This blog will focus on issues relating to my DUI/OVI, criminal and appellate legal practice. It is my hope that some of the postings will answer your questions and provide you with a framework to choose an attorney and fight your case! As with my websites and other published material, you will see my philosophy on the law (and life). Contact me at: CharlesRowland@CharlesRowland.com. Please also visit my web sites for topic-specific information: www.CharlesRowland.com, www.OhioDUIdefense.com, www.DrivingUnderSuspension.com, www.OhioSpeedTrap.com, www.RecklessOperation.com, and www.OhioConsumerAttorney.com. You can reach me at 937-879-9542 or 1-888-ROWLAND. For the convenience of our clients we have also added an after-hoursDUI Hotline: 937-776-2671. Thanks again for stopping by.
One of the courts that I visit most often is the Clark County Municipal Court located at 50 East Columbia Street in downtown Springfield, Ohio. The court handles all misdemeanor cases occurring in Clark County. The Court is open Monday through Friday from 8am to 5pm and can be reached by calling (937) 328-3726 or toll free at (800) 544-1694.
If you consume too much to drive this weekend and you are in Montgomery County your ride is free. Operaton Arrive Safe, a program sponsored by the Montgomery County Prosecuting Attorney's Office and the Ohio State Highway Patrol will pay for a cab to give you a lift. This program, which was started in Christmas 2007, has provided over 800 cab rides to prevent drunk driving. If you need a cab call (937) 449-9999. Charles M. Rowland II provides a 24 hour DUI/OVI Hotline if you find yourself in trouble: (937) 776-2671.
The OVI check-point conducted by the Montgomery County Sheriff's Department in conjunction with the Trotwood Police along West Third Street on June 20th resulted in one arrest for suspicion of drunk driving. Police did, however, hand out tickets for improper child restraint, seat belts and other traffic violations. It is the opinion of this blog that check-points are an unconstitutional intrusion that violates the long-held principle that law enforcement must have probable cause to suspect you of a violation before initiating contact. Everyone agrees that drunk driving is a preventable and all-to-often tragic crime, but are we willing to give up our cherished freedoms to address this problem? Contact attorney Charles M. Rowland II at 937-879-9542. He is a committed advocate for citizens accused of drunk driving (called OVI, DUI, OMVI or DWI) and can represent you in federal, common pleas or municipal court.
This morning the Ohio State Highway Patrol released a memorandum announcing that they will be out in force this holiday weekend. "If you are driving impaired - we will arrest you," sates the report. These efforts are funded by federal "overtime" grants which allow for the increased patrols and are conducted in conjunction with Operation CARE (Combined Accident Reduction Effort) patrols. They encourage motorists to use the 1-800-GRAB-DUI number to report suspected drivers. Charles M. Rowland II encourages you to call 1-888-KICK-DUI if you are arrested.
We, at Brown, Rowland, Babb & Campbell were proud to sponsor the first Beavercreek Parks & Rec. Movie Night last Friday, June 26. The crowd was big (bigger than shown because we took the picture while there was still daylight) and people had a good time with the kids. The movie was Kung Fu Panda.
An internet neo-Nazi "talk show host" and Second Amendment nut-job was arrested in New Jersey for stating that three federal district court judges "deserved death." He was upset by the ruling in National Rifle Assn v. City of Chicago, http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov where the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to overturn a ban on handguns in the city of Chicago and some surrounding suburbs. The man went further to post pictures of the three judges, phone numbers and the work address of the court and plot maps of the Dirksen Federal Courthouse in Chicago. He made reference to the killing of another federal judge's family members. "Apparently, the 7th U.S. Circuit court didn't get the hint after those killings," he said in his posting. "It appears another lesson is needed." The man will be transported to Chicago where he will hopefully be sentenced for a long prison term in the very building he suggested should be car bombed. He faces ten (10) years in prison and $250,000 in fines. The man was well known to law enforcement and to advocates who monitor hate-speech like the Southern Poverty Law Center (www.splcenter.org/).
This is the entrace to the Miamisburg Municipal Court. The Judge is the Honorable Robert E. Messam, Jr. His jurisdiction includes the cities of Miamisburg, Germantown, West Carrollton and Miami and German Townships. The Court is located inside the Miamisburg Civic Center at 101 N. First St., Miamisburg, Ohio. The court can be found online at www.MiamisburgCourts.com or, for DUI/OVI inquiries, by phone at 937-866-2203. Charles M. Rowland II regularly appears in this court, and courts throughout the Miami Valley. For representation in the Miamisburg Municipal Court please contact Charles M. Rowland II at 937-879-9542.
One of the greatest things about being a DUI/OVI attorney is visiting the different courts throughout Ohio.I have started taking pictures of the courts I visit as a kind of photographic journal.This week I visited the Vandalia Municipal Court which is located at 245 James Bohanan Dr., Vandalia, Ohio45377.You Can contact the court at (937) 898-3996.The Judge is the Honorable Cynthia M. Heck. Visit the court at: www.VandaliaCourt.com, or by email at: vmc@vandaliacourt.com
"That which is unchallenged and exercised as habit rapidly becomes ritual. When this occurs, dissent becomes an object of surprise, if not resentment."
On April 1, 2009, this blog reported on the unusual arrest of Kile Wygle. Mr. Wygle was arrested in Newark (Licking County), Ohio for impaired driving after he crashed on his homemade motorized barstool (see picture below). It happens that Mr. Wygle also owes approximately $37,000 in back child support. So, the Licking County Child Support Enforcement Agency is moving in to preemptively seize any profits which may be derived from the sale of the barstool. [Editor's Note: I want one]. www.TheStandard.net is reporting that Mr. Wygle thinks the entire situation is "pretty goofy."
In acient Babylon it was customary for the father of the bride to supply his new son-in-law with a months supply of mead, an alcoholic honey beverage (a precursor to our beer). A month in Babylon was a full moon phase, thus this post wedding time was the honey month, or, as we now call it: the HONEYMOON.
Are you convinced we live in a neo-prohibitionist environment? Listen to the spokesman for the Texas Beverage Commission and ask if we have gone too far.
FORT DRUM, N.Y. -- Fort Drum soldiers arrested for drunken driving will have their cases handled in military court instead of a civilian one. The northern New York Army post had been publishing the photos of offenders in the post newspaper since last March, but Fort Drum commander Maj. Gen. Michael Oates says that strategy to deter soldiers from driving drunk isn't working. Oates says there are still too many DWI incidents.
Oates says soldiers arrested for drunken driving now will face the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He says punishment under the code is wide-ranging and could go from a reprimand to a full court-martial. Oates also says it was taking too long to prosecute cases in civilian courts, and he wants to see them concluded more quickly. He announced the new policy Thursday.
"I only drink beer...not the hard stuff...so I'm fine to drive."
WARNING: The BAC machines employed in the State of Ohio do not distinguish between beer and other forms of alcohol. Biological factors such as absorption, elimination and metabolism may present interesting scientific arguments for a DUI attorney, but it is incontrovertible that the machine will pick up the alcohol no matter the method of delivery.
In San Bernardino County the California the Highway Patrol works with the U.S. Marines in conducting D.U.I. checkpoints. Can this happen in our pro-military suburbs surrounding Wright Patterson Air Force Base? The answer may lie in the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, 8 U.S.C. § 1385 which makes it unconstitutional to use the United States military for law enforcement. Howver, recent changes make an expansive reading more likely. Section 1076 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". It provides that:
'The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.'
Can this recent change in the law get an expansive reading to allow troops to engage in DUI checkpoints? What makes this such an important issue is the continued use of hype in DUI cases to justify un-American police activities and the seemingly endless desire of Ohio's powers-that-be to provide the police with unprecedented powers. We will keep an eye on this issue as it winds its way through the state courts.
Choose a lawyer who is knowledgeable and competent in the field of criminal law and has taken steps to further his or her education in the field. Charles Rowland maintains membership in the National College of DUI Defense and in the National Motorists Association. Choose an attorney who is able to answer your questions and spends time addressing your concerns. The attorney is going to be your guide throughout this process so make sure it is someone who you are able to talk with openly and honestly. Remember, you are the consumer and you should receive a good service for your dollar. Choose an attorney who will take the case to trial if necessary. Find out what his or her experience has been with the court in question and find out if he or she feels that they can competently represent you. Find out what the attorney's retainer fee is and find out what the attorney's hourly rate is. For many people the D.U.I. experience will be one of the most traumatic and life-altering events they will experience. Hire a competent attorney who will not be afraid to challenge the government and fight for your rights!
This blog joins in the outrage focused on the senseless and vicious attack on the National Holocaust Memorial Museum. We join with all patriotic Americans in sending condolences to the victims.
The Interstate Driver License Compact is an agreement between 45 member states to exchange arrest information for certain traffic violations, including DUI.For example, if you are arrested in Ohio for DUI, Ohio will inform your home state.Your home state may take no action, immediate action or treat the offense as if it occurred in your home state for licensure purposes.The intended goal of the Compact was to prevent the occurrence of multiple driving records that were “hidden” from other states.Currently there are five states that are not members to the IDLC: Georgia, Massachusetts, Michigan, Tennessee and Wisconsin.
You may want to forget about the IDLC, however, because there is a new player in the game; the Driver License Agreement (DLA).The Driver License Agreement (DLA) is a new compact written by the Joint Executive Board of the Driver License Compact (DLC) and the Non-Resident Violator Compact (NRVC) with staff support provided by the American Assn. of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). Over the next few years, the DLA will replace the IDLC imposing tougher fines and penalties against drivers that commit violations under the DLA.For example, adverse action can be taken against a driver for not responding to violations such as equipment violations, registration violations, parking violations, and weight limit violations. As of this posting, Connecticut, Arkansas and Massachusetts are member of the DLA, with legislation in various stages in Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota and North Carolina.There has also been federal legislation mandating that states must participate.As of this posting no mandate has been passed into law.
Ohio classifies DUI in two ways. The first offense 4511.19(A)(1)(a) is the old fashion notion that you are "under the influence" of alcohol or drugs. This definition is subject to expansion by the prosecution and is scrupulously narrowed by the defense. Other portions of the statute deal with "per se" violations, known as breath test cases (blowing over the limit). These two types of cases are very different and will be analyzed differently by competent DUI counsel.
Ohio has judicially recognized rules and procedures to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the breath testing program. These rules and procedures can be found in the Ohio Administrative Code. Other "rules" that affect a breath test can come from departmental testing regulations, training procedures and operator's manuals. Accordingly, an officer or department that ignores, skips or otherwise violates these administrative rules calls into question the accuracy and reliability of test results.
Most jurisdictions will allow a test in unless the alleged deviations from the rules raise substantial and legitimate questions about the breath test that prejudices the defendant. This is commonly referred to as the "substantial compliance test." Good DUI counsel can effectively use these deficiencies to create reasonable doubt as to the test. The weight given to the test is determined not by the court but by the jury. God bless that wonderful check on judicial power.
In response to a client question here is the current bond schedule for the Clark County Municipal Court. The Court can be contacted Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm at (937) 328-3726. The Clark County Municipal Court is located at 50 East Columbia Street, Springfield, Ohio 45502. The criminal/traffic division of the Clark County Municipal Court handles all misdemeanor cases, preliminary hearings on felony cases and all traffic cases (including DUI) occuring within Clark County.
Clark County Municipal Court
Bond Schedule
Effective Date September 22, 2008
Charge
Bond
Speed 1 Thru 20 Mph Over
175.00
Speed 21 MPH and Over
200.00
Driving While Intoxicated
500.00
Driving Under Suspension
500.00
Drag Racing
500.00
Reckless Operation
200.00
Hit Skip
500.00
Red Light
150.00*
Stop Sign
150.00*
Failure To Yield With Accident
150.00*
Fail To Signal Turn
120.00
Following Too Close
120.00
Left Of Center
120.00
One Way Street
120.00
Improper Passing
120.00
Improper Start
120.00
Assured Clear Distance
120.00
Driving On Restricted Street
120.00
Squealing And Peeling
200.00
Crossing Yellow Line
120.00
Improper Lane Change
120.00
U Turn Violation
120.00
Disregard Street Markings
120.00
*Passing Stopped School bus
Must Appear
Drive On Closed Road
120.00
Moving Violations Not Listed
120.00
Child Restraint - 1st Violation
200.00
*Child Restraint - 2nd Violation
Must Appear
Seat Belt - Driver
85.00
Seat Belt - Passenger
75.00
Open Container
200.00
Fail To Comply With Officer
200.00
Driver License Law - Expired License
120.00
Driver License Law - Failure To Produce License
120.00
Auto License Law - One Tag
120.00
Auto License Law - Fail/Display County Sticker
120.00
Auto License Law - Fail/Register Vehicle
120.00
Auto License Law - Fail/Transfer Registration
120.00
Parked On Roadway
120.00
Muffler Violations - Defective Exhaust
120.00
Muffler Violations - Cracking Exhaust
120.00
Light Provision
120.00
Obstructed View
120.00
Occupying Space On Highway
120.00
Insecure Load
120.00
Failure To Dim Lights
120.00
Helmet Ordinance
120.00
Opening Car Door
120.00
Unreasonable Noise
200.00
Equipment Violations Not Listed
120.00
Failure To License Dog - With Proof
130.00
Failure To License Dog - Without Proof
155.00
Failure To Control Dog
155.00
Failure To Innoculate Dog - With Proof
130.00
Failure To Innoculate Dog - Without Proof
155.00
Cruelty To Animals
750.00
Failure To Identify
120.00
Violation Of Bicycle Ordinances
120.00
Fleeing Or Eluding
500.00
Resisting An Officer
500.00
Unsafe Vehicle
120.00
Handicap Parking
350.00
Jaywalking
110.00
City Parks After Hours
200.00
Oversize Load
120.00
Slow Moving Vehicle Emblem
120.00
No Fuel User Tax Permit
120.00
Window Tint (With Proof)
105.00
(Without Proof)
200.00
Littering From A Vehicle
200.00
Alcoholic Beverage In Park
200.00
Per state law, proof of insurance is required.
Bond amount is double for second moving offense within a twelve (12) month period.
Cancellation of license for non-appearance or non-payment of violation.
Citation occurring within a construction zone and marked accordingly shall require posting of double bond or personal appearance of defendant.
Xenia Municipal Court has jurisdiction over OVI/DUI violations of any ordinance of any municipal corporation within its territory. The Xenia Municipal Court has jurisdiction for the cities of Xenia and Bellbrook; the villages of Yellow Springs, Cedarville, Jamestown, Spring Valley, and Bowersville; and the townships of Sugarcreek, Xenia, Cedarville, New Jasper, Silvercreek, Ceasarcreek, Miami, Jefferson, Ross, and Spring Valley. The Court’s jurisdiction also includes four college campuses: Central State University, Wilberforce University, Cedarville College, and Antioch College. Law enforcement agencies located within the jurisdiction of the court include: Bellbrook Police Department; Cedarville Police Department; Central State University Police Department; Greene County Animal Control; Greene County Sheriff’s Office; Greene County Parks District; Jamestown Police Department; Ohio Department of Parks and Natural Resources; Ohio Department of Wildlife; Ohio State Highway Patrol; Spring Valley Police Department; Sugarcreek Township Police Department; Wilberforce University Police Department; Xenia Police Division; and Yellow Springs Police Department.
Location: Xenia Municipal Court is located on the second floor of Xenia City Hall, 101 N. Detroit Street.
Hours of Operation: Hours are 7:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays & Wednesdays. Hours are 7:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. on Thursdays and Fridays. The court observes the following holidays: New Year's Day; Martin Luther King, Jr. Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Veteran's Day; Thanksgiving (and the Friday following); and Christmas Day. As of January 1, 2008, Night Court services are no longer provided.
On Wednesday, June 3, 2009, The Ohio House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will hold a second hearing for H.B. 162 that would raise the speed limit to 70 m.p.h. on Ohio's Interstates. The hearing will take place at 10:30 AM in Room 017 (in the basement of the Statehouse). The agenda states that the hearing is open to Proponents, Opponents, and Interested Parties.
You can be sure that the government and insurance representatives will be there to claim the entire population of Ohio will be decimated by raising the speed limit five MPH. It would be great if there are some NMA members there supporting the bill---in fact asking that the limit be raised to 75 MPH so it comes a little closer to representing reality on Ohio's Interstates.
Monday, May 25, 2009 Ohio Court Strikes Down Wrongful Entrustment ChargeThe Court of Appeals for the Twelfth District of Ohio last week struck down a "wrongful entrustment" ticket handed to a father who had allowed his son to borrow his Jeep. West Chester Township police were intent on collecting $500 plus court costs from John R. Tranovich because his son Mark's license was suspended on June 21, 2008 when the twenty-year-old took the vehicle. A trial court heard the case and imposed a suspended six-month jail sentence on the father. Ohio's wrongful entrustment law imposes harsh penalties that include the mandatory seizure of a vehicle's license plate for thirty-days on a first offense and permanent seizure of the loaned vehicle on a third offense. "No person shall permit a motor vehicle owned by the person or under the person's control to be driven by another if the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person does not have a valid driver's license," Ohio Code 4511.203 states. Mark Tranovich had previously had a one-year suspended license. After it had expired, his father had arranged for an SR22 automobile insurance bond, giving him every reason to believe his son's license was fully restored. John Tranovich never received any notification from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles about his son's second suspension, and so he testified that he did not know anything about it. A previous appellate court decision established that there is "no affirmative duty" to check drivers' licenses before lending one's car. "Given appellant's testimony and the officer's admission that appellant never told him he knew about Mark's current suspension, we find the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that on June 21, 2008, the day of the entrustment of the Jeep to Mark, appellant knew or had reasonable cause to believe Mark had no legal right to drive," Judge William W. Young wrote for the three-judge panel. "Given the evidence presented, the trial court could not reasonably find that the state proved the offense of wrongful entrustment beyond a reasonable doubt." The court tossed out John Tranovich's conviction for his son's offense. Judge Young has a special connection with father-son issues as he was the first Ohio judge to serve on the bench with his father, Warren C. Young. A copy of the decision is available in a 40k PDF file at the source link below.
Source: Ohio v. Tranovich (Court of Appeals, State of Ohio, 5/25/2009)
Great News! Below is a story from today, May 22, 2009 announcing the return of a Cincinnati classic - Burger Beer. The story is from Cinncinnati WLWT-tv. Have a wonderful and safe Memorial Holiday weekend and enjoy a Burger Beer!
With the first major driving holiday of the summer season approaching, we have analyzed the laws across the country to determine the best and the worst states when it comes to exploiting the motoring public.
These state rankings were calculated using seventeen criteria related to specific traffic laws, enforcement practices, and the treatment of traffic ticket defendants. The rankings are designed to provide guidance to travelers who do not want their vacation ruined by speed traps, arcane laws or “kangaroo” traffic courts.
The state most likely to find its way into your wallet is New Jersey. With its toll roads, roadblocks, and speed traps, New Jersey has left almost no stone unturned when it comes to extracting cash from motorists. The state has also recently pushed through a red-light camera pilot project at a time when many states are banning the ticket cameras because they’ve proven to have a negative effect on traffic safety. Add in “driver responsibility” fees, which are ineffective and have a disproportionate effect on the poor, and you have the worst state in our rankings.
Here are the worst ten states:
1) New Jersey 2) Ohio 3) Maryland 4) Louisiana 5) New York 6) Illinois 7) Delaware 8) Virginia 9) Washington 10) Massachusetts
On the opposite end of the spectrum, the five states that treated motorists most fairly are Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, and Kentucky. The complete list of rankings and the criteria we have used can be found at the bottom of this article.
Jim Baxter, President of the National Motorists Association, said “It is not exactly a well kept secret that many traffic laws, enforcement practices, and traffic courts are more about generating revenue and political posturing, than they are about traffic safety. During holidays, like the upcoming Memorial Day weekend, we’re bombarded with messages about intensified enforcement, ‘click it or ticket,’ and horrendous fines when in fact most vacation-related traffic accidents are caused my inattention, distraction and fatigue. However, these are accident causes that don’t generate much in the way of government revenue, so instead our highways are overrun with unmarked police cars and ticket cameras.”
Baxter went on to say “The long term solution to aligning legitimate public interests with government policies is to remove the money from traffic regulation, enforcement, and adjudication. Until that happens, the focus on revenue generation will continue to trump effective traffic regulation and ethical enforcement practices.”
With this in mind, motorists who will be traveling to unfamiliar areas during the holiday may want to check out the NMA’s National Speed Trap Exchange – a listing of speed traps across the country – at www.speedtrap.org.
Today the Greene County Bar Association will meet in special session at the Fox & Hound Pub. After a short business meeting we will embark on a journey to the Cincinnati Reds vs. Philadelphia Phillies (12:35) and then on to Argosy casino. I'll try to post some pictures of the trip if they are palatable.
Here is a link to a wonderful article from the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy by Susan A. Bandes. It describes a twenty-year effort, starting in the Reagan Justice Department to overturn the exclusionary rule first articulated by the Supreme Court in Mapp v. Ohio. http://www.acslaw.org/c21/criminaljustice A description of the article is included below.
ACS is pleased to distribute "The Roberts Court and the Future of the Exclusionary Rule," an Issue Brief by Susan A. Bandes, Distinguished Research Professor at the DePaul University College of Law. Since the Supreme Court decided Mapp v. Ohio in 1961, the exclusionary rule has been the primary method of enforcing against state and local law enforcement officers the Fourth Amendment's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The exclusionary rule had previously been applied to federal law enforcement officials, but as Professor Bandes argues, "the Court's broad expansion of Fourth Amendment protection ignited a heated debate over the proper remedy for a violation of the right - a debate that continues to this day." She discusses the objections to the exclusionary rule, which are based on the high price it imposes on the government by prohibiting the use in court of evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Professor Bandes continues by explaining that, "The exclusionary rule excludes evidence that would never have been acquired if the police had obeyed the Fourth Amendment in the first place. Thus the controversial nature of the remedy has much to do with the controversial nature of the underlying right. The Fourth Amendment imposes constraints on law enforcement officials in order to protect individual autonomy and dignity."
Based on changes in police practices that followed the Court's decision in Mapp, moreover, Professor Bandes asserts that "it has become apparent that the exclusionary rule is an essential means of ensuring that law enforcement officers respect the limits the Fourth Amendment imposes on their power." She also points out that the Mapp Court itself reasoned that "the government should neither profit from its own illegal activity nor model disrespect for the law through its own actions." Nevertheless, she argues that the Roberts Court has issued decisions that have weakened the exclusionary rule and even suggested that is it obsolete and no longer needed. Professor Bandes contends that these decisions are the logical extension of an effort that began in the Reagan-era Justice Department, led by then Attorney General Edwin Meese, to launch the first frontal attack on the exclusionary rule. She concludes by observing that, "Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, both of whom served in the Meese Justice Department, are now part of a four-member voting block (with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas) that, to all appearances, is busily laying the groundwork for abandoning the exclusionary rule. They lack only a reliable fifth vote."
"The leading rule for the lawyer, as for the man of every other calling, is diligence. Leave nothing for tomorrow which can be done today. Never let your correspondence fall behind. Whatever piece of business you have in hand, before stopping, do all the labor pertaining to it which can be done...
Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser in fees, expenses and waste of time. As a peace-maker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough...
There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are necessarily dishonest. I say vague, because when we consider to what extent confidence and honors are reposed in and conferred upon lawyers by the poeple, it appears improbably that their impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid. Yet the impression is common, almost universal. Let no young man chossing the law for a calling for a moment yield to the popular belief; resolve to be honest at all events; and if in your judgement you cannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer."
How To Calculate Your Estimated Blood Alcohol Content (BAC)
Showing estimated percent of alcohol in the blood by number of drinks in relation to body weight. This percent can be estimated by:
1. Count your drinks (1 drink equals 1 ounce of 100-proof liquor, one five ounce glass of table wine or one 12-ounce bottle of regular beer).
2. Use the chart below and under number of "drinks" and opposite "body weight" find the percent of blood alcohol listed.
3. Subtract from this number the percent of alcohol "burned up" during the time elapsed since your first drink. This figure is .015% per hour. (Example: 180 lb. man - 8 drinks in 4 hours / .167% minus (.015x4) = .107 %