918-550-9175

Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

Free Evaluation
logo
mobile logo
 

DWI Tag

11 October
0 Comments
Sticky

Can a Drunk Driver Face Homicide Charges?

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Can a Drunk Driver Face Homicide Charges?

A drunk driver in Oklahoma can face homicide charges if his driving under the influence results in the death of another person. Many drivers who injure or kill others while under the influence of drugs or alcohol face manslaughter charges rather than homicide charges. Manslaughter charges require the prosecutor to prove different, and less demanding, requirements than homicide does. Unlike manslaughter, homicide requires a showing of intent. Usually, driver charged with homicide face second-degree murder or felony murder charges, not first-degree murder. First-degree murder is premeditated (“with malice aforethought”) and intentional or else the death occurs under one of the following...

Continue reading
09 October
0 Comments
Sticky

New Oklahoma Law Alters License Revocation Process, Makes Breath Test Refusal Illegal

Posted by Clint
in Blog
New Oklahoma Law Alters License Revocation Process, Makes Breath Test Refusal Illegal

A sweeping new Oklahoma law will substantially affect the rights of drivers arrested on DUI charges. In early June, Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed the law and then quickly issued an executive order that contradicts some of the law’s provisions. Now a lawsuit questions its constitutionality and critics warn of future problems for those charged with DUI. The new law, referred to as Senate Bill 643, makes three important changes to existing law. First, it will be illegal for drivers suspected of driving under the influence to refuse a breath test. Breath test refusal will be a misdemeanor, punishable by a...

Continue reading
29 September
0 Comments
Sticky

The Driver’s License: A Privilege or a Right?

Posted by Clint
in Blog
The Driver's License: A Privilege or a Right?

Holding a driver’s license has been called both a privilege and a right. The Supreme Court weighed in on driver’s license revocation hearings and related issues in two cases from the 1970s. In the case of Bell v. Burson, 402 U.S. 535 (1971), the Supreme Court determined that an administrative driver’s license revocation must involve a determination of whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the driver will be found liable for the offense. In other words, a long-term (not temporary) license revocation because a driver might have committed a crime cannot be automatic. If it is truly automatic and does...

Continue reading
27 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Guilty Pleas: What You Can Expect in Court

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Guilty Pleas: What You Can Expect in Court

One key Supreme Court case describes your rights and what you can expect if you make a guilty plea in court. In Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970), the Court considered whether the guilty plea of a defendant who changed his plea due to new information about his co-defendant was voluntary. In doing so, the Court explained how to evaluate whether a guilty plea is voluntarily, intelligently, and knowingly made. Guilty pleas are not voluntary if they are “induced by threats (or promises to discontinue improper harassment), misrepresentation (including unfulfilled or unfulfillable promises), or perhaps by promises that are...

Continue reading
25 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Supreme Court Cases About Taking Blood Samples

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Supreme Court Cases About Taking Blood Samples

Blood samples taken from suspected drunk drivers have been the topic of several high-profile Supreme Court cases. Defendants have challenged whether compelled blood samples violate the Fifth Amendment and whether evidence of refusal to take a blood test violates the Fifth Amendment. In both cases, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government. In the case of Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966), a drunk driving suspect was arrested while in the hospital receiving treatment for injuries. At the hospital, a police officer ordered a doctor to take the driver’s blood sample. The sample was used as evidence, and...

Continue reading
22 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Do I Have the Right to Assistance at Trial by an Expert Witness?

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Do I Have the Right to Assistance at Trial by an Expert Witness?

Criminal defendants who cannot afford to pay for an expert witness but need one to mount a defense may wonder if the Constitution grants them the right to expert witness assistance at trial. The Supreme Court has determined – twice – that at a minimum, there is a right to assistance of a mental health expert to evaluate the defendant in death penalty cases. Whether there is a right to expert witness assistance in non-death penalty cases, or whether there is a right to assistance by other types of experts, are open questions. In Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985),...

Continue reading
20 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Exclusion of Identification Evidence at Trial

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Exclusion of Identification Evidence at Trial

Exclusion of identification evidence at trial can be a turning point for a criminal case. Getting the judge to agree that alleged eyewitnesses should not testify that they saw the defendant at the scene of the crime requires an evaluation of all the circumstances of the identification. In a 1977 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States explained the test for excluding identification evidence. The decision, Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (1977), confirmed earlier case law in explaining why a police officer viewing a single photograph and then making an in-court identification did not violate the Due Process Clause...

Continue reading
18 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Warrant or No Warrant? Your Rights

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Warrant or No Warrant: Your Rights

Three key Supreme Court cases discuss the need for a warrant when police require a suspect to submit to blood and breath tests. The first addresses the amount of force used to compel a test, and the second two discuss whether a warrant is required for blood versus breath testing in DUI cases. Use of Force and Warrants In the case of Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952), the Supreme Court considered whether police may force a suspect to turn over evidence without a warrant. The facts are harrowing: sheriffs entered a man’s home without a warrant and saw capsules on...

Continue reading
15 September
0 Comments
Sticky

Presumption of Innocence in DUI Cases

Posted by Clint
in Blog
Presumption of Innocence in DUI Cases

The presumption of innocence is the founding premise of the American criminal justice system. It states that you are presumed to be innocent of a crime unless and until you are found guilty in a court of law. In DUI cases, the presumption of innocence is important because drivers have many available defenses to DUI charges that may not be obvious at first, such as failure to follow proper breath test procedures. If drivers were presumed guilty of a DUI without the chance to establish defenses, their cases might turn out very differently. The case of Morissette v. United States, 342...

Continue reading
13 September
0 Comments
Sticky

What Kinds of Roadside Questions Require a Miranda Warning?

Posted by Clint
in Blog
What Kinds of Roadside Questions Require a Miranda Warning?

Roadside questions from law enforcement – are they legal if you have not been given a Miranda warning? What kinds of questions can the police ask? Two key Supreme Court opinions in the cases of Berkemer v. McCarty and Pennsylvania v. Muniz address and (mostly) answer these common queries in the context of DUI cases. In Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984), a police officer pulled over a driver whose car was swerving in and out of its traffic lane. After the officer pulled over the driver and noticed his difficulty standing and slurred speech, the officer asked the driver...

Continue reading