Tag: OVI lawyer

miamisburg ovi

First Offense Miamisburg OVI? Here’s What To Expect

00Miamisburg DUI AttorneyTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Miamisburg OVIMiamisburg OVI? I can help!

first offense Miamisburg OVI is defined at O.R.C. 4511.19 as a DUI with no priors within 6 years.  The first offense OVI can be charged in three ways.  The first charge is caused by testing over the legal limit of .08% B.A.C. (example O.R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(d)).  These types of offenses are also referred to as “per se”  violations.  In addition, a second way to be charged is for violating the high-tier provision of Ohio’s OVI law.  Ohio has also created a per se “high-tier” limit of .17% BrAC, sometimes referred to as a SUPER-OVI.  The per se high-tier limits for a first offense OVI are set forth at O.R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)

  • (f) person has a concentration of seventeen-hundredths of one per cent or more by weight per unit volume of alcohol in the person’s whole blood.
  • (g) person has a concentration of two hundred four-thousandths of one per cent or more by weight per unit volume of alcohol in the person’s blood serum or plasma.
  • (h) person has a concentration of seventeen-hundredths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of the person’s breath.
  • (i) person has a concentration of two hundred thirty-eight-thousandths of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of the person’s urine.
Appreciable Impairment Offenses

In addition, if you refuse to take a chemical test, the State might still be able to prove you guilty of a first offense OVI.  They must prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that you  operated a motor vehicle after having consumed some alcohol, drugs of abuse, or a combination of the two and their ability to operate the motor vehicle was appreciably impaired.  How does a jury determine “under the influence?”  The following is an excerpt from the Ohio Jury Instructions:

“Under the influence” means that the defendant consumed some (alcohol) (drug of abuse) (combination of alcohol and a drug of abuse), whether mild or potent, in such a quantity, whether small or great, that it adversely affected and noticeably impaired the defendant’s actions, reaction, or mental processes under the circumstances then existing and deprived the defendant of that clearness of intellect and control of himself/herself which he/she would otherwise have possessed. The question is not how much (alcohol) (drug of abuse) (alcohol and a drug of abuse) would affect an ordinary person.

Jury Questions

Since the question is, what effect did any (alcohol) (drug of abuse) (alcohol and a drug of abuse), consumed by the defendant, have on him/her at the time and place involved, you need an attorney who can combat the State’s evidence. If the consumption of (alcohol) (drug of abuse) (alcohol and a drug of abuse) so affected the nervous system, brain, or muscles of the defendant so as to impair, to a noticeable degree, his/her ability to operate the vehicle, then the defendant was under the influence. The Ohio jury Instruction cites language from State v. Hardy (1971), 28 Ohio St.2d 89, 57 O.O.2d 284, 276 N.E.2d 247; and State v. Steele (1952), 95 Ohio App. 107, 52 O.O. 488, 117 N.E.2d 617.

“Appreciable impairment offense” is set forth at Ohio Revised Code 4511.19(A)(1)(a) which states,

(A)(1) No person shall operate any vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley within this state, if, at the time of the operation, any of the following apply:

(a) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them.

First Offense OVI Penalties

The following penalties are reserved for first offense OVI offenders.  Obviously, it is in your interests to hire counsel who can assess your case and provide you with an honest assessment of your case.  Be sure to discuss the mitigating factors that your attorney should know as well as the not-so-good aspects of your case.  In addition, judges have discretion to look at many factors in fashioning a remedy and your attorney should be able to give you an idea of how to approach your case so as to minimize any potential penalties.  Here are the range of possible penalties for a first offense OVI.

  • Jail – 3 Days Minimum up to 6 Months or,
  • Driver Intervention Program – For 3 Days
  • Jail – 6 Days (If Blood Alcohol Concentration .17 or Above)
  • License Suspension – From 6 Months to 3 Years
  • Reinstatement Fee – $475.00
  • Fine – From $375 to $1,075
Party Plates (Ohio’s Scarlet Letter)

When are yellow OVI plates required?  If you are convicted of OVI in Ohio, yellow “restricted plates” are required in certain circumstances.

  • If you are convicted of OVI as a first offense, the judge has discretion to order restricted plates as a condition of granting you limited driving privileges.
  • If you are placed under and administrative license suspension, a judge has discretion to order restricted plates as a condition of granting limited driving privileges.
Is an Interlock Ignition Device Mandatory?

The device is not mandatory on a first offense OVI.  Judges have discretion to require the ignition interlock device on first offenses, but on subsequent offenses the IID is mandatory.  It is important to speak with an experienced attorney who is familiar with the judge presiding over your case to get an idea of whether or not you will likely receive an ignition interlock device on a first offense.

Immobilization

If you do not have a prior OVI offense, getting your car back is relatively easy as Ohio OVI law does not authorize immobilization as a penalty for a first offense.  So, here are the steps you should take to get your car back.

  • Locate the proper tow lot;
  • Gather enough cash (or other proper payment) to pay towing and storage fees;
  • Gather proof of ownership; and
  • If you were placed under and Administrative License Suspension, get a licensed driver to drive your car from the impound lot.

Having trouble with ANY of the items above? We will help get your car back.  Need a ride? I sometimes drive clients to the tow lot myself.  Due to high costs, move quickly in order to save storage fees.

What does a first offense OVI defense cost?

Frequently, we encounter many people who want a rational, economic justification for hiring an OVI attorney on a first offense OVI.  The only study I could find on this topic was a 2006 Texas Department of Transportation study which calculated the costs of a drunk driving conviction. “In that state showed the total costs of a DWI arrest and conviction for a first-time offender with no accident involved ranges from $9,000 to $24,000.” [source]  In addition, a story from CNBC citing that study, they speculate that total costs, absent you losing your job, could range as high as $20,000.  Because pricing your case is wildly speculative, here are some of the expenses you may realize:

  • Court costs.
  • Attorney fees.
  • Loss of job.
  • DUI “school.”
  • Temporary loss of income.
  • Car towing, impounding.
  • Alternate transportation costs.
  • Car ignition interlock device.
  • Periodic blood testing.
  • Monthly monitoring fees.
  • Cost of incarceration.
  • Increased auto insurance premiums
CONTACT MIAMISBURG OVI ATTORNEY CHARLES M. ROWLAND II

Obviously, if you were to lose your job and/or your career because of an OVI conviction, the lifetime costs skyrocket.  Insurance premiums, damages caused by personal injury or costs of restitution for property damages also cause the costs to climb.  Some of the expenses highlighted above can take years to come to fruition.  The lingering effects of having a drunk driving conviction may be with you for life.  The good news is that a good OVI attorney can significantly curb the financial detriments incurred in a OVI case.  Yes, a good attorney can save you money. While predicting what an attorney can save you is just as wildly speculative as predicting costs, it is common for many of the costs to be subject to negotiation and/or reduction.  In addition, a reduction of the charge will not only lower the possible maximum fines, but can also get rid of ugly mandatory punishments required by Ohio’s OVI statute. O.R.C. 4511.19.  Therefore, best way to explore how much a vigorous OVI defense will costs in your case, contact Charles M. Rowland for a free consultation. Finally, know that we care about our clients. For over twenty years I have been an OVI attorney. For the last 10 plus years I have practiced exclusively OVI law. I want you to win.

For more information about a Miamisburg  OVI, check out www.miamisburgovi.com.  

 

Dayton OVI Attorney Charles M. Rowland II

00Dayton DUI, Montgomery CountyTags: , , , , , , ,

Looking for a OVI attorney in Dayton, Ohio?

dayton oviDayton OVI attorney, Charles M. Rowland II has been serving the people of Dayton since 1995. He focuses his practice exclusively on defending the accused drunk driver and has amassed an impressive number of credentials in his field. He was named “Top Attorney” in the area of OVI defense by Car & Driver (May 2013) and Time (August 2013). He is a former city prosecutor and special prosecutor in OVI cases. Charles Rowland has been an expert witness on matters of evidential breath testing, testifying on behalf of the United States government in Court Martial proceedings at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.

Did you blow? Charles Rowland is certified on the Intoxilyzer 8000, the BAC DataMaster and has lectured on topics related to the machines, teaching attorneys throughout Ohio how to beat a breath test. He has completed training in the Drug Recognition Expert Protocol and is as qualified as any law enforcement officer in administering and interpreting the standardized field sobriety tests. Twice a year, Charles M. Rowland II helps the Greene County Career Center Police Academy by conducting a mock trial.

Learn more about Charles M. Rowland II by scheduling a free consultation about your Dayton DUI case. Call (937) 318-1DUI or 888-ROWLAND.

What is Snow Law in Ohio?

00Holiday Messages, Ohio Traffic LawTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

English: Trees covered by snow in Boreal, Cali...

Let it snow!

With the return of winter weather, we have received some questions about what constitutes an emergency and under what authority an emergency can be deemed to exist.  We have also counseled clients who wanted to know what law would circumscribe their behavior during a significant weather event.  Here is what we learned:

A county sheriff may, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code sections 311.07 and 311.08, declare an emergency and temporarily close the state roads and municipal streets within his/her jurisdiction when such action is reasonably necessary for the preservation of the public peace. Ohio Attorney General’s Opinion 97-015, issued April 1, 1997, concluded that this authority includes state roads, county and township roads and municipal streets.

Ohio law provides for three levels of emergency classifications.

Emergency Classifications

LEVEL 1: Roadways are hazardous with blowing and drifting snow (the definition may become a matter of dispute if you ever have to challenge this law). Roads may also be icy. Motorists are urged to drive very cautiously.

LEVEL 2: Roadways are hazardous with blowing and drifting snow. Roads may also be very icy. Only those who feel it is necessary to drive should be out on the roads. Contact your employer to see if you should report to work. Motorists should use extreme caution.

LEVEL 3: All roadways are closed to non-emergency personnel. No one should be driving during these conditions unless it is absolutely necessary to travel or a personal emergency exists. All employees should contact their employer to see if they should report to work. Those traveling on the roads may subject themselves to arrest.

Ohio Revised Code 2917.13 sets forth the crime of “Misconduct at an Emergency.”  Any person who knowingly hampers or fails to obey a lawful order of the sheriff declaring an emergency and temporarily closing highways, roads and/or streets within his/her jurisdiction may be subject to criminal prosecution under Ohio Revised Code Section 2917.13, “Misconduct at an emergency” or other applicable law or ordinance. A violation under that section is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree, punishable by a jail sentence not to exceed 30 days and/or a fine not to exceed $250. If the misconduct creates a risk of physical harm to persons or property, it is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable by a jail sentence not to exceed 180 days and/or a fine not to exceed $1,000.  Below is the full text of the statute.

ORC 2917.13. Misconduct at emergency.

(A) No person shall knowingly do any of the following:

  • 1. Hamper the lawful operations of any law enforcement officer, firefighter, rescuer, medical person, emergency medical services person, or other authorized person, engaged in the person’s duties at the scene of a fire, accident, disaster, riot or emergency of any kind;
  • 2. Hamper the lawful activities of any emergency facility person who is engaged in the person’s duties in an emergency facility;
  • 3. Fail to obey the lawful order of any law enforcement officer engaged in the law enforcement officer’s duties at the scene of or in connection with a fire, accident, disaster or emergency of any kind.

(B) Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit access or deny information to any news media representative in the lawful exercise of the news media representative’s duties.

(C) Whoever violates this section is guilty of misconduct at an emergency. Except as otherwise provided in this division, misconduct at an emergency is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If a violation of this section creates a risk of physical harm to persons or property, misconduct at an emergency is a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(D) As used in this section:

  • 1. “Emergency medical services person” is the singular of “emergency medical services personnel” as defined in section 2133.21 of the Revised Code.
  • 2. “Emergency facility person” is the singular of “emergency facility personnel” as defined in section 2909.04 of the Revised Code.
  • 3. “Emergency facility” has the same meaning as in section 2909.04 of the Revised Code.

Effective Date: 03-22-2004

To view the state’s weather-related road closures and restrictions, visit the Ohio Department of Transportation’s traffic Web site at www.buckeyetraffic.org.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville 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 (and clean up snow)”

OVI law in Ohio

OVI Law in Ohio – Is It A Just World?

00DUI Court ProcessTags: , , , , , ,

If you practice OVI law in Ohio…

OVI law in OhioThe belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, which was first theorized by Melvin Lerner in 1977.  Lerner, M.J. & Miller, D.T. (1977). Just-world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin85, 1030-1051.  Attributing failures to dispositional causes rather than situational causes, which are unchangeable and uncontrollable, satisfies our need to believe that the world is fair and we have control over our life. We are motivated to see a just world because this reduces our perceived threats,Burger, J.M. (1981). Motivational biases in the attribution of responsibility for an accident: A meta-analysis of the defensive-attribution hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin90, 496-512, Walster, E. (1966). Assignment of responsibility for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social31, 73-79, gives us a sense of security, helps us find meaning in difficult and unsettling circumstances, and benefits us psychologically.  Gilbert, D.T., & Malone, P.S. (1995).The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin117, 21–38.

Unfortunately, the just-world hypothesis also results in a tendency for people to blame and disparage victims of a tragedy or an accident, such as victims of rape (See Abrams, D., Viki, G.T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology84, 111-125;Bell, S.T., Kuriloff, P.J., & Lottes, I. (1994). Understanding attributions of blame in stranger-rape and date-rape situations: An examinations of gender, race, identification, and students’ social perceptions of rape victims. Journal of Applied Social Psychology24, 1719-1734) and domestic abuse (See Summers, G., & Feldman, N.S. (1984). Blaming the victim versus blaming the perpetrator: An attributional analysis of spouse abuse.Journal of Applied Social and Clinical Psychology2, 339-347) to reassure themselves of their insusceptibility to such events. People may even go to such extremes as the victim’s faults in “past life” to pursue justification for their bad outcome.(Woogler, R.J. (1988). Other lives, other selves: A Jungian psychotherapist discovers past lives. New York: Bantam.)

OVI law in Ohio does not address this bias at any phase of a trial. The just world phenomena is observed in OVI trials as a bias that can cause a jury to overlook the evidence and blame the accused driver for putting himself or herself in a position where an officer could arrest them.  When you combine this inherent bias with a society that stigmatizes drinking drivers (Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk, Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over), you are left with a turbulent trial scenario for your attorney to face.  An experienced Ohio DUI attorney will make allowances for the juries unknown bias by addressing it in the void dire and in a closing argument.  Often, simply addressing the bias is enough of an inoculation to allow the jurors to focus on the evidence, but OVI law in Ohio is replete with evidence of innocent people being convicted because a jury won’t (or can’t) overcome this bias.

OVI Law In Ohio
ovi defense

Charles M. Rowland II, OVI Defense Attorney

00Ohio DUI DefenseTags: , , , ,

Charles M. Rowland II is 100 percent focused on OVI defense.

By concentrating exclusively on defending clients who are accused of drunk driving, he is able to provide the very best representation possible. He is:

Experienced – He has been practicing OVI defense law for 20 years and has attained certifications on the Intoxilyzer 8000 and the BAC DataMaster. He is one of only a handful of attorneys in the country to hold a Forensic Sobriety Assessment Certificate. He has received certification on the administration and evaluation of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests and has been trained in the Drug Recognition Expert protocol.

A Former OVI Prosecutor – He served as City Prosecuting Attorney for the city of Xenia and has served as Special Prosecutor for Greene County and the City of Xenia. Early in his career he served as an Arbitration Judge for the Greene County Common Pleas Court.

A OVI Teacher – Twice yearly Charlie conducts a mock trial for the Greene County Police Academy focusing on the application of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. He is a sought after speaker on topics related to OVI and has written over 1000 scholarly articles on OVI topics on the DaytonDUI blog.

Award Winning – In 2013, Charlie was named a top OVI attorney by both “Time “Magazine and “Car & Driver” Magazine. He has been “Superb (10/10)” rated by the attorney rating service AVVO since 2008 and has been awarded Super Lawyer status in OVI defense since 2013. He is co-recipient of the Beavercreek Chamber of Commerce Public Education Award and a Fellow to the Ohio State and American Bar Foundations. Charles has also received a Community Service Award by the Ohio State Bar Foundation.   The DaytonDUI blog has been selected for inclusion in the prestigious American Bar Association Journal. Charlie is a two-time winner of a Distinguished Service award from TCN-BHS for service to those addicted to drugs and alcohol.

Cutting Edge OVI Defense – Charlie is a long-time member of the National College for DUI Defense, a founding member of both the American Association of Premier DUI Attorneys and the National Association of DUI Attorneys. He is consulted as an “expert” making regular appearances on television and radio.

To protect your rights in an OVI case, call Charles M. Rowland II at (937) 318-1384 today.