"That which is unchallenged and exercised as habit rapidly becomes ritual. When this occurs, dissent becomes an object of surprise, if not resentment."

-B. Carmon Hardy-

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.

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.

Source: Associated Press http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/to_speed_up_the_process_fort_d.html

I have suffered from being misunderstood, but I would have suffered a hell of a lot more if I had been understood.

                          -Clarence Darrow

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.

More soon.

Subject: Ohio H.B. 162-Speed limit to 70 mph

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.