Blog Topic

Ignition Interlock Devices Coming To A State Near You? Part II

Ignition Interlock Devices: Making the Roads Safer or a Costly & Ineffective "Feel-good Band-Aid?" The Debate Continues...

As explained in the last blog update, ignition interlock devices are machines installed in a convicted DUI offender's vehicle that measures the amount of alcohol in the driver's breath. If it is over the legal limit, the device will not allow the ignition system to operate. The first judge to use this tactic was LaDoris Cordell in California, May 1987. To her, ordering convicted drunk drivers to install theses devices seems common sense and basic safety. In her opinion, the judicial system seems to systematically dispatch with DUI cases quickly in the name of efficiency so as not to tie up the courts, however it does nothing to make the roads safer. California legislators apparently agree, because right now a bill that would require judges in four test-pilot counties to order the installation of ignition interlock devices in the vehicles of both first-time and repeat drunken drivers sits on Governor Schwarzenegger's desk awaiting signature. Persuasive arguments in favor of the mandatory interlock device sentencing includes a note from The American Journal of Preventive Medicine, which shows 5 out of 6 studies found that interlocks reduced the rate of recidivism for DUI charges. Advocates of the interlock law acknowledge that there are costs involved with the devices and that they are not a cure-all. But those advocates remind us that driving is an important privilege, and the costs associated with the devices are an appropriate inconvenience when measured against the other DUI costs such as death and injuries, fines, and prison time.

However those arguments opposing the interlock device laws are not without merit. Some argue that the devices slow down the court system with additional paperwork and simultaneously ignore a large purpose of DUI law: punitive consequences. Many people want to see DUI convicts serve more jail time. The biggest argument against the devices is the unfair effect of its installment. These interlock devices are not available in all areas, meaning in addition to the expensive costs of the device itself ($150) and its monitoring (at least $50 per month), convicts pay additional costs in driving to an area that provides them for its installation and monitoring. Others argue that the interlock devices are ineffective and difficult to enforce. Planned drinkers can easily get around the device by leaving their car running, having another person (often a child) blow into it, or simply use another person's car or a rented car. According to one Alaskan judge, there is no real DUI cure because, "People are going to over consume and drive because they make honest mistakes, because they are addicts, because they are stupid, and because they are selfish and their own convenience is more important to them than the safety of others."

There are arguments on both sides of this DUI hot topic. So far Alabama remains unaffected by the ignition interlock device laws storming the country, but we'll see if that remains to be the case if California passes the law. Where one large state goes, many may follow.

Drive Safe!

Kate

78 Hour Trooper Blitz Begins Today
Posted by: Brett Hollett
July 02, 2009

Another holiday weekend is upon us and like most people I am trying to get out of the office as soon as possible. I cannot wait to just sit back, fire up the grill and enjoy the company of family and friends. If you are traveling this 4^th of July weekend you are probably already aware that traffic will be heavy. Alabama state troopers will be out in full force this weekend conducting another statewide traffic "blitz". This blitz will start Thursday at 6:00 p.m. and run through Sunday at midnight. Troopers will be conducting random checkpoints and speeding details.

Last year over 4^th of July weekend there were 16 motor vehicle related fatalities. 3 fatalities were alcohol related and 11 involved drivers or passengers not wearing their seat belt.

Therefore, if you are traveling the Alabama roadways this weekend buckle up and pay close attention not only to your own driving but to those driving around you.

Have a safe and happy 4^th.

Drive Safe,

Brett

Alabama Crackdown to Last Through Memorial Day
Posted by: Zach Peagler
May 22, 2009

Most people know to drive more carefully during holiday weekends. Whether that is due to logical reasoning or fear of an increased likelihood of being ticketed is up for debate. Alabama Government officials believe they have found a causal relation between an increased police presence and traffic stops, and fewer driving fatalities. This "crackdown" or "blitz" will last through the upcoming Memorial Day weekend. See the following article for a full overview: http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/metro.ssf?/base/news/124159775780370.xml&coll=2

Last year, Alabama had the fewest number of fatalities on highways since 1985, so maybe the crackdown is working. Of vehicle related fatalities last year, however, 40% involved drunk drivers. If you and your family or friends are traveling this holiday weekend, please pay extra attention, not only to avoid the headache of a traffic ticket, but because there will be a lot more drivers on the road; that, combined with the festive nature of the Memorial Day weekend will lead to more drunk drivers on the road. The combination is a recipe for very bad things.

Drive Safely,

Zach

Permalink

Motion Practice
Posted by: Zach Peagler
March 14, 2009

An attorney friend of mine sent me a link to the following post on the website of the Orlando-based law firm of Katz and Hidock (http://www.katzandhidock.com/press3.htm), regarding the inadmissibility of breath test results in limited circumstances. In the current, "everyday practice" of DUI defense in Alabama, the admissibility of breathalyzer results does not come up all that often. This, of course, is mainly due to the large percentage of municipalities that offer a deferred-prosecution alternative for most first-time DUI offenders. However, in recently speaking with a Florida DUI attorney regarding a client I am representing in Alabama that has a Florida driver's license, I realized that deferred prosecution is not an option in Florida. Wow! That certainly changes the dynamic of defending drunk driving charges! The attorney went on to tell me that due to the fact that there were no deferred programs, DUI defense in Florida had become largely a "motion based practice." This means that the battles are fought outside the courtroom, i.e. attempting to suppress the admission of breath test results in court.

I truly believe this same fate awaits Alabama DUI defense practitioners. I can't say for sure when, but political interest groups will do everything in their power to stop the ebbing tide of deferred prosecution, and attempt to have prosecutors enforce the stiffest penalties possible for those found guilty of DUI (or even those not "found guilty"). Our firm, therefore, plans to be ready for that day before it comes. We're going to continue talking to and learning from our Florida counterparts to be ready to wage the fight regarding the admissibility of various test results in DUI prosecution.

Drive Safe,

Zach

Permalink

Skeletons in Your Closet
Posted by: Zach Peagler
August 23, 2008

I found this article interesting: http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200880820070. This is politics at its best, and in line with my last post regarding the ineffectiveness of the legislative process. Politicians appear more interested in winning for winning's sake, than being true agents of change. That being said, this article serves as a stark reminder that if you are charged with a crime, in this instance multiple charges of driving under the influence of alcohol, and you plan to ever potentially find yourself in the public eye, you will want to strongly consider hiring competent defense counsel. Remember, effective counsel can not only protect your interests and rights with regard to winning your case, it can help mitigate harsh punishments that don't always fit the alleged crime.

In this case, the GOP candidate was charged with DUI in 1990 and 1996, in both instances refusing to take a blood alcohol test. The charges in both cases were dismissed, and it appears that the accused's attorney(s) led him to believe that the records would be expunged. However, when his democratic rival sent a staffer looking for dirt, the records were found in a public courthouse file. Although the records showed that the charges were dismissed, they did not say why, leaving open the assumption that the rich/powerful politician was able to pull some strings and have the cases dismissed. I wouldn't want to be those attorneys feeling the wrath of an angry client, especially under these circumstances.

In Alabama, there is no procedure or remedy for the expungement of records, although it has been done. Juvenile records are sealed to an extent, but at some point, depending on the type of employment you are seeking, the records can be unveiled. Therefore, especially in Alabama, it is critical that you hire an attorney willing to take your case as far as you desire, to get the results you deserve. If you are innocent, hire an attorney willing to win the case at trial and have the record accurately reflect your innocence.

Drive Safe,

Zach

Permalink

If Voting Could Really Change Anything...
Posted by: Zach Peagler
August 09, 2008

"If voting could really change anything it would be illegal." I'm drawing a blank on where I recently heard these words, but I thought they were an appropriate opening for this post which deals with an article I read recently on al.com (http://www.al.com/press-register/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/121637252686990.xml&coll=3) regarding recent attempts in the Alabama Legislature to toughen DUI laws. According to this piece, the Legislature has shunned Attorney General Troy King's attempts to have municipal court and out-of-state DUI convictions count toward the enhanced punishment associated with multiple DUI convictions or guilty pleas. Further, the Legislature has failed to remove the timeframe in which the multiple convictions or guilty pleas must occur in order to stack up to a felony charge (currently a 4th DUI in 5 years). Finally, according to the author's opinion, the Courts find loop holes in the law whenever they are available and reduce DUI punishments if at all possible.

The author of the article reveals obvious frustration with the legislative process, although not stating with any specificity what the Legislature has done or not done to fail the public. In my opinion, laws regarding DUI punishments will always be subject to scrutiny at the hands of competent attorneys and judges whose job it is to ensure that laws live up to constitutional frameworks, and that the innocent are not unfairly punished. However, the reality of the court system today is that it is overcrowded. The dockets are long, the prosecutors are overwhelmed, as are the Judges in many instances. Cases are plead in almost every instance, especially when the accused is not represented by an attorney. In many municipalities, deferred prosecution is the standard, and in that instance a DUI will never show up on the Defendant's record if he or she successfully completes court-ordered classes and pays fines.

As a defense attorney, these programs are great in that my job is to zealously represent my client and get the best possible outcome; and I believe in some cases that the classes mandated in a deferred prosecution scenario may acutally sink in and change someone's perspective. However, if the author of this article really wants to see more strict DUI punishments, I believe it starts in the courts, with local prosecutors pressing more cases with strong evidence to trial, and deferred prosecution guidelines being more strictly scrutinized. In the reality of the day to day battle, the laws enacted by the State Legislature have much less of an impact than the lawyers that implement and scrutinize those laws.

Just my opinion. Drive safe,

Zach

Permalink