DUI Dictionary

Posted by on

DUI Dictionary

Drunk driving arrests, DUI / DWI arrests, cases involving driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), or the combination of alcohol and drugs, all seem to have their own language. Indeed, DUI / DWI criminal defense lawyers seem to have their own language as well. As any criminal defense attorney who concentrates on defending drinking and driving cases will admit, there are special terms which are not readily understood. The following are often-used (and not often easily understood) terms relating to DWI / DUI, drunk driving, drinking and driving, DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) and other related criminal arrests:

a · b · c · d · e · f · g · h · i · j · k · l · m · n · o · p · q · r · s · t · u · v · w · x · y · z

Walk-and-Turn (WAT) test – One of the three tests that make up the standardized field sobriety battery. This test requires a person to take nine heel to toe steps down a straight line, turn and take nine heel to toe steps back up the line. The subject is assessed on the ability to understand and follow instructions as well as the ability to maintain balance during the instruction stage and walking stage.

Wet Reckless – Plea to a charge of reckless driving which was "alcohol related." A wet reckless results from a plea bargain to reduce a charge of drunk driving. There are several reasons for such a reduction, including a borderline blood alcohol level, where there was no accident and no prior record. The result is a lower fine, no jail time and no record of a drunk driving conviction, but if there is a subsequent drunk driving conviction the "wet reckless" will be considered a "prior" drunk driving conviction and result in a heavier sentence required for a second conviction. The chief benefits of a wet reckless are realized on a second-offense (or greater) DUI conviction; there are only marginal benefits when charged with a first-offense. A wet-reckless can be especially important to anyone who holds a professional license, since it is only reported on a criminal record as a reckless driving. It is vital that you consult with a criminal defense DUI lawyer before accepting any such plea.

Witness – A person who can provide testimony on behalf of the prosecution or DUI defense.

DUI Dictionary

Posted by on

DUI Dictionary

Drunk driving arrests, DUI / DWI arrests, cases involving driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), or the combination of alcohol and drugs, all seem to have their own language. Indeed, DUI / DWI criminal defense lawyers seem to have their own language as well. As any criminal defense attorney who concentrates on defending drinking and driving cases will admit, there are special terms which are not readily understood. The following are often-used (and not often easily understood) terms relating to DWI / DUI, drunk driving, drinking and driving, DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) and other related criminal arrests:

a · b · c · d · e · f · g · h · i · j · k · l · m · n · o · p · q · r · s · t · u · v · w · x · y · z

Walk-and-Turn (WAT) Test – One of the three tests that make up the Standardized Field Sobriety battery. This test requires a person to take nine heel-to-toe steps along a straight line, turn and take nine heel-to-toe steps down the same way to the starting point. The subject is assessed on the ability to understand and follow instructions as well as the ability to maintain balance during both the instruction stage and walking stage.

Wet Reckless – This is a plea to a charge of reckless driving which was alcohol related. A wet reckless results from a plea bargain to reduce a charge of drunk driving. There are several reasons for such a reduction, including a borderline blood alcohol level, where there was no accident and no prior record. The result is a lower fine, no jail time and no record of a drunk driving conviction, but if there is a subsequent drunk driving conviction the “wet reckless” will be considered a prior drunk driving conviction and result in a heavier sentence required for a second conviction. The chief benefits of a wet reckless are realized on a second-offense (or greater) DUI conviction. There are only marginal benefits when charged with a first-offense DUI. A wet reckless can be especially important to anyone who holds a professional driver’s license, since it is only reported on a criminal record as reckless driving. It is vital that you consult with a criminal defense DUI lawyer before accepting any such plea.

Witness – A person who can provide testimony on behalf of the prosecution or DUI defense.

DUI Dictionary

Posted by on

DUI Dictionary

Drunk driving arrests, DUI / DWI arrests, cases involving driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), or the combination of alcohol and drugs, all seem to have their own language. Indeed, DUI / DWI criminal defense lawyers seem to have their own language as well. As any criminal defense attorney who concentrates on defending drinking and driving cases will admit, there are special terms which are not readily understood. The following are often-used (and not often easily understood) terms relating to DWI / DUI, drunk driving, drinking and driving, DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) and other related criminal arrests:

a · b · c · d · e · f · g · h · i · j · k · l · m · n · o · p · q · r · s · t · u · v · w · x · y · z

Zero Tolerance Blood Alocohol Concentration or BAC – Allowable blood alcohol content for minors (as defined by the state). In California, this law states that it is against the law to drive with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01% or higher if you are under 21 years of age. Your BAC is measured by a test given to you by a police officer. Under this law, on your first offense, your driving privilege will be suspended for one year if:

  • your BAC is .01% or higher, or
  • you refuse to take the Preliminary Alcohol Screening Test, or
  • you fail to complete the PAS Test

Expert Witnesses in DUI / DWI cases

Posted by on

Expert Witnesses in DUI / DWI cases

The use of experts is extremely important in DUI / DWI, drunk driving, or driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUID) cases. Because the prosecution will be putting the arresting officer and the criminalist before the judge during his or her case to testify as to why the defendant is guilty, it is vital that the defense is able to put forward its own witnesses to counter that. Experts can be called to discuss a variety of topics, but their primary purpose is to support the idea that there are other possible explanations for the prosecution’s evidence that the defendant was drunk driving. Experts can talk about chemical tests, field sobriety tests, accident reconstruction, scientific aspects of being under the influence, and so on.

Chemical Tests: Experts will discuss possible flaws with both breath and blood tests, such as that the breath machine is not properly calibrated or fermentation occurred with the blood and a higher alcohol reading was the result. There are a variety of ways an expert can attack the chemical tests.

Field Sobriety Tests: Experts can use a person’s performance on field sobriety tests (FSTs) to support their opinion that the motorist accused of DUI was not under the influence at the time of driving. If the FST’s are performed well, they will use this to show that there was no physical impairment (if there is good balance, no swaying, etc.) and no mental impairment (if the person followed instructions, counted in correct order, etc). Mental and physical impairment are very important because any good expert will testify that mental impairment always precedes physical impairment when a person is intoxicated. This means that if there was no evidence of mental impairment, but was some physical impairment, the physical impairment was probably due to something other than intoxication (such as an injury or poor testing conditions).

Alcohol Level at Time of Driving vs. Alcohol Level at Time of Testing: Experts are often called to testify in order to rebut the presumption that if a person was drunk at time of the chemical test that they must have been drunk at the time of driving. Since the chemical tests are always given at least many minutes, sometimes even an hour or two after driving, the blood alcohol content (BAC) very often is not the same at both times. Sometimes this can be good for the defense’s case because under certain circumstances the defendant’s BAC could be rising, which means it is higher at the time of the test than when driving. This is a very technical area, and an expert is essential to explain it to a jury and to raise reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant was over the legal limit at the time of driving.

Accident Reconstruction: It is often helpful (especially in a felony DUI / DWI arrest) to have an expert in the field of accident reconstruction. Whenever there is a DUI / DWI, DUID (driving under the influence of drugs), drunk driving, or any type of drinking and driving arrest along with an accident, the passions of the jury will likely be inflamed. As such, it is essential that an accident reconstruction expert be available to testify regarding the mechanics of the accident, and to offer opinions regarding whether or not the accident was the fault of the impaired driver, the other party, or would have been unavoidable regardless of the impairment or non-impairment of the accused DUI / DWI motorist.

Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) Cases

Posted by Darren Kavinoky on

In California, anyone who drives after ingesting drugs, either legal or illegal, can be arrested for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). In California, driving under the influence of drugs is prosecuted in practically the same way as cases involving driving under the influence of alcohol. DUID is a serious charge that carries harsh repercussions, and requires qualified legal counsel. A California attorney experienced in defending DUID cases can fight the case from beginning to end and can achieve a favorable result for a driver accused of driving under the influence of drugs.

In DUID cases, it does not matter if the driver is under the influence of a drug that is legal or illegal. Taking over-the-counter cold medicine can result in a DUID case. There is no requirement that the drug be a prescription drug. The only issue is whether the driver was under the influence of drugs such that they could not operate the vehicle with the same care as a sober person.

In a DUID case, a person is “under the influence” when they are unable to operate a vehicle with the same caution characteristic of a sober person, of ordinary prudence, under the same or similar circumstances. A prosecutor must prove that the driver meets the legal standard for driving “under the influence.”

There is no legal limit or special number that indicates that a person is too impaired to drive. Therefore, results that indicate a certain amount of narcotics or other drugs in the driver’s system do not automatically mean that the driver was impaired. The prosecutor must prove impairment by way of other circumstantial evidence too. The prosecutor will introduce evidence of the motorist’s driving pattern, appearance, performance on field sobriety tests, and chemical test results.

Once an arrest has been made in a case involving driving under the influence of drugs, California’s implied consent law requires that the driver submit to a chemical test. One may submit to a blood test, breath test, or urine test. The urine test is rarely used in drunk driving cases because it is a highly unreliable to test for alcohol, but it is more common in cases where drug use is suspected. If a driver fails to submit to a chemical test, he or she will face an automatic license suspension for one year.

An experienced California criminal defense attorney understands that urine tests are inherently unreliable. A drug like marijuana can stay in a person’s system for up to a month. Therefore, if a person smoked marijuana on a Monday and was arrested for driving under the influence of drugs on the next Friday, even if they hadn’t smoked since Monday, the urine test would come up positive for marijuana. This is true despite the fact that the driver was not actually under the influence of marijuana at the time of driving.

Typically, an investigation for driving under the influence of drugs will begin once a police officer who observes driver impairment concludes following a breathalyzer that the driver is not under the influence of alcohol. Some police agencies will automatically look into the results of blood and urine tests for traces of drugs when an impaired driver does not appear to be under the influence of alcohol.

When police suspect drug use, an officer who has received training as Drug Recognition Evaluator, or DRE will be called on to investigate. A California DUI lawyer will be able to challenge whether the officer is actually a qualified DRE because training and experience vary among officers. The DRE will investigate the driver for drug impairment by checking pupil size, blood pressure, pulse rate, and other measurements. The DRE may conduct further field sobriety tests in a well lit and controlled environment. The DRE will also ask the driver questions in order to elicit incriminating statements.

Drug use is not always easy to spot. Oftentimes, what may appear to be drug use could be a result of drowsiness, depression, or other mental or physical ailments. A qualified attorney experienced in DUID cases, will be able to investigate a case and come up with a plan to minimize any potential punishments.

Expert Witnesses in DUI / DWI Cases

Posted by on

Expert Witnesses in DUI / DWI Cases

The use of experts is extremely important in DUI / DWI, drunk driving, or driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUID) cases. Because the prosecution will be putting the arresting officer and the criminalist before the judge during his or her case to testify as to why the defendant is guilty, it is vital that the defense is able to put forward its own witnesses to counter that. Experts can be called to discuss a variety of topics, but their primary purpose is to support the idea that there are other possible explanations for the prosecution’s evidence that the defendant was drunk driving. Experts can talk about chemical tests, field sobriety tests, accident reconstruction, scientific aspects of being under the influence, and so on.

Chemical Tests: Experts will discuss possible flaws with both breath and blood tests, such as that the breath machine is not properly calibrated or fermentation occurred with the blood and a higher alcohol reading was the result. There are a variety of ways an expert can attack the chemical tests.

Field Sobriety Tests: Experts can use a person’s performance on field sobriety tests (FSTs) to support their opinion that the motorist accused of DUI was not under the influence at the time of driving. If the FST’s are performed well, they will use this to show that there was no physical impairment (if there is good balance, no swaying, etc.) and no mental impairment (if the person followed instructions, counted in correct order, etc). Mental and physical impairment are very important because any good expert will testify that mental impairment always precedes physical impairment when a person is intoxicated. This means that if there was no evidence of mental impairment, but was some physical impairment, the physical impairment was probably due to something other than intoxication (such as an injury or poor testing conditions).

Alcohol Level at Time of Driving vs. Alcohol Level at Time of Testing: Experts are often called to testify in order to rebut the presumption that if a person was drunk at time of the chemical test that they must have been drunk at the time of driving. Since the chemical tests are always given at least many minutes, sometimes even an hour or two after driving, the blood alcohol content (BAC) very often is not the same at both times. Sometimes this can be good for the defense’s case because under certain circumstances the defendant’s BAC could be rising, which means it is higher at the time of the test than when driving. This is a very technical area, and an expert is essential to explain it to a jury and to raise reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant was over the legal limit at the time of driving.

Accident Reconstruction: It is often helpful (especially in a felony DUI / DWI arrest) to have an expert in the field of accident reconstruction. Whenever there is a DUI / DWI, DUID (driving under the influence of drugs), drunk driving, or any type of drinking and driving arrest along with an accident, the passions of the jury will likely be inflamed. As such, it is essential that an accident reconstruction expert be available to testify regarding the mechanics of the accident, and to offer opinions regarding whether or not the accident was the fault of the impaired driver, the other party, or would have been unavoidable regardless of the impairment or non-impairment of the accused DUI / DWI motorist.

List of Expert Witnesses for DUI / DWI Cases

Posted by Brianna Wilkins on

List of Expert Witnesses for DUI / DWI Cases

  1. Mary McMurray, Blue Mounds, WI. Chemistry degree. Previously worked for Wisconsin State Patrol on Intoxilyzer 5000 as instructor and maintenance tech. Extensive experience with BAC Datamaster, Intoximeter EC-IR and Draeger 7410 & 7110. Expert on preliminary breath testing-devices. Expert on software applications for breath instruments. Also former SFST instructor in 1980s and early 1990s. Mary’s e-mail: [email protected].
  2. Jay Zager, Ft. Lauderdale, FL. Ex-cop in Broward County. Medical retirement after 15 years. CMI factory-trained on BOTH the Intoxilyzer 8000 and 5000. Repair technician approved by factory. Also, NHTSA SFST instructor. E-mail: [email protected]. Phone: 954-752-9788; FAX (954) 752-9788.
  3. Robert (Bob) LaPier, (208) 754-4632, (800) 257-4643. SFST instructor. Ex-cop who has trained thousands of cops on SFSTs. DRE instructor. Accident reconstruction. Intoxilyzer 5000 maintenance and instructor certified. www.LaPier.com.
  4. Steve Rubenzer, Houston, TX. E-mail: [email protected]; website: www.SteveRubenzerPhD.com; 11914 Astoria, Suite 490, Houston, TX 77089; Ph: 281-481-5715, Fax: 281-922-5903. Bachelor of Science, Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, 1981; Master of Science, Clinical Psychology, University of Houston, 1984; Doctor of Philosophy, Clinical Psychology, University of Houston, 1990; Licensed Psychologist in Texas since 1992. SFST instructor, plus has taken special courses on eye movements at the University of Houston College of Optometry that enable him to testify about HGN and similar eye movements. ABPP Diplomate in Forensic Psychology (one of 220 in USA), American Board of Professional Psychology.
  5. Walden, Platt & Associates, Bryan, TX. Two Master Police Trainers (Troy Walden and Lance Platt) with Ph.D. degrees; retired from police work as NHTSA & IACP DRE and SFST trainers of the trainers; also handle in-depth police investigation and analysis of DUI / DWI case files and are available for testimony in court proceedings. www.WaldenPlatt.com. (979) 822-3060; Fax: (979) 822-3061. [email protected] or [email protected]. Supervise SFST Student and Instructor Courses across the USA.
  6. Bob Awtrey, LaGrange, Georgia. Accident Reconstruction Specialist, phone: 706-645-1643; fax: 706-663-4081. Former mathematics teacher and then 20 years with Georgia State Patrol; taught reconstruction for Georgia law enforcement officers in statewide program. www.SouthEasternSafetyAssociates.com; E-mail: [email protected].
  7. Stefan Rose, MD, Physician trained in General Psychiatry, Clinical Pathology and Forensic Toxicology, 10130 Northlake Blvd., Suite 214, #300, West Palm Beach, FL 33412, phone: 561-795-4452, Fax: 561-795-4768, pager 800-555-6449; [email protected]. Expertise in drugs, especially cocaine, plus expert on Intoxilyzer 5000, drug dog expert.
  8. David Stafford, Ph.D, Memphis, TN; Toxicologist (formerly with University of Tennessee Medical School over 30 years, now retired); Breath, Blood, Urine, SFST. Drugs, Alcohol, arson investigation.
  9. Pat Demers, Retired Pharmacist and Masters in Forensic Science. Formerly ran crime lab in Massachusetts. Currently resides in Maine. Phone: 207-636-2908; Cell: 207-459-0981; E-mail [email protected]; 124 10th Street, Acton, ME 04001.
  10. Rick Swope, Davie, FL- SFSTs, Accident Reconstruction, Engineer – 8211 SW 28 Street, Davie, FL 33328. Office: 954-476-7640; Fax: 954-476-9224. Master’s Degree, Engineering; Ex-cop and Ex-DUI Task Force Officer. SFST Master Instructor. [email protected]; www.Swoperecon.com.
  11. Edward F. Fitzgerald, JD, Mesa, AZ. Wrote book on Intoxication Test Evidence, general information on breath-test principles and blood/urine testing. E-mail at: [email protected]. www.Edwardffitzgerald.com.
  12. Dr. Michael Hlastala, Ph.D. Breath testing-device expert, Professor of Lung Physiology and Biophysics and of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, Phone: 206-543-3166; Fax: (206) 685-8673; E-mail: [email protected]. Practicing since 1969, with over 350 published articles or books.
  13. Dr. James Woodford, Ph.D., Chemistry, Chattanooga, TN; [email protected] or [email protected], Breath, blood, urine, drugs or alcohol. Also, attended first SFST student course in 1994.
  14. Harvey Cohen, Ph.D, C.I.H., Cambridge Technical Associates, PO Box 920113, Needham, MA 02492. Phone: 781-449-4335, Fax: 781-449-1539, Co-Author of Harvey M. Cohen & Joseph B. Green, APPREHENDING AND PROSECUTING THE DRUNK DRIVER (Matthew Bender 2002). [email protected].
  15. Dr. Robert Middleberg, Pharm. D., Ph.D., 3701 Welsh Road, Willow Grove, PA. Phone: 215-657-4900; Fax: 215-657-2972. Intoxilyzer 5000; pharmacology issues, toxicology. Currently directs the Forensic Toxicology Unit of National Medical Services, as well as serving as a laboratory director. Previously served as the Director of Expert Services for NMS, and coordinated medico-legal issues for courts, attorneys, etc.
  16. Charles E. Smith, DUI Consultant, Ex-cop (23 years) with Factory Maintenance and Repair Training by CMI (40 hours); over 30 years of O-T-J training; SFST instructor; DRE instructor; plus has been court qualified to do retrograde work as a toxicologist in Florida (from job training, not educational degrees). SFST Instructor Training in 1983, plus has taught DRE course; Phone: 772-286-5761; fax: 772-286-6732; [email protected].
  17. Francis Gengo, Pharm.D, Ph.D., Pharmacology; Toxicology; 64 Dan Troy Dr., Williamsville, NY 14221-3550, phone: 716-634-0915. See web information at www.Dentinstitute.com/document_26_4.php. Dr. Gengo currently serves as an Associate Professor of Pharmacy and Neurology and a Clinical Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery at the SUNYAB School of Medicine.
  18. Steven W. Rickard, Accident Reconstruction Expert & Animation of Accidents. Prior PA State Trooper with over 30 years total experience. 1644 Whitley Drive, Harrisburg, PA 17111.
  19. William C. Fischer, Endicott, NY. Phone: 607-785-5766; Fax: 607-748-8404, Accident Reconstruction and Vehicle Fault Expert.
  20. David Sweeney, Conway, SC. Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacology, Infrared Breath Testing (BAC Datamaster and basic issues for Intoxilyzer 5000); effects of EITHER alcohol or drugs – prescribed and non-prescribed (contraband) – 843-241-3108 (cell); 843-347-0352 (work). E-mail: [email protected].
  21. Tony Corroto, 17 years of police work with Atlanta PD – Master Instructor of Instructors in BOTH SFSTs and DREs – Oversaw breath test program & ran over 10,000 Intoxilyzer 5000 breath tests – Web site: www.DUIexpertWitness.com; E-mail: [email protected]; Phone: 404-906-2153; Fax: 770-693-9852.
  22. Lawrence Masten, Ph.D in Toxicology, Board Certified in Toxicology; 873 West Bay Drive, 186, Largo, FL 33770. Fax: 727-595-0785; toll-free: 866-329-9262; [email protected]. Handles collection, transport, storage, and analysis of legal and hospital blood for BACs & the interpretation of BACs and factors that affect BAC readings and/or blood/urine drug levels. 33 years experience.
  23. Dominick A. Labianca, Ph.D., Department of Chemistry, Brooklyn College of The City University of New York, Brooklyn, NY 11210; 718-951-5458. Expert in blood, urine, proper testing, conversion from serum to whole blood.
  24. Dr. Alfred E. Staubus, Pharm.D., Ph.D.. Phone: 614-451-1406, Fax: 614-451-1407 (alcohol and drug issues; blood, breath or urine testing). E-mail: [email protected]. 1015 Kenway Court, Columbus, OH 43220.
  25. Dr. David Schneider, Pharm D., BA in Biology; Practicing Pharmacologist for 30+ years, Royal Oak, MI. Phone: 313-577-1579; Fax: 810-545-2475.
  26. William Giguiere, B.S. in zoology, with minors in chemistry and political science; grad studies in marine biology; Masters in secondary education to teach biological and physical sciences; graduate studies in toxicology, pulmonary functioning and respiratory therapy and in alcohol studies; presently working at Park-Gilman Clinics, Inc. Burlingame, CA 94010. Phone: 650-259-7564 or Fax: 650-259-7952.
  27. David (Dave) Fries – Live Oak, FL; Intoxilyzer 5000, SFST Field Testing (Instructor) – 386-344-1770 cell; 386-658-2687 fax; [email protected]. Ex-cop with extensive experience on the Intoxilyzer 5000.
  28. Kenneth Glaza, K & R’s Recording Studio, Inc., www.knr.net, V:(248)557-8276 F:(248)557-0441, forensic audio or video enhancement or filtering, plus other engineering services.
  29. Bill Taylor, Standardized and Non-standardized Field Testing and Intoxilyzer 5000. Phone: 770-534-1501. E-mail: [email protected]. Ex-cop (27+ years) who has trained in excess of 3000 instructors and students on SFSTs. Retired Police Captain, in charge of the DUI task force. Formerly headed up State of Georgia original training on NHTSA SFSTs & alcohol/drug training for 3 years, after retirement as cop in 1991.
  30. Dr. Terry Martinez, Toxicologic Associates Inc., 6614 Clayton Road, #107 Richmond Heights, Mo 63117; Phone: 618-345-0786; 618-367-8700; ext. 1404. Holds Ph.D. in Pharmacology. He is also an expert on methamphetamine manufacture cases.
  31. Jerry W. Bush, MD, medical degree, University of Alabama; B.S. in Pharmacy, Auburn University (1st in class); Board Certified in Internal Medicine; background in pharmaceutical research; certified Independent Medical examiner; presently in private medical practice south of Atlanta. P.O. Box 39, Williamson, GA 30292.
  32. Gil Snowden, Brick, NJ; [email protected]; Phone: 732-458-4014; Fax: 732-458-3449; former New Jersey State Police Breath Test Coordinator/Instructor and DWI/SFST instructor, now expert for breath-testing and SFSTs.
  33. Mike McDermott, Forensic Audio & Tape Expert, Great Falls, VA. Phone: 703-757-0103; Fax: 703-757-0262; E-mail: [email protected].
  34. Dr. David Benjamin, Ph. D., 77 Florence Street, Suite 107, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467. Phone: 617-969-1393, Fax: 617-969-4285. Alcohol or drugs are within his realm of expertise.
  35. Joe Citron, MD, JD (board-certified ophthalmologist for 30+ years), Atlanta, GA. HGN guru (from both medical standpoint and SFST training) and other SFSTs (certified); Intox 5000 (factory certified instructor); medical testimony such as symptoms that mimic alcohol impairment after traffic accident; medical degree, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, NY; residency at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN – 404-261-2911 or 404-386-1100 or 404-784-5297. e-mail: [email protected].
  36. Dr. Richard Saferstein, Ph.D., 20 Forrest Court, Mount Laurel, NJ 08054, (856) 234-7134 Voice, (856) 778-4841 Fax. Ph.D. in Chemistry. Noted author of books on Forensic Science. Former Chief Chemist for the State of New Jersey.
  37. Stan Alari, Radar and Laser Expert, 412 North Pacific Coast Hwy #237, Laguna Beachm, CA 92651, 1-877-SOX RADAR; Fax: 760-406-6222; E-mail: [email protected]. Stanley Alari & Associates. www.StantherAdarman.com.
  38. Joseph William Huff, Ph.D. in Physiology from Medical College of Georgia, Masters in Pharmacology from University of Georgia, B.S. in Chemistry with minors in Biology and Mathematics from West Georgia College, 118 Lyle Way, Carrollton, GA 30117, CEO, Materials and Surfaces, Ltd; Adjunct Professor, State University of West Georgia; 770-834-8611; Fax: 770-832-1028; [email protected]. Previously worked as Assistant Professor teaching Ophthalmology at the Bethesda Eye Institute.
  39. Dr. Spurgeon Cole, Ph.D., Psychology (formerly with Clemson University); Expert in Psychophysical Testing protocol and devastating witness regarding the lack of scientific method in implementation of SFSTs and “Validation Studies”; 1040 McNutt Crossing, Bogart, GA 30622, (864) 710-1293 (cell), [email protected].
  40. Dr. Ronald Nowaczyk, Ph.D., received BA from Northwestern University, MA and Ph.D. Miami University (Ohio), Associate Vice Chancellor for Economic and Community Development, Head of Department, Professor of Psychology, Office of Economic and Community Development, 300 E. First Street, 301 Willis Building, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858; Phone: 252-328-6650, Ext. 231, Fax: 252-328-4356, E-mail address: [email protected].
  41. Gil Sapir, Forensic Science Consultant, undergrad degree in Microbiology and Biology, Colorado State University, Master of Science in Criminalistics, University of Illinois-Chicago; JD degree, Chicago-Kent College of Law; extensive publications and law review articles on breath-testing deficiencies and SFST unreliability; has taken factory training on most breath-testing devices, including EC-IR, DataMaster, Intoximeter 3000. SFST trained. E-mail: [email protected]; P.O. Box 6950, Chicago, IL 60680.
  42. Ron Lloyd, Villa Rica, GA, former Georgia State Trooper for 13 years; NHTSA SFST Instructor; DRE Instructor; Top Instructor in Georgia when he departed to be a private investigator and expert in DUI cases; Intoxilyzer 5000 operator trained (as a cop), but not a factory ‘technician”. (770) 463-8823 Business; (770) 463-8813 Fax; 12 North Alexander Creek Road, Newnan, GA 30263. E-mail: [email protected].
  43. James Johnson, Polygraph Expert, Former Chief Polygrapher for U. S. Air Force (Europe), 11 Deerwood Drive, Litchfield, NH 03052-8004, 603-424-6365.
  44. Lonny E. Horowitz, MD – Was an EMT prior to attending medical school; worked for 4 years during residency and internship in trauma units in NY and NJ area; can provide expert testimony about symptoms of traumatic head injury mimicking alcohol intoxication; also expert in diabetes, hypoglycemia and high protein diet issues for breath test interference defense. No training on breath testing-devices, but can explain how ketone conversion to isopropyl alcohol may be misread by an infrared device as ethyl alcohol. 770-393-3438. Woodstock, GA location. [email protected].
  45. Forensic Gait Analysis Group, Two podiatrists [Dr. Clark D. Miller and Dr. Paul N. Greenberg] provide medical and scientific review of DUI-DWI suspects regarding foot function and gait analysis. Use computer technology to quantitatively measure and analyze gait patterns for purposes of refuting police claims of impairment as shown through field sobriety testing procedures. 212-794-2060 (NY) or 973-379-4965 (NJ). www.ForensicGait.com and E-mail at: [email protected].
  46. Ronald Henson, Ph.D. Peoria, IL (309) 360-5614; P.O. Box 10706, Peoria, IL 61612-0706. Ph.D. (Dissertation: Workplace Drug & Alcohol Testing), M.P.A., B.S. Ex-police officer and previously worked for State of Illinois as an Instructor for Breath, Blood, and Urine Alcohol Testing and SFSTs. Expert experience with the Intoximeter EC/IR, Intoximeter 3000, AlcoSensor Models III & RBT IV, Intoxilyzer 5000 & 4011s, BAC Verifier, BAC DataMaster, portable breath-test devices, and related physiology and pharmacology principles associated with alcohol testing.
  47. Dr. Sarah Kerrigan, Ph.D., Forensic Toxicologist. A Scotland Yard training toxicologist whose specialty is drugs that impair, Dr. Kerrigan received her BS in Chemistry/Analytical Chemistry and Toxicology and her Ph.D. in Chemistry in the field of drugs of abuse testing. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 7429, Houston TX 77248-7429; Office: 713 868 2440; E-mail: [email protected].
  48. Dr. Gerald P. Simpson, Ph.D., 846 Woodlawn Dr, Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
  49. Jan Semenoff, a factory-certified instructor for the Intoxilyzer 5000, and a former Canadian police officer. E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: www.itd2.com; offers breath training course for Intoxilyzer 5000.
  50. J. Robert Zettl, Forensic Toxicologist (Bachelor of Science in Bacteriology with minor in Physical Chemistry; Masters in Public Administration), (Intoxilyzer 5000, blood tests; urine tests) Littleton, CO. E-mail: [email protected]; formerly with State of Colorado Alcohol Program for over 25 years.
  51. Joann Samson, Ph.D., Toxicologist/Physiologist, NHTSA Certified Instructor, Breath, Blood and Urine Expert, 17 Princeton Street, Concord, NH 03301, (603) 229-0073; Fax: (603) 224-6933, [email protected] [Former State Toxicologist].
  52. Thomas E. Workman, Esq., Patent Attorney with 30+ years in high-level computer software, firmware and hardware development; understands “Source Code” issues and analyze code and can testify about flaws in programs running breath computers. 41 Harrison Street, Taunton, MA 02780; 508-822-7777; Fax: 508-824-2420; E-mail: [email protected].
  53. Wanda Marley, RN, BSN, CRNA, MS, PhD., Fort Collins, CO. Worked as Emergency Room and Intensive Care nurse, then Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) in operating room for total of 16 years. Trained at Mayo Clinic in anesthesia, and got a Master’s degree at the University of Kansas, which stressed primarily pharmacology and toxicology. Taught physiology and pharmacology at Colorado State University for 7 years, after earning a Doctoral degree there, in physiology. Worked for 19 months as Senior Scientist at Rocky Mountain Instrumental Laboratory, then opened medical-legal consulting business. Testifies on DUI and DUID cases, particularly when the client has some medical problem or takes prescription meds which contribute some degree of psychomotor impairment. Website: www.RockyMedleg.com; E-mail: [email protected]; Phone: (970) 224-4587; Fax: (970) 224-1194.
  54. Gary Lage, Ph.D, Toxicologist; can handle alcohol or drugs with blood tests, pharmacology issues; ToxLogics, Inc., 22 Bernard Street, Ewing, NJ 08628; (606) 883-9077; Fax: 609-883-9044; E-mail: [email protected]; Website: www.rtctox.com/lage.php.
  55. John Woodward, Utica Toxicology Services, 737 3rd Avenue, #E, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Has been an expert for state in more than 2500 cases prior to moving over to independent labwork in criminal and civil cases. Phone: 619-420-8388; Fax: 619-420-4128; E-mail: [email protected].
  56. Barry S. Reiss, Ph.D., 8006 Bellafiore Way, Boynton Beach, FL 33437, E-mail: [email protected]. Pharmacology expert witness for civil, DUI, DWI, and federal pharmacy law. Licensed in Florida and New York. Twenty-five years of experience in providing pharmacology expert witness testimony. Author of three books on Pharmacology; former pharmacology professor.

DUI Punishment in Federal Court

Posted by Brianna Wilkins on

Generally, driving under the influence or driving while intoxicated cases are prosecuted in State Superior Courts. Arrests that take place on federally-owned land such as national parks and military bases are prosecuted under the jurisdiction of the Federal Court. Federal Courts are different from State Courts in that they are controlled by different procedures. A California criminal defense attorney who is experienced in defending federal drunk driving cases understands the difference between state and federal prosecutions, the potential penalties that each may carry, and the many methods that are available to mitigate the consequences of a conviction for either.

Arrests in national parks are under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, and as such, they are governed by the Code of Federal Regulations. Under the Code of Federal Regulations, driving under the influence of alcohol in a national park is a Class B misdemeanor. A driver convicted of a Class B misdemeanor can face up to six months in a federal prison and a fine of up to $5,000. He or she may also face up to five years of federal probation.

People driving under the influence of alcohol on federal land that does not fall under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service face the same punishment as those prosecuted in State Superior Court. The Assimilative Crimes Act, provides that DUI / DWI arrests on any land other than National Parks and military bases that are owned by the federal government fall under the law of the state where the driver was arrested.

The penalties for a conviction in a federal DUI / DWI case can be harsh and inconvenient, so it is crucial to hire excellent legal representation. An attorney experienced in defending federal drunk driving cases can implement a plan to achieve the best possible results in an individual case.

The federal government has Implied Consent laws similar to California’s Implied Consent Law. When a driver refuses to submit to a chemical test in a federal DUI investigation, there will be additional consequences. Refusal to submit is a misdemeanor under the Code of Federal Regulations and could lead to six months in a federal prison. A convicted driver will not be allowed to drive on federally-owned land for one year. Although there is no automatic license suspension under the federal laws, the California DMV will be notified of the refusal to submit and it will suspend the driver’s California license for one year.

It is important for a person facing federal drunk driving charges to understand that not every attorney is fully capable of representing a person in Federal Court. Federal courts differ from state courts in terms of timelines and procedures. It is important to use a federal criminal defense lawyer who is knowledgeable about the federal rules when fighting federal DUI / DWI charges.

DUI Manslaughter

Posted by on

Manslaughter

The most serious of all drunk driving cases are those that involve the death of a person or persons. Punishments in these cases will be very harsh. When a person dies in a drunk driving incident, the prosecutor will usually charge the driver with second degree murder, vehicular homicide, or manslaughter. An experienced California DUI / DWI lawyer can often negotiate a plea bargain with the prosecution. If a fair compromise is not available, then a qualified attorney can vigorously defend against the charges in a trial.

Manslaughter is defined as the killing of another person without intent, but with the knowledge that one’s actions are likely to cause death. The theory behind this definition is that a person who drinks and drives knows that drinking and driving is dangerous and that it could lead to killing a person. This is also defined as criminal negligence.

In manslaughter, intent is not the issue. In all but a few cases, an individual driving under the influence of alcohol does not intend to kill anyone. The prosecution will argue however, that the person knew that his or her actions could lead to a person’s death. When a driver has previous drinking and driving convictions, the prosecutor will be able to argue that the driver really did know how dangerous his or her actions were.

If a DUI / DWI attorney can evaluate the evidence and subsequently prove that the driver was not under the influence of alcohol, the prosecutor must drop some of the charges. Independent experts will investigate the facts behind the drunk driving charge. The experts will investigate the driver’s blood alcohol content (BAC) at the time of the accident.

Chemical tests are typically conducted an hour or more after an incident. This may be especially true when the driver was also injured in the crash. Due to the lateness in conducting the tests, there can be no irrefutable evidence as to what the driver’s BAC was at the time of the incident. It is entirely possible that the driver’s BAC could have increased between the time of the accident and the time of the blood test or breath test.

A competent criminal defense attorney and his or her team of experts will conduct an independent investigation into the facts of the case. An attorney who focuses on drunk driving criminal defense will hire independent investigators to do forensic research and accident reconstruction in order to discover evidence that is favorable to the defendant. An independent investigation is crucial because the defense is up against the police and prosecutors who have the resources to investigate every aspect of the accident in order to collect evidence against the driver.

The consequences in manslaughter cases are harsh. It is therefore crucial to hire only the best possible legal representation. A California DUI / DWI attorney and the experts on the defense team will evaluate each case to determine the best possible defense in order to minimize any potential punishments.

Second-Degree Murder

Posted by on

Second-degree Murder

When a drunk driving case involves a death, serious charges will be filed against the motorist suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol. Punishment in these cases can be very severe. When a person dies in a drunk driving incident, the prosecutor will commonly charge the driver with vehicular homicide, manslaughter, or second-degree murder. A skilled DUI / DWI attorney can vigorously defend the case and can often reach a reasonable plea bargain with the prosecution.

Felony second-degree murder is a rare charge to be brought in cases of driving under the influence of alcohol or driving while intoxicated in California. In second-degree murder cases the prosecution must prove that the driver acted with implied malice or a conscious disregard for human life. This is usually very difficult for a prosecutor to prove.

When a driver has a record of DUI / DWI convictions, the prosecutor will be able to present those prior convictions as evidence that the driver was aware of the dangers involved in driving drunk. When a person pleads Guilty or No Contest to drunk driving charges in California, they must sign an admission or admit on the record that they are aware of the dangers of driving while drunk. This is known as a “Watson warning.” The prosecutor may use the Watson warning to try to illustrate the driver’s intent.

A skilled DUI defense attorney will employ independent experts to investigate the underlying DUI / DWI charges. If the driver was below the legal limit or not under the influence of alcohol at all, the prosecutor may have to drop some of the charges. The experts will investigate what the driver’s blood alcohol content (BAC) would have been at the time of the accident. Quite often, chemical tests are conducted hours after an accident. Due to the delay in conducting the testing, there will be no definitive evidence as to the driver’s exact BAC at the time of the accident. In fact, the driver’s BAC could have increased between the time of the accident and the time of the blood test or breath test.

In second-degree murder cases, the defense is up against both the police and prosecutors, who have the resources to investigate every aspect of the incident and every inch of the scene in order to gather evidence against the defendant. An attorney who focuses on drunk driving criminal defense will employ independent investigators to conduct forensic research and reconstruct the accident to uncover evidence that points to the defendant’s innocence.

An independent investigation by the criminal defense attorney and his or her team of experts is extremely important when presenting a defense to charges of vehicular homicide. The consequences are very harsh in second-degree murder cases. They can carry a sentence of 25 years to life. Because the effort of the prosecution may be relentless, it’s crucial to hire only the best possible legal representation. A California DUI / DWI attorney and the experts on the defense team will evaluate each case to determine the best possible defense in order to minimize any potential punishments.