Tag: ovi

Beavercreek OVI

Beavercreek OVI – Beavercreek DUI?

00Beavercreek DUITags: , , , , , , ,

beavercreek duiBeavercreek DUI – Beavercreek OVI?

If you have been arrested for OVI in Fairborn, Bath Township, Beavercreek or Beavercreek Township? Your misdemeanor Beavercreek DUI case will be heard in the Beavercreek/Fairborn Municipal Court, 1148 Kauffman Ave. in Fairborn, Ohio.  Need to find information about a case in the Fairborn Municipal Court?  Search HERE.  For case information or visit the court’s web site HERE. I am a life-long resident of Beavercreek and I have represented the accused drunk driver in the Fairborn/Beavercreek Municipal Court since 1995.

DUI law is my passion and I dedicate my practice to OVI law and has some of the most impressive credentials for OVI attorneys in the state of Ohio.  If you find yourself in need of criminal representation in the Fairborn Municipal Court, contact me, Fairborn DUI Attorney Charles M. Rowland II, today!  You can reach me at 937-318-1DUI (318-1384), 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263), or 24/7 on the after-hours DUI Hotline at 937-776-2671, by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500 or by visiting www.FairbornDUI.com, or www.BeavercreekDUI.com.

Want more fun facts about why you should hire me for your Beavercreek DUI?

  • lifelong resident of Beavercreek, Ohio (we moved when I was three).
  • this court suspended my license for speeding when I was 17.
  • graduated from Beavercreek High School in 1988.
  • my sister was Miss Beavercreek once.
  • grew up near St. Luke’s and the “Old Country Store.”
  • left for law school in 1992 – when I came back Beavercreek had a mall… BAM!
  • represented Beavercreek Schools for two terms on their school board.
  • carved “B’CREEK” into the Great Wall of China.
  • half-owner of the beaver that sits in the Beavercreek Police Department.
  • I  know all the good places to eat in Beavercreek.
  • I’ll do a good job with your case.

An Overview Of The OVI Process From Beginning To End

00DUI Court ProcessTags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In this video, we walk you through the typical OVI process.


Following an OVI arrest, you will attend your ARRAIGNMENT. This hearing is designed to allow you to enter a plea. No doubt, you will have considered getting an attorney. We offer a free consultation. Furthermore, I make myself available immediately. If you have an attorney at this point, you may not have to attend this hearing. If you hire me, we file paperwork with the court. This paperwork will tell the court you have an attorney. In addition, we file other important papers to protect your rights.  One of the documents we file is a request for a pre-trial.

After your arraignment, we will take steps to get your DRIVING PRIVILEGES back. Often, not being able to drive is the worst part of the OVI process. After the passage of a number of days, you will be granted privileges to drive. Most of our clients say that getting back to driving is like getting their life back.  Depending on the court, you may wait a few weeks to a couple of months to attend your pre-trial.


Plea bargaining, plea negotiation, PRE-TRIAL – they are all the same thing. Your attorney will go into a room and meet with the prosecuting attorney. The prosecutor represents the government. Most of the time, you will not be in the room. It is very uncommon for the arresting police officer to attend a pre-trial.  The result of the pre-trial is an OFFER.  You and your attorney will discuss what the offer means and whether or not you should accept the government’s resolution.  This is the most important decision you will make in your case.


If the offer is not acceptable, you will file a MOTION TO SUPPRESS. At the motion, you will have a full hearing in front of the judge. The prosecutor will call the arresting officer to testify. Your attorney will have the opportunity to challenge the officer’s observations. If a chemical (breath) test was conducted, your attorney will challenge the test. You will not testify. Instead, your attorney may call an expert. All of these matters should be thoroughly discussed with your attorney prior to the hearing.


If the motion to suppress is not successful, you will have your case proceed to TRIAL.  Trials are very uncommon. Only two to five percent of all cases go to trial.  At this point it is important to have an attorney who has the experience and resources to try your case. It is important to stand up for your rights. I represent many people for OVI, but your case is the only one you will likely ever have. Therefore, it is important that you talk with me. An open line of communication is essential. Finally, know that we are a team but you are in charge.

If you need an OVI attorney, please give me a call at (937) 318-1384 or 888-ROWLAND. “All I do is DUI defense.”

OVI process

Felony DUI – Aggravated Vehicular Homicide

00DUI FelonyTags: , , , , ,

Felony DUI – Aggravated Vehicular Homicide

Felony DUI -Aggravated Vehicular Homicide, O.R.C. 2903.06, is a crime that results from the death of another caused by the defendant’s operating a vehicle while impaired. (a violation of R.C. 4511.19 -OVI) You can also be charge for driving negligently or recklessly under the law. The aggravated vehicular homicide statute encompasses driving an automobile recklessly or negligently (called vehicular homicide) whether or not alcohol played a part in the death. Often, defendants are indicted for multiple counts, with additional counts for each victim of the accident.

Felony DUI – Penalties

felony DUIThe penalties for an Aggravated Vehicular Homicide are harsh. Under the reckless section of the felony OVI statute you will be found guilty of a third degree felony which rises to a second degree felony if the driver is under suspension at the time of the offense. Aggravated vehicular homicide, when impaired as defined in R.C. 4511.19, is a second degree felony which rises to a first degree felony if the driver was under suspension at the time of the offense. Penalties include mandatory prison terms with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine for the 1st degree felony and prison up to 8 years and a fine up to $15,000 for the 2nd degree felony.

If drunk driving (now called OVI; operating a vehicle while impaired) is charged as the proximate cause of the death, the penalties become mandatory and are very difficult to get reduced or lowered. Often, these cases are high-profile cases engendering much prejudice toward the defendant. Because of these factors, you need an attorney who will work as hard as possible for your freedom. 

Who Do You Choose?

When you face these kind of penalties, you need an attorney with experience. I focus my practice exclusively on OVI defense.  In addition to experience, I the resources and the expert witnesses that will make the difference in your case. I offer a free consultation for all clients. I will work hard to make sure that you understand the charges, the process and your possible outcomes. Call me at (937) 318-1384 for a free consultation. In addition, you can contact me 24/7 at (937) 776-2671.

Admitting OVI Blood Tests Made Easier By Ohio Supreme Court

00Blood & Urine Tests, DUI Case LawTags: , , , , , , , , , ,

blood test


In Ohio, a blood test is administered by a crime lab or the collecting health care agency. The blood must be drawn by a licensed medical professional.  In cases where blood tests are administered by a crime lab, the Ohio DUI driver’s blood sample must be drawn within three hours of the perceived infraction.  In addition, it must be tested in compliance with regulations drafted by the Ohio Department of Health. Because of their complexity, an attorney focusing on DUI defense exclusively should be considered.

Please consult the articles on the ODH rules on this blog. The regulations include rules for collection and handling of blood samples, testing techniques, laboratory operations, permits, and records maintenance. In cases where DUI blood tests are administered by a hospital expert testimony regarding the blood test and how the result relates to impaired driving ability.

Ohio law requires you to take a blood, breath, or urine test if you are arrested for an OVI. Ohio’s “implied consent” law says that if you are lawfully arrested by an officer who has probable cause to believe that you have been operating under the influence, then you consent to taking a chemical test of your blood, breath, or urine for the purpose of determining your blood alcohol content (BAC).  The test must be taken within two hours of driving and the officer gets to choose which test you take. The question is, how strictly will the courts enforce the two-hour limit.  


The Ohio Supreme Court clarified their position on the refrigeration of a blood sample. They address whether strict compliance is required. Answer, no! They also clarified, with great deference to the prosecution, what substantial compliance means. Spoiler alert: it is a quickly eroding standard. In State v. Baker, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-451 the Ohio Supreme Court ruled on the admissibility of a blood test samples.  In this case a Trooper left the sample unrefrigerated in his patrol car for over four (4) hours.  The Ohio Supreme Court opinion reversed a lower court decision. The lower court ruled because the state did not strictly comply with the refrigeration requirement, the sample could not be used against the defendant. This case arose from a 2011 OVI charge that arose from accident that killed a pedestrian.

While giving lip service to the fact that strict compliance with the refrigeration rule is preferable, the Court recognized logistical issues of gathering and submitting samples may make strict compliance unrealistic in all cases. Citing State v. Plummer, where the Court in 1986 held that the failure to refrigerate a urine sample for four hours did not render the test results inadmissible, and State v. Mayl, a 2005 decision that cited Plummer, the Court determined that the failure to refrigerate a blood sample for as many as five hours substantially complied with the refrigeration requirement, permitting the sample to be used as evidence. The failure to refrigerate the defendant’s specimen for four hours and 10 minutes substantially complied with the rule and did not make the test results inadmissible per se.


In this case, the court clarified the procedure for admitting blood-alcohol test results into evidence as established in the Court’s 2003 State v. Burnside decision.  Burnside states that to challenge a blood test result, the defendant must file a motion to suppress.  After the filing of a motion to suppress it becomes the responsibility of the state to demonstrate it substantially complied with the administrative rule. If the state proves substantial compliance, the burden then shifts back to the accused to show the failure to strictly comply made the test unreliable and prejudicial.

In opposition, a dissenting opinion was written by  Justice William M. O’Neill. While he acknowledge that strict compliance is not always realistic or humanly possible, he concluded the majority decision makes the substantial compliance standard too low for such serious cases. Therefore, he stated the decision allows for the rule to be ignored.  This blog has long argued that the “substantial compliance standard” is a fast-eroding standard that allows the court to admit evidence if the police try their best, or demonstrate a good faith effort, effectively shifting the burden of proof from the government to the defendant.


If you have questions about your  blood test case, please contact me at (937) 318-1384. Also, you can also hear me lecture on this topic. I will be speaking on behalf of the American Association of Premier DUI Attorneys in November. In addition to these cases, I will be giving an update on Ohio OVI law. I hope you can be there. If not, please visit the DaytonDUI blog for all things OVI. Learn about city-specific OVI courts. Due to their complexity, review the law on blood, breath and urine testing. Stay abreast of developments in the law. As a result of my focus, I hope to have the most up-to-date information. I work hard to be the best DUI in Ohio. In conclusion, I take great pride in my work.


Drugged Driving – Dude, I’m Injured Not Stoned

00DUI, Drugs & DrivingTags: , , , ,


When a law enforcement officer comes upon a crash scene he or she may suspect illicit drug use. Their training, the  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration manual and common sense dictate that no suspicion of drug use be  assumed without evidence. When a case involves medical problems, a drug investigation (DRE, drug recognition expert evaluation) should not be performed. This is the rule per NHTSA. The government wants to avoid confusing possible drug use with the observations really being medical issues. Where the NHTSA manual states in a situation like this, “your primary purpose at this time is to look for any evidence of a medical complication that would warrant terminating the examination and summoning medical assistance since there is always the possibility that a person suspected of drug impairment is actually suffering from an illness or injury requiring medical attention.”

This is another example of how an experienced drugged driving attorney can help. When you come to your consultation, be prepared to talk science. 


What we suspect will happen upon implementation of Ohio’s Medical Marijuana law is that law enforcement will take action. Will their opposition to the law manifest in more questionable drugged driving arrests? How can they not be biased? Can an officer instructed to be on alert for drugged driving approach the suspect with the requisite open-mindedness needed to conduct an investigation. In short, will the police officer be fair?

I am reminded of the quote by Maslow, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, ever problem is a nail. 


As this blog has warned for the past years, the next phase of the government’s WAR ON DRUGS is the DRE protocol allowing roadside police to determine if a person is impaired by prescription or illicit drugs.  Consequently, while it may make no sense that a police officer is turned into a roving drug scientist, the government is allowing this approach. If you are accused of driving while impaired by drugs, call me. I have studied and been certified in drug recognition training. I’m ready! It is imperative that your attorney be familiar with police tactics.  Without the knowledge, you will have no defense. In additoin, I want you to have a plan of attack. Call me to discuss what I can do. What’s more, it is free! Call me at (937) 318-1DUI or visit www.DaytonDUI.com.