Posts Tagged ‘ohio criminal defense attorney’

We Know Who The Dangerous Drunk Drivers Are!

August 8th, 2014

drunk driversWe know who the dangerous drunk drivers are.  According to the National Hardcore Drunk Driving Project:

Hardcore drunken drivers are those who drive with a high blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .15 or above or who do so repeatedly, as demonstrated by having more than one impaired driving arrest, and who are highly resistant to changing their behavior despite previous sanctions, treatment or education.

We also know how dangerous these people can be.

Hardcore drunk drivers are responsible for 70% of all drunk driving fatalities and are 380 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash. Drivers with blood alcohol concentration levels in excess of .15 are only one percent of all drivers on weekend nights; however, they are involved in nearly 50% of all fatal crashes during that time.

Now that we know we are certainly focusing our attention on these drivers… right? No.  The national debate over drunk driving laws includes a push by MADD and their government friends at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to require states to force even first-time offenders to install intrusive cameras and breath machines in their cars.  Along with their friends in the insurance industry, MADD is pushing for the requirement that ALL cars be fitted with an alcohol monitoring system call DADSS (Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety).  MADD has also let its neo-prohibitionist freak flag fly by supporting the lowering of the BAC to .05% and shifting its focus away from its traditional mission to that of preventing underage consumption of alcohol. Have our thought leaders and policy makers given over to political stunts on the misguided theory that we can arrest our way to zero drunk driving fatalities?  What else but “policing for revenue” could justify lowering the BAC limit, keeping the drinking age at 21 and continued failed policies like OVI checkpoints?

I have my arguments with the approaches taken by the National Hardcore Drunk Driver Project, but I like their approach to identify and target hardcore drunk drivers for the bulk of the enforcement.  It makes sense – target the people who are likely to reoffend and make sure they can’t hurt people.  You can check out some of their ideas below.

FOR JUDGES:

FOR PROSECUTORS:

FOR PROBATION AND PAROLE PROFESSIONALS:

> FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT:http://responsibility.org/implementation-alcohol-interlocks

Attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself Dayton’s choice for drunk driving defense. Contact Charles Rowland by phone at (937) 318-1384 or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263). If you need assistance after hours, call the 24/7 DUI Hotline at (937) 776-2671.  You can have DaytonDUI at your fingertips by downloading the DaytonDUI Android App or have DaytonDUI sent directly to your mobile device by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Facebook, @DaytonDUI on Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, Pheed and Pintrest or get RSS of the Ohio DUI blog.  Email CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or visit his office at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  “All I do is DUI defense.”

I represent accused drunk drivers check these city-specific sites at the following links:

FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburg,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville

 

Can A Defendant Waive A Jury Trial In Ohio? (by DaytonDUI)

December 19th, 2012

Controversial Jury Bill Dies In Committee

Xenia Jury BoxOhio is one of 21 states that give the power to decide whether or not to have a jury trial solely to the defendant.  Thus, a defendant can, at any point, decide against a jury trial and opt for a trial only to the judge.  This is often done in serious OVI cases wherein a technical or scientific point is the most salient point.  It is particularly apt when a defendant wants to avoid allowing the prosecution to enflame the jury with sympathetic evidence of injuries or in cases where the defendant has a lengthy criminal history.  In short, it is one of very few tools that can (in very limited circumstances) benefit a criminal defendant.  This benefit does not exist in the federal system.  Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23 states that a defendant may only waive a trial by jury with the consent of the prosecution.  This provision has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Patton v. U.S. and Singer v. U.S.

Ohio State Rep. Lynn Slaby, a former prosecutor, introduced HB 265 last December to change Ohio law to make it consistent with federal law, and thus more beneficial to Ohio prosecutors.  The Bill states, in pertinent part:

The prosecuting attorney, a village solicitor, a city director of law, or a similar chief legal officer for a municipal corporation responsible for prosecuting a criminal case before a municipal court may demand a jury trial in any criminal case in which a defendant may demand a jury trial. The prosecuting attorney, village solicitor, city director of law, or similar chief legal officer may demand a jury trial notwithstanding a defendant’s failure to demand a jury trial and over the objection of the defendant.(Emphasis added.)

From the beginning the bill was controversial and garnered little support outside of the prosecutors.  “This is the second time in nine years that the legislature has attempted to take away a defendant’s right to waive a jury trial; a right that simply levels the playing field for defendants in a game where the prosecution enjoys exclusive control over the nature of the charges filed, the number of charges brought, and execution of the charges through warrant and arrest. The last time, in 2002, the measure (H.B. 541) was squashed through the hard work of attorneys and judges who saw the danger in such legislation.” Columbus Bar Association, Fall 2011.

On Wednesday, December 12, the Ohio Senate Judiciary Committee held testimony on HB 265. After hearing testimony, Chairman Mark Wagoner did not call for a vote. This action by Chairman Wagoner effectively defeated the bill for this session.  As of this writing it is unknown whether the bill will be reintroduced at a later date.  We will keep you informed.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in DaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburg, Huber Heights,Beavercreek, and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook,www.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.comor write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

Proof Beyond All Reasonable Doubt And Other Closing Arguments (by DaytonDUI)

September 17th, 2012

Imagine that you woke up with a sore throat.  It persists throughout the day and into the next.  As the week drags on you feel worse and worse and your wife demands that you go to the doctor.  You hate doctors, but you feel so lousy that you agree to get your throat checked out.  When you arrive you fill out the requisite forms and wait longer than you feel is necessary.  Just as you are nearing your boiling point a nurse calls your name and leads you into a small room.  You tell her that you’ve had a sore throat for the past few days and that you feel lethargic.  She dutifully writes down the information and tells you that the doctor will be in to see you shortly.

A few minutes later the doctor opens the door and begins to look at your throat.  He tells you to say “ahh” and touches his hand to your forehead.  “No fever, but your throat is very red,” he says.  “Have you ever smoked?” he asks.  When you mutter that you smoked cigars a few years ago and begin to explain that you smoked cigarettes when you were in college the doctor abruptly cuts you off.  “I have concluded that you have throat cancer!”  The words hit you like a punch.  As you are reeling the doctor begins to tell you that he’s dealt with people like you before.  “Cancer is serious and I can’t take the chance that you only have a sore throat.”  You protest, “what about additional tests, an M.R.I. or some other tests?”  “No, no, no,” the doctor says.  “I am so sick of people who don’t see cancer close up, thinking that it is no big deal.  Just take an antibiotic you say, well mister I’ve been called to the bedside of people dying of cancer and I’ll be damned if I’ll let you hurt yourself or someone else by not getting your larynx removed.”  “I WANT A SECOND OPINION,” you yell, but the doctor does not seem to care.  “Nurse, prep the patient for surgery!”

If this scenario seems far-fetched, you have never been arrested for drunk driving.  Officers are self-proclaimed experts on spotting clues of impairment.  The come into court spouting the pseudo-scientific prattle fronted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.  Invariably, they have noted bloodshot and/or glassy eyes accompanied by slurred speech and an odor of an alcoholic beverage.  They ask you to do amazingly subjective tests which amount to nothing more than “stupid human tricks.”  You do not get a chance to practice or try again.  They do not conduct an objective investigation into your state of impairment, but merely lead you through a series of steps that will inevitably lead to your arrest. Like our fictional doctor, the officer may have dealt up-close with the tragedy of drunk driving and considers it his or her duty to prevent anyone from being affected by this all-to-preventable devastation.  Like our fictional patient, you get no second opinion.

It is up to your defense attorney to explain to a jury that the officer’s observations do not lead to the conclusion that you are impaired.  Was your weaving caused by alcohol or by an ill-timed cell phone call?  Are your bloodshot and glassy eyes a sign of having consumed too much alcohol or by the fact that you are tired?  Is that slurred speech or do you simply speak differently from the officer?  Is you performance on physical tests affected by your weight, your gender, your bum knee, or the fact that you are scared to death?

At the end of every drunk driving trial, the judge tells the jury that “beyond a reasonable doubt” is “proof of such character that an ordinary person would be willing to rely and act upon it in the most important of the person’s own affairs.” O.R.C. 2901.05(E) [emphasis added]  The penalties for DUI are, in some respects, just as serious as the decision to get a medical procedure and the ramifications of a conviction last throughout a person’s life.  If you are faced with the possibility of an Ohio DUI trial, please contact Charles M. Rowland II immediately.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, SpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgHuber HeightsBeavercreekCentervilleSpringboro, Franklin and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitterupdates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook,www.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

The 47 Types & 38 Causes of Nystagmus; (It’s Not Just Caused by Alcohol)

August 24th, 2012

Field sobriety test

The horizontal gaze nystagmus test is an eye test approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration(hereinafter NHTSA) as a tool to detect clues of impairment in drivers. The HGNtest is one of three psychomotor tests approved as part of the standardized field sobriety testing protocol employed by law enforcement officers throughout the United States and used here in Ohio. The HGN is a test of your eyes wherein the testing officer is looking for abnormal movements call saccades.  These movements make the eye appear to bounce or wobble.  The officer uses this movement to make a correlation to alcohol use.  This would valid only if we are able to demonstrate that nystagmus is specific to alcohol impairment.  However, we know that there are other causes of nystagmus.  It is up to your DUI lawyer to demonstrate another valid reason for what the officer is observing.  You can find information about the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test and its biases on this site.

Listed beloware some other scientifically recognized causes of nystagmus.

47 Types of Nystagmus

1. Acquired

2. Anticipatory(Induced)

3. Arthrokinetic(Induced,Somatosensory)

4. Associated(Induced,Stransky’s

5. AudioKinetic(Induced)

6. Bartel’s(Induced)

7. Brun’s

8. Centripetal

9. Cervical(NeckTorsion,Vestibular-0basilarArteryInsufficiency

10.Crcular/Elliptic/Oblique (Alternataing Windmill, Circumduction, Diagonal,

Elliptic, Gyratory, Oblique, Radiary)

11.Congenital (Fixation, Hereditary)

12.Convergence

13.Convergence Invocked

14.Disaccociated, Disjunctive

15.Downbeat

16.Drug Induced (Barbiturate, Bow Tie, Induced)

17.Epileptic (Ictal

18.Flash Induced

19.Gaze-Evoked (Deviational, Gaze-Paretic, Neurasthenic, Seducible, Setting-In)

20.Horizontal

21.Induced (Provoked)

22.Intermittent Vertical

23.Jerk

24.Latent/Manifest Latent (Monocular Fixation, Unimacular)

25.Lateral Medullary

26.Lid

27.Miner’s (Occupational)

28.Muscle Paretic (Myasthenic)

29.Optokinetic (Induced, Optomotor, Panoramic, Railway, Sigma)

30.Optokinetic After-Induced (Post-Optokinetic, Reverse Post-Optokinetic)

31.Pendular (Talantropia)

32.Periodic/Aperiodic Alternating

33.Physiologic (End-Point, Fatigue)

34.Pursuit After Induced

35.Pursuit Defect

36.Pseudo Spontaneous

37.Rebound

38.Reflex (Baer’s)

39.See-Saw

40.Somatosensory

41.Spontaneous

42.Stepping Around

43.Torsional

44.Uniocular

45.Upbeat

46.Vertical

47.Vestibular (Agotropic, Geotro-Pic, Bechterew’s, Caloric, Compensatory,Electrical/Faradic/Gal Vanic, Labyrinthine, Pneumatic/Compression, Positional/Alcohol, Pseudo Caloric)

Obtained from Dr. L. F. Dell’Osso, Nystagmus, Saccadic Intrusions/Oscillations and Oscillopsia, 3 Current Neuro-Opthamology 147 (1989).  There are also 38 verified causes for a horizontal gaze nystagmus other than alcohol impairment.

 

38 Causes of Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus

1. ProblemsWithTheInnerEarLabyrinth

2. Irrigating The Ears With Warm Or Cold Water Under Peculiar Weather

Conditions

3. Influenza

4. StreptococcusInfection

5. Vertigo

6. Measles

7. Syphilis

8. Arteriosclerosis

9. MuscularDystrophy

10.Multiple Sclerosis

11.Korchaff’s Syndrome

12.Brain Hemorrhage

13.Epilepsy

14.Hypertension

15.Motion Sickness

16.Sunstroke

17.Eyestrain

18.Eye Muscle Fatigue

19.Glaucoma

20.Changes In Atmospheric Pressure

21.Consumption Of Excessive Amounts Of Caffeine

22.Excessive Exposure To Nicotine

23.Aspirin

24.Circadian Rhythms

25.Acute Trauma To The Head

26.Chronic Trauma To The Head

27.Some Prescription Drugs, Tranquilizers, Pain Medications, Anti-Convulsants

28.Barbiturates

29.Disorders Of The Vestibular Apparatus And Brain Stem

30.Cerebellum Dysfunction

31.Heredity

32.Diet

33.Toxins

34.Exposure To Solvents, PCB’s, Dry-Cleaning Fumes, Carbon Monoxide

35.Extreme Chilling

36.Lesions

37.Continuous Movement Of The Visual Field Past The Eyes

38.Antihistamine Use

See Shultz v. State, 664 A.2d 60, 77 (Md. App. 1995) citing State v. Witte; State v. Clark, State v. Superior Court, and Mark A. Rouleau, Unreliability of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test, 4 Am.Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 439 (1989); Louise J. Gordy & Roscoe N. Gray, 3A Attorney’s Textbook of Medicine § § 84.63 and 84.64 (1990).

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboroHuber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI.”

Rowland Participates In Drug Debate

April 23rd, 2012
View of Tilton Hall to the West

Charles Rowland was honored to participate in a debate as part of the Heroin Seminar at Ohio Northern University which was sponsored by the Department of History, Politics and Justice.  The debate on the legalization of heroin was the culmination of an ongoing academic discussion of recognizing, understanding and fighting the abuse of heroin in the community.  Prof. Kevin Hill, a professor of law at Ohio Northern University spoke on behalf of keeping heroin illegal and subject to criminal sanction.  “Prof. Hill was one of my professors and he is a powerful advocate,” said Rowland.  Professor Hill’s  arguments for keeping heroin illegal are trumpeted by the Drug Enforcement Agency which argues that legalization would only increase the use and abuse of heroin.

Speaking on behalf of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (L.E.A.P.) and in his capacity as a practicing criminal defense attorney, Rowland championed the idea of approaching the problems of heroin use in a more effective way.  His arguments centered on the failed “War on Drugs” and highlighted efforts to move our policy from enforcement, interdiction and incarceration to treatment and prevention.  “It was just great to stand on that familiar stage and argue for something that I have a great passion for.  I hope that we caused some policy-makers to rethink their approach to throwing people in prison.”  Rowland frequently speaks on behalf of L.E.A.P. and Miami Valley N.O.R.M.L. advocating an end to the failed policies of the drug war.

If you have been accused of a crime involving impaired driving or the use of illegal drugs, please contact Ohio OVI attorney  Charles M. Rowland II.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  Charles M. Rowland II is working hard to be your trusted source for DUI information in the Miami Valley. “All I do is DUI Defense.”