You have been unable to obtain a disposition to your DUI case that you can accept, what alternatives are there? You have three options. The first option is to open plead (blind plea) the case before a judge. The second alternative is to waive a jury trial and have the judge be the trier of fact. The last option is to have a jury trial. What will occur in court when you request a jury trial?
On the day of your trial, the circuit clerk's office will summon 40 to 50 people for jury duty. The potential jurors will arrive and watch a short movie concerning the court system and the jury process. After the movie, the jurors will be brought to your courtroom. The judge will introduce the prosecutor, your attorney, you and the courtroom personnel to the jury. The clerk will randomly call jurors to the jury box. For Further informtion, contact your Kendall County DUI Attorney.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Boone County DUI Attorney and Double Jeopardy
Illinois DUI will also be labeled DUI, drunk driving, or driving under the influence. DUI arrests in IL results in 2 separate individual cases: the criminal case, which the consequence might include jail, fines, a suspended driver's license, required alcohol instruction courses, and more. A DUI arrest will also trigger an administrative driver's license suspension that can only be challenged with a timely request for a hearing. This is just one of the reasons it is so crucial to get in touch with a DUI attorney immediately.
While this may appear as if there is double-punishment for one offense (a violation of the Double Jeopardy clause of the Constitution), the IL Supreme Court decided that a summary suspension of a driver's license is not considered punishment under the criminal law and as a result does not offend the double jeopardy clauses of the Illinois or U.S. Constitutions. For further information, contact your Illinois Boone County DUI Attorney or visit the DUI Blog.
While this may appear as if there is double-punishment for one offense (a violation of the Double Jeopardy clause of the Constitution), the IL Supreme Court decided that a summary suspension of a driver's license is not considered punishment under the criminal law and as a result does not offend the double jeopardy clauses of the Illinois or U.S. Constitutions. For further information, contact your Illinois Boone County DUI Attorney or visit the DUI Blog.
Elgin DUI Attorney
A driver who was arrested for a DUI is eligible may be eligible for monitoring driving device permit (MDDP) if they are considered a first offender. The defendant's attorney will complete the appropriate paperwork to apply for the MDDP. To obtain the permit, the State of Illinois requires that a Breath Alcohol Interlock Ignition Device (BAIID) be installed on their vehicles. The costs can range from $1000 for a 6 month suspension to $2000 for a 1 year suspension. For further information, contact your Elgin DUI Attorney or visit a video regarding your Elgin DUI Attorney
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Sangamon County DUI Attorney and the BAIID
A DUI offender may decline the court’s offer to petition for an MDDP and instead choose to restrain from driving during the suspension period. However, an offender who chooses not to participate in the program and is subsequently caught driving a vehicle during the suspension period, is guilty of a Class 4 felony. Additionally, an offender who participates in the BAIID program and is subsequently caught driving a vehicle without a BAIID device installed is guilty
of a Class 4 felony. Penalties include possible imprisonment of 1-3 years, a minimum of 30 days in jail or 300 hours of community service, and fines of up to $25,000. For further information, contact your Sangamon County DUI Attorney or your Sangamon County DUI Lawyer. You can review a video regarding Attorney Monroe McWard's experience as a Sangamon County DUI Attorney.
of a Class 4 felony. Penalties include possible imprisonment of 1-3 years, a minimum of 30 days in jail or 300 hours of community service, and fines of up to $25,000. For further information, contact your Sangamon County DUI Attorney or your Sangamon County DUI Lawyer. You can review a video regarding Attorney Monroe McWard's experience as a Sangamon County DUI Attorney.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Illinois Warren County DUI Attorney and Breathalyzers
Law Enforcement officials are generally pleased if a driver under arrest for DUI accepts the invitation to take the breath test. Why? Because it offers them evidence on a scientific scale that they believe outweighs the observational evidence which led to the DUI arrest in the first place.
There are several scientific principles at work in an intoximeter or breath reading machine. First, no sample is any good if the manufacturer’s guidelines are not strictly followed. In fact, most machines out there today are in operation outside of the manufacturers’ limited warranty.
A local DUI Attorney can help explain the nuances of the machine, but one of the easiest ways to relate to it is knowing that it is a computer. Everyone who has used a computer has witnessed the computer fail or lock up. Computers aren’t perfect and neither are Breathalyzers. For further information, contact your Warren County DUI Attorney.
There are several scientific principles at work in an intoximeter or breath reading machine. First, no sample is any good if the manufacturer’s guidelines are not strictly followed. In fact, most machines out there today are in operation outside of the manufacturers’ limited warranty.
A local DUI Attorney can help explain the nuances of the machine, but one of the easiest ways to relate to it is knowing that it is a computer. Everyone who has used a computer has witnessed the computer fail or lock up. Computers aren’t perfect and neither are Breathalyzers. For further information, contact your Warren County DUI Attorney.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
New DUI law starts in 4 California Counties
Convicted drunken drivers in four California counties will have to prove they haven't had a drink before they can start their vehicles, under one of several laws taking effect Thursday. The law requires first-time and repeat offenders to install ignition interlock devices in their vehicles. If the device detects alcohol on the driver's breath, the vehicle will not start.
The law can "save hundreds of lives here," said Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles. "This is a piece of legislation that will really matter at the community level."
The law starts on an experimental basis in four counties—Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento and Tulare. The experiment phase will last five years, after which lawmakers can consider expanding the program statewide.
J.T. Griffin, vice president of public policy for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said he hopes the program will be expanded and serve as a model beyond the 13 states that already require offenders to use interlock devices.
The device consists of a breathing tube, a device that measures alcohol content and a connection to the ignition system. Drivers must blow into the tube before starting the vehicle and periodically must stop to retake the test while they are traveling. The device keeps track of failed tests. Most offenders will be required to pay about $125 to install and $60 monthly to maintain the device, although there is a program for low-income convicts, said Mike Marando, a spokesman for the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The DMV also will collect a one-time $45 administration fee. First-time offenders will be required to have the devices installed for five months. A second DUI extends the requirement to 12 months, a third offense to 24 months and a fourth conviction to 36 months. The time periods double if the offense results in an injury.
There is no limit in California on the number of DUI convictions drivers can have before losing their licenses, according to the DMV. Marando cited a study by the International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, which found a 40 percent to 95 percent reduction in the rate of repeat drunken driving offenses while the devices were installed. Violations increased once they were removed.
Joshua Dale, executive director of the California DUI Lawyers Association, said the state would get better results by targeting young or repeat offenders rather than imposing a blanket burden on all DUI offenders. Many first-time offenders learn their lesson and never drive drunk again, he said.
Dale said many drivers will be unable to afford the devices, on top of the typical $2,500 they pay in fines and court fees.
Griffin, who works at MADD's office in Washington, D.C., said requiring the devices is less onerous than prohibiting offenders from driving.
"The interlock device lets them go to work, go to school, go anywhere they want to go. It just requires them to go sober," he said.
The interlock law is among several taking effect July 1, the first day of the state's new fiscal year. For further information, contact your Local Alameda County DUI Attorney.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15413272?nclick_check=1
The law can "save hundreds of lives here," said Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles. "This is a piece of legislation that will really matter at the community level."
The law starts on an experimental basis in four counties—Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento and Tulare. The experiment phase will last five years, after which lawmakers can consider expanding the program statewide.
J.T. Griffin, vice president of public policy for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said he hopes the program will be expanded and serve as a model beyond the 13 states that already require offenders to use interlock devices.
The device consists of a breathing tube, a device that measures alcohol content and a connection to the ignition system. Drivers must blow into the tube before starting the vehicle and periodically must stop to retake the test while they are traveling. The device keeps track of failed tests. Most offenders will be required to pay about $125 to install and $60 monthly to maintain the device, although there is a program for low-income convicts, said Mike Marando, a spokesman for the California Department of Motor Vehicles. The DMV also will collect a one-time $45 administration fee. First-time offenders will be required to have the devices installed for five months. A second DUI extends the requirement to 12 months, a third offense to 24 months and a fourth conviction to 36 months. The time periods double if the offense results in an injury.
There is no limit in California on the number of DUI convictions drivers can have before losing their licenses, according to the DMV. Marando cited a study by the International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, which found a 40 percent to 95 percent reduction in the rate of repeat drunken driving offenses while the devices were installed. Violations increased once they were removed.
Joshua Dale, executive director of the California DUI Lawyers Association, said the state would get better results by targeting young or repeat offenders rather than imposing a blanket burden on all DUI offenders. Many first-time offenders learn their lesson and never drive drunk again, he said.
Dale said many drivers will be unable to afford the devices, on top of the typical $2,500 they pay in fines and court fees.
Griffin, who works at MADD's office in Washington, D.C., said requiring the devices is less onerous than prohibiting offenders from driving.
"The interlock device lets them go to work, go to school, go anywhere they want to go. It just requires them to go sober," he said.
The interlock law is among several taking effect July 1, the first day of the state's new fiscal year. For further information, contact your Local Alameda County DUI Attorney.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15413272?nclick_check=1
DUI driver faces 28 years in Jail after guilty verdict
An Aurora woman has been found guilty of 21 counts of drunken driving and reckless homicide in connection with a 2007 crash that killed five teenagers.
Sandra Vazquez looked straightforward and sat erect as the verdict was read in the Kendall County Courthouse in Yorkville on Wednesday. When the guilty verdict came in the reckless homicide charge, she looked down and then regained her composure.
Her lawyer appealed for bond with GPS monitoring, which Judge Clint Hull immediately refused. "I'm sorry the presumption of innocence has been removed today," he said.
Vazquez then broke into tears and began convulsing and was immediately led out of the courtroom by sheriff's deputies. In the gallery, a man with Vazquez's sister yelled out, "Stay strong, Sandra." She was allowed to call her children, ages 4 and 8, to inform them of what happened. The verdict came on the second day of deliberations.
Members of the five woman, seven man jury declined to comment publicly on the case. Defense attorney Kathleen Colton said that indicates to her that the verdict was a difficult one for them to reach. "They did not want to have to justify it. They were emotional. Some appeared to be crying," she said.
Prosecutors alleged that Vazquez was intoxicated on Feb. 11, 2007 when she drove her sedan full of eight teens down Illinois Route 31 in Oswego, lost control and hit a utility pole. Killed were Jessica Nutoni, 15; Tiffany Urso, 16; Matthew Frank, 17; Katherine Merkel, 14; and James McGee.
Colton maintained the Vazquez wasn't intoxicated but instead was distracted by the number of people in her car and the commotion they were causing. Vazquez herself testified that she gave the drunken teens a ride because she felt badly that they were stuck at a party with no way home. Sentencing has been scheduled for Aug. 27. She faces 28 years in prison. For further information, contact yout Kendall County DUI Attorney.
Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/sandra-vazquez-verdict-97504194.html#ixzz0sQbscKKH
Sandra Vazquez looked straightforward and sat erect as the verdict was read in the Kendall County Courthouse in Yorkville on Wednesday. When the guilty verdict came in the reckless homicide charge, she looked down and then regained her composure.
Her lawyer appealed for bond with GPS monitoring, which Judge Clint Hull immediately refused. "I'm sorry the presumption of innocence has been removed today," he said.
Vazquez then broke into tears and began convulsing and was immediately led out of the courtroom by sheriff's deputies. In the gallery, a man with Vazquez's sister yelled out, "Stay strong, Sandra." She was allowed to call her children, ages 4 and 8, to inform them of what happened. The verdict came on the second day of deliberations.
Members of the five woman, seven man jury declined to comment publicly on the case. Defense attorney Kathleen Colton said that indicates to her that the verdict was a difficult one for them to reach. "They did not want to have to justify it. They were emotional. Some appeared to be crying," she said.
Prosecutors alleged that Vazquez was intoxicated on Feb. 11, 2007 when she drove her sedan full of eight teens down Illinois Route 31 in Oswego, lost control and hit a utility pole. Killed were Jessica Nutoni, 15; Tiffany Urso, 16; Matthew Frank, 17; Katherine Merkel, 14; and James McGee.
Colton maintained the Vazquez wasn't intoxicated but instead was distracted by the number of people in her car and the commotion they were causing. Vazquez herself testified that she gave the drunken teens a ride because she felt badly that they were stuck at a party with no way home. Sentencing has been scheduled for Aug. 27. She faces 28 years in prison. For further information, contact yout Kendall County DUI Attorney.
Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/sandra-vazquez-verdict-97504194.html#ixzz0sQbscKKH
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)