Tag: prosecuting attorney

Ohio OVI Defense Attorney Quote of the Week

00DUI Case LawTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Supreme Court Justice Byron White previously s...

United States Supreme Court Justice Byron White in the landmark case of United States vs. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967)

“Law enforcement officers have the obligation to convict the guilty and to make sure they do not convict the innocent. They must be dedicated to making the criminal trial a procedure for the ascertainment of the true facts surrounding the commission of the crime. To this extent, our so-called adversary system is not adversary at all; nor should it be. But defense counsel has no comparable obligation to ascertain or present the truth. Our system assigns him a different mission. He must be and is interested in preventing the conviction of the innocent, but, absent a voluntary plea of guilty, we also insist that he defend his client whether he is innocent or guilty. The State has the obligation to present the evidence. Defense counsel need present nothing, even if he knows what the truth is. He need not furnish any witnesses to the police, or reveal any confidences of his client, or furnish any other information to help the prosecution’s case. If he can confuse a witness, even a truthful one, or make him appear at a disadvantage, unsure or indecisive, that will be his normal course. Our interest in not convictingthe innocent permits counsel to put the State to its proof, to put the State’s case in the worst possible light, regardless of what he thinks or knows to be the truth. Undoubtedly there are some limits which defense counsel must observe but more often than not, defense counsel will cross-examine a prosecution witness, and impeach him if he can, even if he thinks the witness is telling the truth, just as he will attempt to destroy a witness who he thinks is lying. In this respect, as part of our modified adversary system and as part of the duty imposed on the most honorable defense counsel, we countenance or require conduct which in many instances has little, if any, relation to the search for truth.”

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Dayton and throughout the Miami Valley.  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 Facebookwww.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.

Related articles

Bill of Particulars

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

Sometimes it is unclear what conduct a prosecutor is alleging against someone that causes the action to be criminal.  If this is the case, a defendant is entitled to a BILL OF PARTICULARS.  Under Criminal Rule 7(E), a prosecutor must set forth the nature of the offense and the alleged conduct of the defendant which constitutes the charge.  The right to a Bill of Particulars is legislatively set forth at R.C. 1905.05(A).  A criminal defense attorney must make a written request for a Bill of Particulars within twenty-one (21) days after the arraignment and no later than seven (7) days before trial.  Under Ohio law, a bill of particulars may be amended at any time under conditions that justice requires.  Ask your attorney whether or not a bill of particulars has been filed in your case.

Dayton/Springfield  DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver.  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.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

Reasonable Articulable Suspicion & Illegal Police Stops

09Field Tests (SFSTs), Illegal Police StopsTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Protecting You From Illegal Police Stops!

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects you against unreasonable searches and seizures, which  includes being unlawfully or illegally pulled over or stopped by law enforcement.  An officer cannot simply pull you over based on a hunch or intuition.  When a police officer observes a traffic violation, he or she is justified in initiating a limited stop for the purpose of issuing a citation.  State v. Brickman (2001), 11th Dist. No. 2000-P-oo58, 2001 Ohio App. LEXIS 2575.  The legal standard applied to traffic stops is reasonable and articulable suspicion, which means that the officer has reason to believe that:

  1. a crime has been committed;
  2. a crime is being committed, or
  3. a crime is about to be committed, AND
  4. the person(s) being stopped is the person who did one of the above

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 21, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968).  It is your attorney’s job to demonstrate to a judge or jury that the officer lacked any credible evidence upon which to base reasonable and articulable suspicion.  In an OVI arrest scenario this often means fighting the reason(s) for the stop in the first place.  You are aided in this fight by having an attorney familiar with the officer’s training as set forth in the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration Student Manual, which is specific on what the officer is to look for and what conclusions he or she can draw from your actions. (See Detecting Drunk Drivers at Night, previous post)

Dayton DUI lawyer Charles M. Rowland II has been trained in police procedures and tactics by being certified in the same NHTSA standardized field sobriety training that the police themselves undergo.  Charles M. Rowland has every NHTSA Student manual dating back to 1983, and every field sobriety validation study dating back to 1975.  His experience as a city prosecutor and his certification in Forensic Sobriety Assessment puts him in an excellent position to defend you from illegal police stops.  Further, no one is more committed to defending your Fourth Amendment Rights than Charles M. Rowland II.  Call him today at 937-318-1DUI (318-1384) or 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).

The picture used in this posting is the exclusive property of Charles M. Rowland II and is protected by copyright. No use of this picture is permitted without the express written consent of attorney Charles M. Rowland II.

The Role of the Prosecutor

00DUI Court ProcessTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
US Supreme Court building, front elevation, st...

In Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935), the United States Supreme Court set forth the unique role of a prosecuting attorney in our system of justice.

The [prosecutor] is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all, and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the two-fold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor — indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.

Attorney Charles M. Rowland II practices exclusively DUI law in and around Dayton, Ohio.  Contact Charles Rowland at (937)318-1384 or 1-888-769-5263 [888-ROWLAND], you can also visit www.DaytonDUI.com. “All I do is DUI defense.”


Prosecuting Attorney Not Required to Prove Date In DUI Trial

00Other Areas & InterestsTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Stylized arrest.

Image via Wikipedia

State v. McFeely, 3/30/2009, 2009-Ohio-1436, 11th District Court of Appeals:  Every prosecuting attorney is taught that they must prove each and every element of the offense including venue, jurisdiction, identification, date and time.

Well, maybe not.  The Eleventh Dist. Court of Appeals recently held (in a DUI case of course) that date was not an essential element of the offense.  The big deal here is that date has always been considered an element of the offense and not just a procedural bugaboo.  Holding police and prosecutors to the highest standards makes for better police work, better trials and ultimately more respect for the judicial system.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]