Published on:

How to get arrested for DUI in Maryland when not driving a car:

After an accident the police show up to sort out the details; but what if the cops smell alcohol on somebody’s breath and charge them with DUI without carefully determining who was actually driving the car? That is what happened on our case this week. Our client was involved in an auto accident and the police somehow surmised that our client was driving when in reality he was not the driver. Then the case becomes a matter of the State trying to prove the Defendant was the driver and the defense proving it was somebody else.

Sometimes the actual driver of the vehicle blames the other person for driving and the officer then makes a judgment call as to who was driving. Generally when a client tells me that they weren’t driving they continue with a “friend” was driving. I proceed to tell them that I need to speak with the friend. It is at this point that the client decides his friend is unavailable or the friend simply never shows at the DUI trial. I set up a case review with this client a month before trial and strangely the “friend” actually showed up.

Published on:

No DUI or criminal case is a slam dunk for the prosecution. Trial work is always fluid and anything can happen when you tell the Judge “Ready for trial.”  Have you ever noticed how many people never say that and just plead cases away? At Bruce Robinson & Associates we are a trial firm, we try DUI cases and we don’t hesitate to say “Ready for Trial.”

A recent example of this happened today in a DUI case in Cecil County, Maryland.  This Defendant was a multiple DUI offender with 2 DUIs within the past 5 years.  Two DUIs inside of a ten year period of time is a bad thing because the defendant is unable to get a probation before judgment and therefore must flat out win his case or he will suffer the consequences of a DUI conviction. In addition to being a multiple offender, this client also had a very high breath result. The State’s Attorney was demanding jail in front of a tough District Court Judge who would have loved nothing more than to oblige the State in it’s demand.

The Prosecutor asked me if  she needed all of her officers for this case. I was thinking, what a strange request, of course you do; evidently sh was used to too many lawyers who just roll plead their clients out. I told the prosecutor that not only did she need all her officers,  but they needed to be in the court room (not just generally available).  After half of the docket went by I began to see a glimmer of hope in the case that the State may not be able to prove its case because the arresting officers may not be available for trial. Ironically, the prosecutor never even checked in with her officers the day before as she is supposed to in order to obtain their presence in court.

Published on:

More states are legalizing marijuana, either for medical use or recreational use. As of 2014, only two states fully legalized it for all users – Colorado and Washington – but 18 states allow it for medical reasons. Even if you don’t partake of it, it can still affect you.

It’s important to understand its effects on the insurance and banking industries, since more states are likely to begin the legalization process in the coming years.

Auto Insurance

Published on:

This week Marijuana becomes legal in the nation’s capital, Washington D.C., kinda.

A person is allowed to grow up to three plants in their house and they are allowed to smoke Marijuana in their house- not on the street. Unlike liberal and intelligent Colorado, D.C. residents will not be able to go on the street and legally purchase grass fro licensed stores; rather they are allowed to have a small amount for personal use which can be imbibed in the privacy and comfort of their own home. This is why folks are allowed to have up to three mature plants in the home- since they cannot legally buy it.

No everybody is a fan of the new law. Congress is not happy with the new law that is now effective as a public referendum. Evidently Congress is threatening to take whatever measures they can to eliminate the nefarious evils promulgated by the wacky green weed, but since Congress is completely unable to pass any meaningful and useful legislation it would be a stretch to think they could 1) find the time to put their mind to such meaningless legislation and 2) be able to find a consensus between the parties since they cannot remotely agree on anything else, such as say, funding for Homeland Security and other meaningful and necessary government programs. They are more or less useless in every dimension and will remain such until the next election.
Continue reading →

Published on:

The issue of DUI by Marijuana (driving under the influence) has never been more relevant than now when states are beginning to jump onto the pot bandwagon, legalizing Marijuana for recreational and or medical use while many more states have put the issue on their 2016 ballot.
The number of drivers charged with operating under the influence of Marijuana is likely to grow dramatically and it behooves us to study the laws we currently have in place and see whether they are adequate to protect the community and the driver. We will also look at the financial gain v. loss to the state from the legalization of Marijuana.
Is driving legal after ingesting Marijuana?
Generally there are three approaches taken by states regarding driving after ingesting weed; the majority of states will charge a driver after obtaining sufficient evidence to prove his or her impairment based on erratic driving factors, a failed field sobriety test and blood work.
A minority of states, including NY, has zero tolerance laws with regard to Marijuana use and will arrest for DUI for any amount of THC or metabolites found in the driver’s system. THC, the psychoactive component of Marijuana can remain in the urine for many days, while metabolites can be detected for several weeks or more for regular users; long after the driving impairment has worn off.
The remainder of the states institute thresholds similar to BAC levels used for DUI alcohol. 5 nano-grams of THC metabolite per milliliter of blood is the legal limit used by many of these states. Colorado is one of the states that have instituted this limit after legalizing Marijuana for recreational use.
Whatever the individual state guidelines are, make sure you understand and adhere to them. In the words of Attorney Zev Goldstein, “Your good record is arguably the most valuable thing you own, protect it from criminal drug/ or operating under the influence of drugs convictions”.
Continue reading →

Published on:

Will I lose my job if I get arrested for DUI? Always a question on the lips of those arrested for an alcohol violation in Maryland. The short answer is probably not! In our over 20 years experience I can count (probably on less than one hand) the number of times a person has lost their job for a first or second time DUI arrest. Obviously there are many factors that play into how one’s employer may feel about such and arrest and therefore, one of the threshold questions may be ‘will the employer find out about the arrest?’

The regular employer who is not a government entity does not typically sit around checking Maryland’s government websites to determine if one of their people has been arrested and therefore the decision is left to the employee to determine if and when this private situation should be made public.

At a minimum, unless you are under some form of legal obligation to disclose a DUI arrest, it seems best to disclose this information (if at all) after you have been to court. The reason for this is that there are many possible outcomes from the arrest, including a NOT guilty. Therefore, putting yourself in a negative light before going to court may not be the best idea. For example, telling your boss what happened two days later, you retain Bruce Robinson & Associates to defend you and you win your case in court. Now what? The employer has been stewing over the situation for months and now the arrest has gone away. You still look bad in the employers eyes, you could be passed over for promotions or any number of things.

Another possible outcome is going to court and receiving a probation before judgment (PBJ); this is not a conviction on your record and you do not receive the 12 points you would otherwise receive for a DUI conviction in Maryland. So now what do you tell your employer? You were arrested? You were not convicted? They are already pissed to hear you got a DUI and if you drive their cars during work, there could be an issue. https://www.mddwi.com
Continue reading →

Published on:

Often times people will come into the office charged with DUI after providing a breath sample of less than .07 or .08. They wonder how it is they were charged in Maryland for DUI/DWI when they blew a legal BAC number between .01 and .06. This is an important question and a misnomer in the legal system. The TV commercials, billboards, and public announcements all indicate that a .08 BAC is the legal limit for alcohol in Maryland. Unfortunately, the little-known truth is that this is simply not correct.

You see, police officers in their zeal to make an alcohol related arrest and show the brass that they are making Maryland’s streets safer, while meeting their quotas, will happily arrest a driver with any BAC content as long as the driver is demonstrating some form of impairment. What is some form of impairment?

Well that’s really the easy part, some form of impairment means failure to stay within your lane of travel, such as crossing over the white dotted lines, it could mean speeding, and it certainly means a failure to perform the field sobriety test adequately when stopped by a police officer for any reason such as not wearing your seatbelt. In other words, failure to wear your seatbelt is now a first-tier offense meaning that you can be stopped and ticketed for this offense (in the past you could not be stopped for this violation alone). Once the police officer senses the odor of alcohol on your breath for something as minimal as one beer she will automatically get you out of your car for field sobriety tests. If you are like every other normal citizen you will not perform the field sobriety tests with 100% acuity and therefore the officer will arrest you for failing to perform the roadside gymnastic test adequately.

Once at the police station you will be asked to provide a breath sample which may come back low in the .02-.05 area and this is where you get charged in many cases despite the low and legal BAC number. It places the police officer in an awkward situation because she has wasted her time with a stop and dragging you to the station and wasted the time of the breath technician only to come back with a low and legal BAC. Nobody likes to have egg on their face so to avoid that you will be charged with DWI or driving while impaired despite having what you were told was a lawful BAC.
Continue reading →

Published on:

Can you be arrested for DUI in Maryland if the police did not see you driving your car? To evaluate that question, it must be further broken down to were you sitting in the car or were you outside the car when the police arrived?

The easier question concerns if you are outside your car when the police officer arrived. If you are simply outside of your car when the police officer arrived and you are inebriated without more, such as an eyewitness or more commonly, ratting yourself out to the police, the answer would generally be no. The proof required by the state to prove the elements of a DUI charge would generally be inadequate under these circumstances.

The police are quite efficient at applying pressure and asking questions of a suspect in order to get them to hang themselves. The first question from the police officer will be, were you driving this car or “what happened when you were driving this car?” And then typically the defendant engages in a conversation thereby indicating that he was the driver and providing evidence that the state can now use against the driver in court. This is why the Miranda warnings indicate that you are not compelled to give evidence against yourself and that anything you say can and will be used against you in court. Make no mistake, they will use this type of evidence against you and it could be the only evidence the government has to convict you of the charge.
Continue reading →

Published on:

One issue that seems to come up with regularity is whether to tell one’s employer or boss that they were arrested and charged with a DUI or other criminal event. Certain people with high levels of clearance or security may be required to inform their employer upon any infraction of the law. However, the majority of people do not have such strict limitations placed upon them. Some people may be concerned because their employee manual may speak to ramifications of a DUI arrest or they may have heard stories about other folks similarly charged.

For the normal person who does not have a clear and absolute obligation to tell their employer, we would generally suggest waiting until the matter is resolved in court, and even then we might consider the necessity of sharing such personal information. The initial problem that comes to mind with being charged is that a charge is not a conviction and therefore going to one’s boss and indicating they were charged with a criminal offense could place that employee in a less than favorable light. Then, when one actually goes to court and if they avoid a conviction or better yet beat the charge completely, that person will have unnecessarily put a stain on their employee record, as far as the boss is concerned, even if their case is won. It is for that reason that we would typically say wait and see what the outcome of the event is before telling anybody about the event. Additionally, some employers may take a fairly strict stance on this type of matter which may be completely unwarranted if the matter is won in court.
Continue reading →

Published on:

Justice John Roberts and the conservative Supreme Court of the United States of America strikes again. In an 8 to 1 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts the court held that evidence gleaned from an otherwise illegal search and seizure can be used against the defendant if the stop was based on good faith. This is a horrible precedent to set for an already strained American people who are sick and tired of law enforcement overstepping their boundaries and in some cases making fatal decisions which go unanswered the courts.

While this decision does not rise to the level of law enforcement killing suspects and police not being indicted, it does further offer the police a wide net to work with because evidence that was formerly obtained as the result of an illegal search and seizure was considered tainted and not usable in court; but as a result of this decision it appears that such evidence, if obtained under the color of law, even though mistaken will be permitted to be used against the defendant.

The decision in Heien v. North Carolina involves a case out of North Carolina in which a police officer pulled the defendant over because his right brake light was out and the officer mistakenly believed that give a basis for a lawful stop. In North Carolina only one brake light is required to operate the vehicle and the officer was mistaken on the basis for the stop. As a result of the illegal stop, the defendant consented to a search of his vehicle which resulted in the location of CDS in the trunk. Counsel for the defendant subsequently attempted to suppress the illegal drugs as a result of an illegal stop. The trial court denied the argument, the North Carolina Appellate Court suppressed the evidnce and the Supreme Court of the United States has now held that despite the stop being illegal, if the stop is done in good faith, subsequently obtained evidence can still be utilized against the defendant.
Continue reading →