BROWN, ROWLAND, BABB & CAMPBELL One of Greene County’s biggest and most dynamic firms, Brown, Rowland, Babb & Campbell offers a full array of client-centered services. Charles M. Rowland II, (www.CharlesRowland.com) Managing Partner, provides aggressive defense to the accused drunk driver. Richard Brown, of counsel, concentrates his practice in the field of Elder Law. Mark Babb, (www.MarkBabb.com) Senior Partner, is one of the Miami Valley’s most recognized criminal defense attorneys. Patricia Campbell (www.OhioDivorceAttorney.com) is a credentialed and dedicated family law practitioner. Zachary Bushatz (www.OhioBankruptcyAttorney.com) concentrates his practice on Bankruptcy Law. The firm is proud to offer services in Personal Injury, Medical Malpractice, Consumer Law and Employment Law. Whatever conflicts life may bring, we at Brown, Rowland, Babb & Campbell are prepared to stand by your side. If you are in need of an aggressive litigation-oriented firm, call BRB&C today at 937-879-9542 or 1-888-ROWLAND.

Born in Lexington, Kentucky, Patricia Campbell grew up in Beavercreek, Ohio. She graduated from Wright State University with a degree in Political Science, magna cum laude as a University Honors Scholar and was conferred an Academic Letter for achieving the Outstanding Delegation Award and Outstanding Delegate at the National Model United Nations.

Ms. Campbell attended University of Dayton School of Law on the Dean's Merit Scholarship and as an Ohio Board of Regents Scholar. While in law school, Ms. Campbell was a member of the Law Review, clerked for the Honorable Patrick J. Foley at the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, and received the CALI Excellence for the Future Award for Jurisprudence.

Upon graduating from law school, Ms. Campbell clerked for the Honorable Roger L. Kline at the Fourth District Court of Appeals. As a clerk, Ms. Campbell drafted opinions for the court, many of which were selected for publication.
Ms. Campbell now practices exclusively in domestic relations.  She is a Certified Divorce Financial Analyst (CDFA) and continuously works to stay abreast of the newest developments in the law, including collaborative practice.   Ms. Campbell also serves on the Board of Directors for Roads to Recovery, a resource center for families of children with autism.

Zachary Bushatz was raised in Marion, Ohio. He graduated from Ohio Northern University with a triple major in History, Political Science and Criminal Justice, magna cum laude. While in undergrad, Mr. Bushatz received the Walter Pengry Rogers Award for outstanding academic achievement. Mr. Bushatz was also a four year member of the Ohio Northern Mock Trial Team, on which he won numerous awards including Best Attorney and Best Witness.

Mr. Bushatz attended Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law on the Dean's Merit Scholarship. While in law school, Mr. Bushatz was a member of Moot Court. During his second year of law school he was a team member of the New York Bar Association Traveling Team. Mr. Bushatz was an Associate Justice on the Moot Court Executive Board his third year.

While in law school, Mr. Bushatz also worked extensively in the area of bankruptcy. He was a legal extern for bankruptcy Judge Richard Speer at the Northern District of Ohio in Toledo. He also worked for a chapter 7 trustee and an attorney that focused on representation of debtors.

WHIO News is reporting that a sobriety checkpoint will take place tonight in Jefferson Township on State Route 4 beginning at 8 p.m.  Be safe!

While there wasn't any cranberry sauce, mashed potatoes, sweet potatoes, or pumpkin pie to eat at the first Thanksgiving, there was beer, brandy, gin, and wine to drink.  Happy Thanksgiving from Brown, Rowland, Babb & Campbell.  We are thankful for you: our clients!

The First Thanksgiving. The Community Trader, Manchester, NY, Nov.,1988; www.plimoth.org/Library/Thanksgiving/thanksgi.htm/.

My staff has checked with our normal sources, including WHIO news, and we have confirmed there are no sobriety checkpoints set for this evening.  Check back tomorrow for updates or follow me on Twitter @CharlieRowland.

True, we build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.
John W. Davis

And God said: 'Let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan'.
George Burns

What are the appropriate sanctions for the State's failure to provide discovery?  In Taylor v. Illinois, 484 U.S.400, 108 S.Ct 646 (1988) the United States Supreme Court held these factors to be important to the court's consideration in fashioning sanctions:

(a) The reason for non-disclosure;

(b) Any prejudice to the party seeking disclosure;

(c) The relevance and importance of the non-disclosed materials;

(d) The ability of the party reasonably to make disclosure;

(e) The relevance and importance of the non-disclosed material;

(f) Whether a continuance can rectify any prejudice; and

(g) Whether the failure to disclose was negligent, willful or in bad faith.

For a good discussion of this issue please see Barone, Defending Drinking Drivers, section 431 and 27 ALR 4th 105 (1984).

Brown, Rowland, Babb & Campbell is proud to offer a full spectrum of services, including: DUI/OVI (Charles M. Rowland II); Felony and Criminal Law (Mark J. Babb); Divorce and Family Law (Patricia N. Campbell) and Wills & Estates (Richard T. Brown, of counsel).  Our newest service is a response to the needs of our community for exceptional bankruptcy services.  Please visit www.DaytonBankruptcyAttorney.com and learn about Zachary Bushatz.

Zachary Bushatz was raised in Marion, Ohio. He graduated from Ohio Northern University with a triple major in History, Political Science and Criminal Justice, magna cum laude. While in undergrad, Mr. Bushatz received the Walter Pengry Rogers Award for outstanding academic achievement. Mr. Bushatz was also a four year member of the Ohio Northern Mock Trial Team, on which he won numerous awards including Best Attorney and Best Witness.

Mr. Bushatz attended Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law on the Dean's Merit Scholarship. While in law school, Mr. Bushatz was a member of Moot Court. During his second year of law school he was a team member of the New York Bar Association Traveling Team. Mr. Bushatz was an Associate Justice on the Moot Court Executive Board his third year.

While in law school, Mr. Bushatz also worked extensively in the area of bankruptcy. He was a legal extern for bankruptcy Judge Richard Speer at the Northern District of Ohio in Toledo. He also worked for a chapter 7 trustee and an attorney that focused on representation of debtors.

A drunk driving charge can affect you in ways that you may not expect. Listed below are some of the more vexing issues associated with an Ohio DUI (OVI).

1. Child Custody - If you are involved in a custody dispute, or have a vindictive spouse who would like to start one, a DUI/OVI conviction can be used against you in domestic relations court.  Automatic suspensions may make it difficult to exercise visitation with your children.  You may also find a court who will refuse to let you transport the children due to a DUI/OVI conviction, thereby increasing the cost or difficulty in seeing your kids.

2. Adoption - Some investigating agencies will use a DUI/OVI conviction against a party seeking to adopt children.

3. Car Insurance - Some companies will drop you if you have a drunk driving conviction and others may deny claims.  Others raise rates dramatically and still other companies force you to buy "high risk" insurance.  You can expect higher costs and less coverage for your dollar.

4. Employment - Given the societal stigma of a DUI/OVI, many companies will terminate an employee who is charged or convicted of an OVI.  Particularly vulnerable employees include those who drive company cars, those who drive between states for their jobs, those who are covered by fleet insurance and those who have management jobs.  In this tough job market you want to check your employment handbook for any reporting obligations a DUI/OVI require.  You have to decide if the employer needs to know, or, if they will be placated by telling them that you are aggressively fighting your charge.

5. Professional Licenses - Are you a doctor, lawyer, nurse, daycare worker, cosmetologist, private security, barber or any other many other workers required by your state to hold a professional license?  Do you hold a security clearance?  Holders of a professional license may face a range of sanctions for a DUI/OVI conviction, including mandatory alcohol counseling, fines, probationary discipline, license review, denial of a license or revocation of an existing license.  Obviously, you should fight your DUI/OVI charge with vigor to avoid these devastating results.

6. Civil Lawsuits - If you are involved in a drunk driving accident you become a target for victims of personal or property damage.  Many times the societal approbation against drunk driving will motivate someone to seek revenge to assure that you are punished for your negligent and reckless behavior.

7. Pilot's License - Those holding an FAA Airman's Certificate are subject to reporting and disclosure requirements.  A DUI is a "motor vehicle action" pursuant to section 61.15 of the FAA Aviation Regulations.

8. Military Induction - The ramifications of a DUI/OVI may prevent or delay induction into the military.  Recruiters are loathe to interfere with an order of any court. 

9. Educational (College) Problems - Many colleges, depending on the facts of the case and whether or not the DUI was on school property, will haul you before a disciplinary committee when you are convicted (in some cases charged) with a DUI/OVI offense.  These sanctions are further complicated if you are applying to a college or university.

10. Travel - Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act may prevent entry into Canada following an OVI conviction. [see previous articles on this topic]  You may also face travel restrictions if you engage in travel to sensitive places.

11. Immigration Issues - DUI/OVI is not a crime of violence but may still carry immigration issues.  Make sure your attorney can get advise from a competent immigration attorney.

12. Commercial Drivers - See the numerous articles I have written on the plight of professional drivers who face the loss of their careers even when driving a non-commercial vehicle on their own time.

13. Enhancement - A DUI/OVI in Ohio is never expungeable and will follow you for 6 years for enhancement purposes.  This means that if you are convicted of a second OVI within 6 years you will face harsh enhanced penalties.  A DUI/OVI will also require you to submit to a chemical test (no-refusals) for 20 years following a conviction.

Given all the above, many times the most difficult aspect of a DUI/OVI is telling those people you love you have been charged.  The National Highway Transportation Administration, MADD, The Century Council, schools and colleges all spend millions of dollars on educational programs and television commercials stigmatizing the act of drunk driving.  DUI clients are perceived as guilty without a presumption of innocence afforded to most defendants.  Furthermore, it causes stress and financial concerns in families that can cause minor fissures to become major cracks.  If you find yourself charged with a DUI/OVI please contact a competent criminal defense attorney who can protect you from this many-tentacled beast.  Charles M. Rowland II has dedicated his practice to representing the accused drunk driver.  Contact him immediately at 937-879-9542 or 1-888-ROWLAND

The Supreme Court of Ohio today [Nov. 12, 2009] released a publication that provides practical information about the lawyer-client relationship for Ohioans considering hiring an attorney.

A joint project of the Supreme Court’s Clients’ Security Fund and Commission on Professionalism, the guide is intended to promote the public’s confidence in the integrity of the legal profession in Ohio.

It is hoped that Ohioans use this guide with its easy-to-understand terms for help in finding a lawyer, what to expect after hiring a lawyer, how to avoid problems in the lawyer-client relationship, and what steps to take if problems do occur. The guide also contains a glossary of common legal terms and their definitions.

“Hiring an attorney can present many challenges to someone unfamiliar with the legal system,” said Janet Green Marbley, administrator of the Clients’ Security Fund. “The tips included in this consumer guide should go a long way toward establishing a comfort level when the need arises to hire an attorney.”

Lori Keating, secretary to the Commission on Professionalism, said other aspects of the guide speak to the duties that the attorney and the client have when working together. “Appreciating the roles each person plays and how one’s actions affect the other should reduce misunderstandings and lead to more successful attorney-client relationships.”

The guide will be distributed through multiple channels to reach Ohio consumers, including judges, clerks of court, legal aid offices and public defender offices. Attorneys should contact the Clients’ Security Fund or Commission on Professionalism for free copies to distribute to their clients.

Access the guide.

Contact: Chris Davey or Bret Crow at 614.387.9250.

On December 1, 2000 amendments to Rule 701 of the Federal Rules of Evidence were passed which may have significant impact on drunk driving representation in Ohio.  The amendment zeros in on the difference between lay opinion testimony (governed by Ev.R. 701) and expert opinion testimony (governed by Ev.R. 702).  Many who find themselves in the DUI motion practice have seen the lines between expert and lay person blurred.  Most often the trial court will allow in "lay expert" opinion of the arresting officer.  The amendment goes directly to that issue.  The new language reads:

If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness' testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are (a) rationally based on the perception of the witness, (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness' testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and (c) not based on scientific, techincal or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702.

In State v. Schmitt, the Ohio Supreme Court held that officers that conducted field sobriety tests could testify as lay witnesses (presumably under 701) to their observations during the tests, even if they could not testify to the results of those tests. State v. Schmitt, 801 N.E.2d 446 (2004).  This opinion makes no incorporation of the "new" rules of interpreting 701.  This should be construed in conjunction with State v. James, 428 N.E.2d 876 (3rd Dist. Auglaize County 1980), which held that an arresting officer was not competent to offer an opinion as to how many beers would get a defendant to a certain alcohol level. 

The practicing attorney should also be aware of the requirements when challenging an expert's qualifications.  According to OHIO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE LAW, J. Painter, 2008 ed., "the party should be allowed 'to conduct voir dire solely on that witness's training and experience...' The trial court's failure to allow a voir dire is harmless error if the objecting party has the opportunity to cross-examine the witness on his training and experience, the objecting party did not move to strike the expert's testimony, and the record demonstrates that the witness had sufficient training and experience to qualify as an expert witness." [citations omitted].

Any insight on the matter of inclusion of the federal amendments will be appreciated, appropriated and litigated.  This may be a ripe area for adjudication in the DUI field.

Question: A client gets stopped by U.S. Air Force security personnel at the gate at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base on suspicion of drunk driving.  Civilian client is then taken onto the base where he is given a breath test by a U.S. Air Force technician.  Civilian client is then cited and receives a summons to appear in Federal Court.  At no time during this process does he come in contact with any “civilian” law enforcement officer.