After being signed by Governor Beverly Perdue, a new animal cruelty law that increase punishments for killing animals will go into effect in North Carolina on later this year.
The new law changes the criminal penalties for animal cruelty charge from a misdemeanor to a class H felony, which could carry a penalty of up to ten years in jail.
“If any person shall maliciously torture, mutilate, maim, cruelly beat, disfigure, poison, or kill, or cause or procure to be tortured, mutilated, maimed, cruelly beaten, disfigured, poisoned, or killed, any animal, every such offender shall for every such offense be guilty of a Class I Class H felony,” says the recently passed bill.
Called “Susie’s Law” after Susie, a dog in North Carolina was set on fire and left to die in North Carolina, the law makes it a felony to also let an animal starve or die of thirst through neglect. For Further information, please visit your local criminal defense attorney.
Monday, June 28, 2010
West Virginia DUI Laws
The way DUI cases are handled in West Virginia will change when the new month gets started.
Under a provision approved by lawmakers in the 2010 regular legislative session, a new agency within the state Department of Transportation will handle license revocations and appeals of those revocations for driving under the influence violators.
Currently, if someone loses their license and wants to appeal, they must appeal with the head of the state Division of Motor Vehicles. Lawmakers didn't think that appeals process was completely fair, since the DMV Commissioner is the person who presides over the hearing examiners who issued the revocations initially.
"It will establish a separate agency within the Department of Transportation to be in charge of conducting hearings and establishing procedures," said Steve Dale with the DMV.
The head of the new agency must be an attorney and will be appointed by the Governor and approved by the state Senate. Presently, the Secretary of Transportation has appointed staff lawyer Jill Dunn to handle the duties until the first Chief Examiner is on board.
Dale says the legislation also gives first time DUI offenders a way to wipe the slate clean if they are willing to follow a prescribed path.
"Have their first offense DUI expunged from their criminal record if they agree to get into the ignition interlock program, which is something we administer here at DMV," explained Dale. "As well as drop any requests for a hearing." For further information, contact your local Virginia DUI Attorney.
Under a provision approved by lawmakers in the 2010 regular legislative session, a new agency within the state Department of Transportation will handle license revocations and appeals of those revocations for driving under the influence violators.
Currently, if someone loses their license and wants to appeal, they must appeal with the head of the state Division of Motor Vehicles. Lawmakers didn't think that appeals process was completely fair, since the DMV Commissioner is the person who presides over the hearing examiners who issued the revocations initially.
"It will establish a separate agency within the Department of Transportation to be in charge of conducting hearings and establishing procedures," said Steve Dale with the DMV.
The head of the new agency must be an attorney and will be appointed by the Governor and approved by the state Senate. Presently, the Secretary of Transportation has appointed staff lawyer Jill Dunn to handle the duties until the first Chief Examiner is on board.
Dale says the legislation also gives first time DUI offenders a way to wipe the slate clean if they are willing to follow a prescribed path.
"Have their first offense DUI expunged from their criminal record if they agree to get into the ignition interlock program, which is something we administer here at DMV," explained Dale. "As well as drop any requests for a hearing." For further information, contact your local Virginia DUI Attorney.
DUI Court in Larimer County
After successfully graduating 155 addicts through drug court, the Eighth Judicial District in Larimer County is creating a DUI court that will enroll its initial clients starting July 1.
While the creation of the DUI court has been years in the making, it comes right on the heels of Colorado legislation designed to create increased treatment for DUI offenders.
Officials say DUI court is part of a larger effort to provide treatment to those with substance abuse problems after drug courts have had success nationwide.
"There's recognition that people who commit this offense will continue to do so until they get treatment," said Larimer County Magistrate Matthew Zehe, who will oversee DUI court when it begins. "There's a movement within government that (treatment) really needs to be explored."
Officials said the success of drug court has helped facilitate the creation of DUI court. In Larimer County, 362 people have participated in drug court since 2001 and 155 have graduated.
Of those 155, nearly 94 percent have not had a felony or misdemeanor conviction in the year after graduation and 83 percent still had no convictions after three years, according to Drug Court Coordinator Alison Newcomer.
Like drug court, DUI court is being created with the goal of not just rehabilitating people, but preparing participants to live a productive life.
"We want the participant to not only work on mental health and substance abuse... but also on building job skills and life skills," said Sarah Keck, the Larimer County DUI court coordinator.
For further information, please visit your Larimer County DUI Lawyer.
While the creation of the DUI court has been years in the making, it comes right on the heels of Colorado legislation designed to create increased treatment for DUI offenders.
Officials say DUI court is part of a larger effort to provide treatment to those with substance abuse problems after drug courts have had success nationwide.
"There's recognition that people who commit this offense will continue to do so until they get treatment," said Larimer County Magistrate Matthew Zehe, who will oversee DUI court when it begins. "There's a movement within government that (treatment) really needs to be explored."
Officials said the success of drug court has helped facilitate the creation of DUI court. In Larimer County, 362 people have participated in drug court since 2001 and 155 have graduated.
Of those 155, nearly 94 percent have not had a felony or misdemeanor conviction in the year after graduation and 83 percent still had no convictions after three years, according to Drug Court Coordinator Alison Newcomer.
Like drug court, DUI court is being created with the goal of not just rehabilitating people, but preparing participants to live a productive life.
"We want the participant to not only work on mental health and substance abuse... but also on building job skills and life skills," said Sarah Keck, the Larimer County DUI court coordinator.
For further information, please visit your Larimer County DUI Lawyer.
Lions President arrested for DUI
Detroit Lions president Tom Lewand could be subject to discipline, including a fine and a suspension, by the NFL following his weekend arrest on suspicion of drunken driving. But his job with the team appears secure with owner William Clay Ford.
The Lions released a statement tonight in which Ford said Lewand had "all my support" and he would continue to "positively lead our organization."
Lewand, 41, was arrested Friday night in Roscommon County, Mich., while in the area for a charity golf event hosted by a former Lion. Lewand, who has spent 16 years with the Lions, oversees the team's day-to-day operations and reports to Ford.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello confirmed Sunday that Lewand is subject to the league's personal conduct policy that commissioner Roger Goodell has consistently said will hold all league employees to high standards of conduct.
Ford said he wants to help Lewand move forward.
"Tom made a very serious mistake and he appropriately owned up to that mistake," Ford said. "As he continues to seek professional assistance for this problem, the Lions will support and help him in any way possible.
"I continue to have full confidence that Tom will positively lead our organization as he has since assuming his current role of team president. He has all my support."
"I am deeply sorry for my actions and take full responsibility for them. As a person in active recovery, I am committed to taking all necessary steps to ensure nothing like this ever happens again." Lewand said in a statement released Saturday night
Roscommon County sheriff's officials have declined to comment on the case and have not released the police report. Lions spokesman Bill Keenist confirmed the incident occurred, said Lewand was released from police custody but did not supply additional details.
For further information, please visit your Roscommon County DUI Attorney.
The Lions released a statement tonight in which Ford said Lewand had "all my support" and he would continue to "positively lead our organization."
Lewand, 41, was arrested Friday night in Roscommon County, Mich., while in the area for a charity golf event hosted by a former Lion. Lewand, who has spent 16 years with the Lions, oversees the team's day-to-day operations and reports to Ford.
NFL spokesman Greg Aiello confirmed Sunday that Lewand is subject to the league's personal conduct policy that commissioner Roger Goodell has consistently said will hold all league employees to high standards of conduct.
Ford said he wants to help Lewand move forward.
"Tom made a very serious mistake and he appropriately owned up to that mistake," Ford said. "As he continues to seek professional assistance for this problem, the Lions will support and help him in any way possible.
"I continue to have full confidence that Tom will positively lead our organization as he has since assuming his current role of team president. He has all my support."
"I am deeply sorry for my actions and take full responsibility for them. As a person in active recovery, I am committed to taking all necessary steps to ensure nothing like this ever happens again." Lewand said in a statement released Saturday night
Roscommon County sheriff's officials have declined to comment on the case and have not released the police report. Lions spokesman Bill Keenist confirmed the incident occurred, said Lewand was released from police custody but did not supply additional details.
For further information, please visit your Roscommon County DUI Attorney.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Anoka County DWI Attorneys and DWI Penalties In Minnesota?
Are You Aware Of The Many Dwi Penalties In Minnesota?
Learning About Minnesota DWI Penalties Is Essential To Maintaining Your Freedom
FREE MINNESOTA DWI CASE EVALUATION
If you are facing a DWI in Anoka County, Minnesota, you most likely want to know more about the types of Minnesota DWI penalties you might be facing. After all, a DWI conviction can result in significant fines, and possibly even jail time. It is imperative you contact an Anoka County DWI Attorney.
When thinking about DWI penalties in Minnesota, however, many people fail to consider the possibility of losing their license plate as well. While this may seem like one of the more insignificant of the Minnesota DWI penalties you might face, losing your license plate can be quite a hassle, as you will not be able to legally drive while your plate is impounded.
You may face a license plate impoundment if your offense involves any of the following:
- Occurs within ten years of a prior impaired driving violation
- The alcohol concentration is 0.20 or more
- A child below the 16 years of age was in the vehicle
- The license had been cancelled as inimical to public safety
If your arrest fits any of these criteria, the plates may be impounded on the vehicle that was used at the time of the violation, as well as on any vehicle that you own or that you have leased or registered under your name, even if you have owned, leased or registered the vehicle jointly with someone else.
Given this, license plate impoundment is one of the DWI penalties in Minnesota that could dramatically impact the lives of your loved ones, as it leaves them without a vehicle as well.
When you are arrested for a DWI in Minnesota, plate impoundment will be issued immediately by the arresting officer. At this time, you will receive a temporary vehicle permit that is good for seven days, or for 45 days if you are not the owner of the vehicle. The plates will then be impounded for at least one year, during which you will be required to use a specially-coded plate once a new plate is issued. During this period, you will also face certain restrictions when it comes to selling and acquiring a new vehicle.
In order to obtain one of these specially-coded plates, you need to meet one of the following criteria:
- You have a substitute driver who is properly licensed
- A member of your household is properly licensed
- You have had your licensed revalidated
- The owner of the vehicle was not the violator, and he or she has a valid license
While plate impoundment may seem like one of the least serious DWI penalties in Minnesota, it can have far-reaching implications. Therefore, when hiring an attorney, be sure to discuss this consequence, as well as other potential Minnesota DWI penalties with your attorney so you can be sure to receive the best legal representation possible. If you have been arrested for a Felony or other criminal offense, contact your local Criminal Defense Attorney.
About the Author
Doug V. Hazelton is a DUI Defense Attorney, who for has successfully handled hundreds of criminals cases. In addition to lecturing on DUI/DWI-related topics nationally, his articles have been published in numerous publications including Criminal Defense Techniques, Criminal Constitutional Law, the Police Misconduct and Civil Rights Law Report. Douglas V. Hazelton dvhazelton@aol.com 612-334-3342 www.dwi-minnesota.com
(ArticlesBase SC #1903555)
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/ - Are You Aware Of The Many Dwi Penalties In Minnesota?
Sunday, June 20, 2010
DUI and your Grant County DUI Attorney
Seattle DUI lawyers, like any other state DUI lawyers put in as much effort as possible to defend their DUI convicted clients. Since drinking is a very common practice in USA, hundreds of DUI cases are filed everyday throughout the country. Seattle, Washington is no exception in having such cases. However, before learning about the fines and costs of Seattle DUI or Washington DUI attorney offenses, people should first understand what DUI is and how it affects human life. DUIs are criminal offenses and you need a local criminal defense attorney.
Here, is a precise list of DUI facts compiled by an eminent Seattle DUI attorney, which I believe will give readers a perfect understanding of this offense and its seriousness. DUI or Driving under Influence of alcohol and drugs is not only dangerous, but is considered to be a serious crime, which can cause the accused serious hazards for life and property. But unfortunately, most people do not realize the seriousness of the issue or how severe its consequences can be. Instead they feel that getting charged with DUI is nothing but an inconvenience or simply an embarrassment for an individual.
Agreeing to the facts listed here by the Seattle DUI attorney, every DUI attorney across the U.S. believe these facts would come as a shock to most of the citizens. Following are some of such shocking facts about DUI and the social impact of this punishable crime:
1.Accidents stimulated by DUI causes one death every half an hour and injure a person in every couple of minutes somewhere across the country.
2.In USA, DUI or Driving under Influence is actually the biggest reason behind the criminal deaths.
3.It has been estimated that more than 17,000 people become victims of individuals driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics and die every year. And shockingly, out of these 17,000 victims nearly 2000 of them are children.
4.Nearly 1.5 million individuals are arrested for DUI every year across USA.
5.Shockingly this figure is less than 1% of the actual DUI instances that occurs in a year across the country. In reality, more than 160 million DUI incidents take place each year.
6.Over 400 children die every year for riding on vehicles driven by drunk drivers.
7.Over 40% of deaths caused by motor accidents in USA are someway or the other associated with driving under influence of alcohol and or drugs.
8.Nearly 50 children pedestrians are killed every year by individuals driving under the influence.
9.It has been surveyed that over 75% of the DUI accused individuals are male.
10.More than 50% of DUI related accidents and deaths occur during the weekends, especially on Saturdays. Most accidents and fatalities take place between midnight and 4 in the morning.
11.Individuals driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs cause an estimated loss of more than $60 billion property every year.
As the Seattle DUI lawyer suggests, U.S. citizens should become more aware of the fatality that is being caused due to their negligence and unawareness. Driving under the influence is an extremely offensive act causing serious damage and even death to both the driver and the victim. If you were arrested for a DUI in Grant County, contact your Local Grant County DUI Attorney. If you were
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Shocking-Facts-Of-Dui/1173767#ixzz0rP5bCPO8
By Steven Brown
Here, is a precise list of DUI facts compiled by an eminent Seattle DUI attorney, which I believe will give readers a perfect understanding of this offense and its seriousness. DUI or Driving under Influence of alcohol and drugs is not only dangerous, but is considered to be a serious crime, which can cause the accused serious hazards for life and property. But unfortunately, most people do not realize the seriousness of the issue or how severe its consequences can be. Instead they feel that getting charged with DUI is nothing but an inconvenience or simply an embarrassment for an individual.
Agreeing to the facts listed here by the Seattle DUI attorney, every DUI attorney across the U.S. believe these facts would come as a shock to most of the citizens. Following are some of such shocking facts about DUI and the social impact of this punishable crime:
1.Accidents stimulated by DUI causes one death every half an hour and injure a person in every couple of minutes somewhere across the country.
2.In USA, DUI or Driving under Influence is actually the biggest reason behind the criminal deaths.
3.It has been estimated that more than 17,000 people become victims of individuals driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics and die every year. And shockingly, out of these 17,000 victims nearly 2000 of them are children.
4.Nearly 1.5 million individuals are arrested for DUI every year across USA.
5.Shockingly this figure is less than 1% of the actual DUI instances that occurs in a year across the country. In reality, more than 160 million DUI incidents take place each year.
6.Over 400 children die every year for riding on vehicles driven by drunk drivers.
7.Over 40% of deaths caused by motor accidents in USA are someway or the other associated with driving under influence of alcohol and or drugs.
8.Nearly 50 children pedestrians are killed every year by individuals driving under the influence.
9.It has been surveyed that over 75% of the DUI accused individuals are male.
10.More than 50% of DUI related accidents and deaths occur during the weekends, especially on Saturdays. Most accidents and fatalities take place between midnight and 4 in the morning.
11.Individuals driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs cause an estimated loss of more than $60 billion property every year.
As the Seattle DUI lawyer suggests, U.S. citizens should become more aware of the fatality that is being caused due to their negligence and unawareness. Driving under the influence is an extremely offensive act causing serious damage and even death to both the driver and the victim. If you were arrested for a DUI in Grant County, contact your Local Grant County DUI Attorney. If you were
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Shocking-Facts-Of-Dui/1173767#ixzz0rP5bCPO8
By Steven Brown
Field Sobriety Tests and your Wright County DWI Attorney
Roadside field sobriety tests (FSTs), developed at the behest of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), are commonly employed by police officers during DUI stops to determine whether a driver is under the influence of alcohol.
FSTs generally consist of a battery of three to five exercises, such as walking and turning in a different direction, standing on one leg, nystagmus (using the eyes to track an object), touching the finger to the nose and reciting the alphabet.
The officer may subjectively decide whether the individual failed the test, or he may decide after applying recently-promulgated federal scoring standards. The NHTSA thinks these tests are a reliable way to gauge sobriety; however, there is mounting evidence that they are anything but.
Many FSTs are based on the concept of divided attention, which occurs when an individual must concentrate on more than one thing at the same time. A driver must divide her attention among various physical and mental activities to safely operate a vehicle, and her ability to do so is significantly reduced by the consumption of alcohol.
Ideally, FSTs evaluate the same mental and physical capabilities that a person needs to drive: information processing; short-term memory; judgment and decision making; steadiness, sure reactions; clear vision; small muscle control; and coordination of the limbs.
The most recently developed of the FSTs is the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test. HGN does not test a drivers ability to divide his attention, but it is thought to be an even more accurate means to detect whether a person has consumed alcohol because it measures involuntary eye movement.
Nystagmus is an involuntary oscillation of the eye, and it occurs naturally in human eyes when they focus too far off center (straight ahead). If a sober person tracks an object from side to side, the eyes will follow it smoothly up to a certain point, when they will begin to oscillate. If an intoxicated person tracks an object from side to side, alcohol will make nystagmus more pronounced, meaning the eyes will oscillate sooner.
However, alcohol is not the only cause of pronounced nystagmus. Nystagmus can be caused by inner ear problems, flu, strep throat, measles, syphilis, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, hypertension, glaucoma and epilepsy.
Temporary conditions such as motion sickness, sun stroke, eye strain or fatigue, and changes in atmospheric pressure may also result in nystagmus. Further, the consumption of common substances such as caffeine, nicotine, or aspirin can also lead to nystagmus. An individuals circadian rhythms or biorhythms also affect nystagmus readings.
The integrity of the original research affirming the validity of the HGN test has been called into question, and in 2001 additional research indicated that the test is improperly administered by most police officers. HGN, however, is not the only FST to be called into question. The entire battery of tests appears to offer dubious evidence of intoxication.
The most obvious problem is that the conditions under which FSTs are given almost guarantee failure: usually late at night; along a graveled or sloped roadside; with unsteady lighting from passing cars headlights, the officers flashlight and patrol cars strobe and headlights; and sometimes gusts of wind from intemperate weather or passing cars. The test is given to a person who is usually nervous and possibly frightened.
In 1991, Clemson University conducted a study on the accuracy of FSTs. Police officers were shown videotapes of individuals performing six common FSTs and asked to determine whether they were too intoxicated to drive. The officers concluded that almost half of the people were too drunk to drive; however, unknown to the officers, none of them had consumed any alcohol.
Given the questionable reliability of FSTs, it is no wonder they are surrounded by controversy and DUI defense attorneys often advise people not to submit to them. Contact your Local Wright County DWI Attorney of your Local DUI Attorney.
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/The-Controversy-Over-Roadside-Field-Sobriety-Tests/32585#ixzz0rP2KShYV
By Lance Knowlton
FSTs generally consist of a battery of three to five exercises, such as walking and turning in a different direction, standing on one leg, nystagmus (using the eyes to track an object), touching the finger to the nose and reciting the alphabet.
The officer may subjectively decide whether the individual failed the test, or he may decide after applying recently-promulgated federal scoring standards. The NHTSA thinks these tests are a reliable way to gauge sobriety; however, there is mounting evidence that they are anything but.
Many FSTs are based on the concept of divided attention, which occurs when an individual must concentrate on more than one thing at the same time. A driver must divide her attention among various physical and mental activities to safely operate a vehicle, and her ability to do so is significantly reduced by the consumption of alcohol.
Ideally, FSTs evaluate the same mental and physical capabilities that a person needs to drive: information processing; short-term memory; judgment and decision making; steadiness, sure reactions; clear vision; small muscle control; and coordination of the limbs.
The most recently developed of the FSTs is the horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test. HGN does not test a drivers ability to divide his attention, but it is thought to be an even more accurate means to detect whether a person has consumed alcohol because it measures involuntary eye movement.
Nystagmus is an involuntary oscillation of the eye, and it occurs naturally in human eyes when they focus too far off center (straight ahead). If a sober person tracks an object from side to side, the eyes will follow it smoothly up to a certain point, when they will begin to oscillate. If an intoxicated person tracks an object from side to side, alcohol will make nystagmus more pronounced, meaning the eyes will oscillate sooner.
However, alcohol is not the only cause of pronounced nystagmus. Nystagmus can be caused by inner ear problems, flu, strep throat, measles, syphilis, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, hypertension, glaucoma and epilepsy.
Temporary conditions such as motion sickness, sun stroke, eye strain or fatigue, and changes in atmospheric pressure may also result in nystagmus. Further, the consumption of common substances such as caffeine, nicotine, or aspirin can also lead to nystagmus. An individuals circadian rhythms or biorhythms also affect nystagmus readings.
The integrity of the original research affirming the validity of the HGN test has been called into question, and in 2001 additional research indicated that the test is improperly administered by most police officers. HGN, however, is not the only FST to be called into question. The entire battery of tests appears to offer dubious evidence of intoxication.
The most obvious problem is that the conditions under which FSTs are given almost guarantee failure: usually late at night; along a graveled or sloped roadside; with unsteady lighting from passing cars headlights, the officers flashlight and patrol cars strobe and headlights; and sometimes gusts of wind from intemperate weather or passing cars. The test is given to a person who is usually nervous and possibly frightened.
In 1991, Clemson University conducted a study on the accuracy of FSTs. Police officers were shown videotapes of individuals performing six common FSTs and asked to determine whether they were too intoxicated to drive. The officers concluded that almost half of the people were too drunk to drive; however, unknown to the officers, none of them had consumed any alcohol.
Given the questionable reliability of FSTs, it is no wonder they are surrounded by controversy and DUI defense attorneys often advise people not to submit to them. Contact your Local Wright County DWI Attorney of your Local DUI Attorney.
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/The-Controversy-Over-Roadside-Field-Sobriety-Tests/32585#ixzz0rP2KShYV
By Lance Knowlton
Minnesota laws are harsh when it comes to drug possession offenses. That is particularly true as it relates to Methamphetamines. Review the criminal charges and their defense in this article.
SIZE MATTERS
The gravity of crimes involving sale or possession of methamphetamine in Minnesota is linked to the size of the contraband. The amount of the drug is determined by the total gram weight of the substance, not by the actual amount of methamphetamine present in it.
In fact, in a recent case decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court, State v. Peck, it was determined that the total weight of bong water could be used to charge the offense. In that case, Sarah Ruth Peck had 2.5 tablespoons of bong water in her bong. The water contained only traces of Meth. As a result, the state charged her with a First Degree Felony Possession carrying a presumptive prison sentence of 86 months, because the water weighed 37 grams, over the 25 gram threshold.
Initially, the trial court in Faribault Minnesota threw it out and the Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. However, in October of 2009, in a split decision, the MN Supreme Court reversed and concluded the bong water is a mixture containing a controlled substance and reinstated the charge.
This case highlights the significant penalties faced particularly as they relate to methamphetamines and other strong drugs. Because of the dangers that methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin pose, the penalties for sale or possession of these drugs are much harsher than penalties for the same amount of other drugs.
Some of the potential charges are highlighted below:
A sale of ten grams or more of any mixture or substance containing methamphetamine, or possession of 25 grams or more of any such substance, is a first-degree controlled substance crime and carries a penalty of up to 30 years' imprisonment and a $1 million fine, or both.
If the person has a previous controlled substance conviction, the penalty is increased to at least four and up to 40 years' imprisonment. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend an 86-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a first-degree controlled substance offense.
The sale of three to ten grams or possession of six to 25 grams of a methamphetamine substance is a second-degree controlled substance violation and is punishable by a 25-year prison sentence or a $500,000 fine, or both. For offenders with a previous controlled substance conviction, the penalty increases to up to 40 years (with a three-year minimum sentence) and an optional fine of up to $500,000.
The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a 48- month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a second-degree controlled substance offense.
The sale of any substance containing methamphetamine, or possession of three to six grams of such
substance, is a third-degree controlled substance crime and carries a prison term of up to 20 years or a fine of up to $250,000, or both.
With a previous controlled substance conviction, the term is at least two and up to 30 years, with an optional $250,000 fine. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a stayed 21-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a third-degree controlled substance offense.
The possession of a substance containing any amount of methamphetamine is a fourth-degree controlled substance crime and carries a prison term of up to 15 years or a fine of up to $100,000 or both.
With a previous controlled substance conviction, the term is at least one and up to 30 years, with an optional $100,000 fine. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a stayed 12-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a fourth-degree controlled substance offense.
METHAMPHETAMINE CRIMINAL DEFENSES
A.The Evidence.
Obviously, evidence of a drug charge is critical to a conviction. The existence of contraband including the necessary weight must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That evidence, however, can be challenged where the search resulting in the evidence was flawed.
The evidence is challenged before trial with Motions to Suppress Evidence. Such motions are a powerful tool when wielded in the hands of aggressive and experienced legal counsel.
A Motion to Suppress Evidence is based upon arguments that evidence was illegally obtained as the product of a search or seizure that violates the Constitution. The court decides this issue after a hearing in which the defense attorney cross-examines the officers involved in the case, and presents legal arguments about why the evidence should be suppressed. If this motion is successful, the case may be dismissed entirely.
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. As individual rights are highly valued in this country, our lawyers have been very successful in challenging drug arrests based on improper searches and invalid search warrants.
A constitutional violation may occur where searches are unsupported by sufficient probable cause to conduct the search. Such challenges require a careful inspection as to what the law enforcement officer knew and when it was known.
Even where search warrants are acquired, numerous potential challenges exist. Challenges may include attacking the probable cause for the warrant or arguing that the scope of the warrant was exceeded either as to location or with respect to the items seized. The challenges that are used would depend greatly on the particular facts of the case.
In addition to challenging the seizure of evidence, the testing procedure for contraband evidence may also be challenged. If improper methods are used to identify the contraband substance, the test results may be suppressed in court. Moreover, since a critical issue in any drug case is the amount of contraband, challenging the drug's purity may also provide a viable challenge to see a reduction of charges.
B.Entrapment
Entrapment occurs when the government, usually law enforcement, entice a person to commit a crime that they were not predisposed to committing. In the context of a drug offense, it may be a viable claim of entrapment if law enforcement initiates contact and communication regarding a sale of narcotics where there was no predisposition on the part of the defendant to commit the offense.
It is important to note that law enforcement officers have no obligation to tell the truth or to reveal their true identity if asked by a potential drug buyer or drug seller. Claims of entrapment are very difficult to present effectively without a trained lawyer. Some successful claims against law enforcement agencies have centered around the idea of a 'virtue test'. Police cannot select random citizens to participate in organized sting operations in hopes of generating an arrest. There must be some compelling evidence that a specific individual has a propensity for committing such a crime.
C.Possession
One of the critical elements of any drug case is whether the defendant was the person who had actual possession of the drugs on their person, or whether the defendant had constructive possession, by locating drugs within that individuals span of control, whether that is in a car, a house, or a dresser drawer.
CONCLUSION
Charges related to methamphetamine possession or possession with intent to sell are extremely serious. On a first offense, presumptive prison sentence in excess of twelve years may apply. Accordingly, you should always seek experienced and aggressive counsel for your defense. Contact your Local Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney. If you were driving with drugs in your system, you may be charge with a DWI. Contact your Local Minnesota DWI Attorney.
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Minnesota-Methamphetamine-Possession-And-Its-Defense/928315#ixzz0rOzJEtO6
By Maury Beaulier
SIZE MATTERS
The gravity of crimes involving sale or possession of methamphetamine in Minnesota is linked to the size of the contraband. The amount of the drug is determined by the total gram weight of the substance, not by the actual amount of methamphetamine present in it.
In fact, in a recent case decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court, State v. Peck, it was determined that the total weight of bong water could be used to charge the offense. In that case, Sarah Ruth Peck had 2.5 tablespoons of bong water in her bong. The water contained only traces of Meth. As a result, the state charged her with a First Degree Felony Possession carrying a presumptive prison sentence of 86 months, because the water weighed 37 grams, over the 25 gram threshold.
Initially, the trial court in Faribault Minnesota threw it out and the Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. However, in October of 2009, in a split decision, the MN Supreme Court reversed and concluded the bong water is a mixture containing a controlled substance and reinstated the charge.
This case highlights the significant penalties faced particularly as they relate to methamphetamines and other strong drugs. Because of the dangers that methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroin pose, the penalties for sale or possession of these drugs are much harsher than penalties for the same amount of other drugs.
Some of the potential charges are highlighted below:
A sale of ten grams or more of any mixture or substance containing methamphetamine, or possession of 25 grams or more of any such substance, is a first-degree controlled substance crime and carries a penalty of up to 30 years' imprisonment and a $1 million fine, or both.
If the person has a previous controlled substance conviction, the penalty is increased to at least four and up to 40 years' imprisonment. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend an 86-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a first-degree controlled substance offense.
The sale of three to ten grams or possession of six to 25 grams of a methamphetamine substance is a second-degree controlled substance violation and is punishable by a 25-year prison sentence or a $500,000 fine, or both. For offenders with a previous controlled substance conviction, the penalty increases to up to 40 years (with a three-year minimum sentence) and an optional fine of up to $500,000.
The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a 48- month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a second-degree controlled substance offense.
The sale of any substance containing methamphetamine, or possession of three to six grams of such
substance, is a third-degree controlled substance crime and carries a prison term of up to 20 years or a fine of up to $250,000, or both.
With a previous controlled substance conviction, the term is at least two and up to 30 years, with an optional $250,000 fine. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a stayed 21-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a third-degree controlled substance offense.
The possession of a substance containing any amount of methamphetamine is a fourth-degree controlled substance crime and carries a prison term of up to 15 years or a fine of up to $100,000 or both.
With a previous controlled substance conviction, the term is at least one and up to 30 years, with an optional $100,000 fine. The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines recommend a stayed 12-month sentence for a person with no criminal history who is convicted of a fourth-degree controlled substance offense.
METHAMPHETAMINE CRIMINAL DEFENSES
A.The Evidence.
Obviously, evidence of a drug charge is critical to a conviction. The existence of contraband including the necessary weight must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That evidence, however, can be challenged where the search resulting in the evidence was flawed.
The evidence is challenged before trial with Motions to Suppress Evidence. Such motions are a powerful tool when wielded in the hands of aggressive and experienced legal counsel.
A Motion to Suppress Evidence is based upon arguments that evidence was illegally obtained as the product of a search or seizure that violates the Constitution. The court decides this issue after a hearing in which the defense attorney cross-examines the officers involved in the case, and presents legal arguments about why the evidence should be suppressed. If this motion is successful, the case may be dismissed entirely.
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. As individual rights are highly valued in this country, our lawyers have been very successful in challenging drug arrests based on improper searches and invalid search warrants.
A constitutional violation may occur where searches are unsupported by sufficient probable cause to conduct the search. Such challenges require a careful inspection as to what the law enforcement officer knew and when it was known.
Even where search warrants are acquired, numerous potential challenges exist. Challenges may include attacking the probable cause for the warrant or arguing that the scope of the warrant was exceeded either as to location or with respect to the items seized. The challenges that are used would depend greatly on the particular facts of the case.
In addition to challenging the seizure of evidence, the testing procedure for contraband evidence may also be challenged. If improper methods are used to identify the contraband substance, the test results may be suppressed in court. Moreover, since a critical issue in any drug case is the amount of contraband, challenging the drug's purity may also provide a viable challenge to see a reduction of charges.
B.Entrapment
Entrapment occurs when the government, usually law enforcement, entice a person to commit a crime that they were not predisposed to committing. In the context of a drug offense, it may be a viable claim of entrapment if law enforcement initiates contact and communication regarding a sale of narcotics where there was no predisposition on the part of the defendant to commit the offense.
It is important to note that law enforcement officers have no obligation to tell the truth or to reveal their true identity if asked by a potential drug buyer or drug seller. Claims of entrapment are very difficult to present effectively without a trained lawyer. Some successful claims against law enforcement agencies have centered around the idea of a 'virtue test'. Police cannot select random citizens to participate in organized sting operations in hopes of generating an arrest. There must be some compelling evidence that a specific individual has a propensity for committing such a crime.
C.Possession
One of the critical elements of any drug case is whether the defendant was the person who had actual possession of the drugs on their person, or whether the defendant had constructive possession, by locating drugs within that individuals span of control, whether that is in a car, a house, or a dresser drawer.
CONCLUSION
Charges related to methamphetamine possession or possession with intent to sell are extremely serious. On a first offense, presumptive prison sentence in excess of twelve years may apply. Accordingly, you should always seek experienced and aggressive counsel for your defense. Contact your Local Minnesota Criminal Defense Attorney. If you were driving with drugs in your system, you may be charge with a DWI. Contact your Local Minnesota DWI Attorney.
Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Minnesota-Methamphetamine-Possession-And-Its-Defense/928315#ixzz0rOzJEtO6
By Maury Beaulier
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Stearns County DWI Attorneys and Challenging the Minnesota Breath Test
The State of Minnesota and the State of Wisconsin currently require a person suspected of a DWI or OWI to submit to a blood, breath or urine test to determine the blood alcohol content of the subject. A refusal to submit to such a test may have more serious ramifications than a test result with a BAC over the legal limit.
The Intoxilyzer 5000 is the current breath-testing machine that is used. This is the machine that is used when a DWI/OWI suspect is taken to the police station and should not be confused with the preliminary breath test (PBT) that may be used at the scene of a DWI/OWI stop. The PBT is not admissible as evidence in Court whereas, the results of the Intoxilyzer 5000 may be critical to a prosecutor's case.
The manufacturer of the "Intoxilyzer" is CMI, a Kentucky corporation. Though the Intoxilyzer has the potential to be accurate, it is not infallible. Breath testing in general is based upon the principle that there is a direct relationship between the amount of alcohol in a person's deep lung air to amount of alcohol in the person's blood in the aveolar tissue of the lungs. Breath testing equipment is calibrated based upon the assumption that the ratio of alcohol in the air to the alcohol in the blood is 1 to 2100.
THIS RATIO IS INACCURATE BASED ON INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES.
Research has clearly demonstrated that the ratio between breath and blood may vary between individuals. This is critical since a person with a ratio lower than 2100 to 1 will result in an inaccurate and high blood alcohol test result from a breath sample.
BREATHING TECHNIQUES MAY AFFECT TEST RESULT
Breathing techniques may also affect the Intoxilyzer 5000 reading. A longer breath sample - over ten seconds - may result in a higher BAC reading by more than 100% since the machinery is calibrated to test a 10 second sample. Additionally, a person who breaths shallow or holds their breath may accumulate residual mouth alcohol resulting in a higher reading than their true BAC. Hyperventilation may also impair the test. The affect of breathing techniques on Intoxilyzer results was confirmed in recent research conducted at the University of Washington Department of Medicine by by Dr. Michael Hlastala.
OUTSIDE RADIO SIGNALS MAY AFFECT DEVICE
Numerous reports and scientific articles have demonstrated that the Intoxilyzer 5000 becomes unstable if it is in proximity to any other devices emitting radio waves. A police officer's radio or proximity of the machinery to the airport may cast doubt on the accuracy of test results.
MACHINES MAY DETECT OTHER CHEMICALS AS ALCOHOL
The Intoxilyzer machine has great difficulty detecting molecules which have a similar structure to ethyl alcohol. There are many molecules in the methyl group which includes ethyl alcohol. The Intoxilyzer bombards a breath sample with infrared light. The light absorption is then tested based upon the Baer-Lambert theory stating that organic substances absorb infrared energy at different wave lengths. The wave lengths tested by the Intoxilyzer 5000 are 3.39 and 3.48 microns. However, there are a number of other similar substances that also absorb infrared light at these wave lengths. Chemicals that are commonly used in wood working or construction may be inhaled, or even a strong presence of chemicals on a person's clothing may be read by an Intoxilyzer as alcohol.
PHYSICAL DISABILITY MAY AFFECT READING
Certain illnesses or disabilities may also create chemical reactions in the body which affect an Intoxilyzer reading. A person with heartburn, liver disease or diabetes may have chemical reactions in the body that impairs a breath sample. The same can be said of people with certain diets, or those on certain medications. Hyperventilation or sitting in certain positions may also cause sample error on a breath test. Further, the subjects exposure to certain chemicals such as acetone may result in an inaccurate breath alcohol test result.
BREATH TEMPERATURE MAY AFFECT READING
the temperature a person's breath may have a critical impact on the accuracy of a breath test. The Intoxilyzer 5000 is calibrated to test breath at 34 C. This is the same temperature that is used for simulator solutions. However, breath samples provided may not always register at exactly 34 C. Even a slight difference may have a critical impact may not always. A variation of only one degree may result in a BAC reading that is 7% higher.
HOW ARE RESULTS CHALLENGED
Intoxilyzer results are challenged by reviewing intoxilyzer maintenance records, police reports and subject test results. Often, these documents will clues will provide clues to inaccurate testing. Erroneous tests may be suppressed so that they cannot be used at trial and if suppressed, may render the prosecutor's case weak and impossible to win. Contacting your Local DWI Attorney is imperative. Retaining Local Stearns County DUI Attorney could be the best investment you will make. If you were arrested in Wisconsin, contact your Local Wisconsin OWI Attorney for further consultation.
Source: http://www.articlealley.com/article_636383_18.html
The Intoxilyzer 5000 is the current breath-testing machine that is used. This is the machine that is used when a DWI/OWI suspect is taken to the police station and should not be confused with the preliminary breath test (PBT) that may be used at the scene of a DWI/OWI stop. The PBT is not admissible as evidence in Court whereas, the results of the Intoxilyzer 5000 may be critical to a prosecutor's case.
The manufacturer of the "Intoxilyzer" is CMI, a Kentucky corporation. Though the Intoxilyzer has the potential to be accurate, it is not infallible. Breath testing in general is based upon the principle that there is a direct relationship between the amount of alcohol in a person's deep lung air to amount of alcohol in the person's blood in the aveolar tissue of the lungs. Breath testing equipment is calibrated based upon the assumption that the ratio of alcohol in the air to the alcohol in the blood is 1 to 2100.
THIS RATIO IS INACCURATE BASED ON INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES.
Research has clearly demonstrated that the ratio between breath and blood may vary between individuals. This is critical since a person with a ratio lower than 2100 to 1 will result in an inaccurate and high blood alcohol test result from a breath sample.
BREATHING TECHNIQUES MAY AFFECT TEST RESULT
Breathing techniques may also affect the Intoxilyzer 5000 reading. A longer breath sample - over ten seconds - may result in a higher BAC reading by more than 100% since the machinery is calibrated to test a 10 second sample. Additionally, a person who breaths shallow or holds their breath may accumulate residual mouth alcohol resulting in a higher reading than their true BAC. Hyperventilation may also impair the test. The affect of breathing techniques on Intoxilyzer results was confirmed in recent research conducted at the University of Washington Department of Medicine by by Dr. Michael Hlastala.
OUTSIDE RADIO SIGNALS MAY AFFECT DEVICE
Numerous reports and scientific articles have demonstrated that the Intoxilyzer 5000 becomes unstable if it is in proximity to any other devices emitting radio waves. A police officer's radio or proximity of the machinery to the airport may cast doubt on the accuracy of test results.
MACHINES MAY DETECT OTHER CHEMICALS AS ALCOHOL
The Intoxilyzer machine has great difficulty detecting molecules which have a similar structure to ethyl alcohol. There are many molecules in the methyl group which includes ethyl alcohol. The Intoxilyzer bombards a breath sample with infrared light. The light absorption is then tested based upon the Baer-Lambert theory stating that organic substances absorb infrared energy at different wave lengths. The wave lengths tested by the Intoxilyzer 5000 are 3.39 and 3.48 microns. However, there are a number of other similar substances that also absorb infrared light at these wave lengths. Chemicals that are commonly used in wood working or construction may be inhaled, or even a strong presence of chemicals on a person's clothing may be read by an Intoxilyzer as alcohol.
PHYSICAL DISABILITY MAY AFFECT READING
Certain illnesses or disabilities may also create chemical reactions in the body which affect an Intoxilyzer reading. A person with heartburn, liver disease or diabetes may have chemical reactions in the body that impairs a breath sample. The same can be said of people with certain diets, or those on certain medications. Hyperventilation or sitting in certain positions may also cause sample error on a breath test. Further, the subjects exposure to certain chemicals such as acetone may result in an inaccurate breath alcohol test result.
BREATH TEMPERATURE MAY AFFECT READING
the temperature a person's breath may have a critical impact on the accuracy of a breath test. The Intoxilyzer 5000 is calibrated to test breath at 34 C. This is the same temperature that is used for simulator solutions. However, breath samples provided may not always register at exactly 34 C. Even a slight difference may have a critical impact may not always. A variation of only one degree may result in a BAC reading that is 7% higher.
HOW ARE RESULTS CHALLENGED
Intoxilyzer results are challenged by reviewing intoxilyzer maintenance records, police reports and subject test results. Often, these documents will clues will provide clues to inaccurate testing. Erroneous tests may be suppressed so that they cannot be used at trial and if suppressed, may render the prosecutor's case weak and impossible to win. Contacting your Local DWI Attorney is imperative. Retaining Local Stearns County DUI Attorney could be the best investment you will make. If you were arrested in Wisconsin, contact your Local Wisconsin OWI Attorney for further consultation.
Source: http://www.articlealley.com/article_636383_18.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)