First Offense:
You are caught driving while intoxicated. If you refuse to submit to a field sobriety test, you will automatically lose your license for 90 days. Many Birmingham DUI attorneys will advise you to submit to the test simply because of this law. You also may be required to spend a maximum of one (1) year in jail, pay hefty fines (ranging from $600-$2,100), and have your driver’s license suspended or revoked for up to one year. According to Alabama law, everyone arrested for a DUI are required to attend DUI School as well.

Second Offense:
If you receive another DUI within a five-year period, it is mandatory that you spend at least five (5) days in jail, but this sentence can also be increased to one (1) year. The fines are vast and range from $1,100 to $5,100 and a second DUI conviction can mean you will lose your license for up to one year. Second offenders are also required to attend DUI School. Do not attempt to go through the process alone. A Birmingham DUI attorney can help you through this course of action against you, fighting for your rights under the law.

Third Offense:
Upon a third DUI arrest, it is mandatory that you serve 60 days in jail, with a maximum time of one (1) year. Your driver’s license can be suspended for three (3) years and your fines will range from $2,100 – $10,100. As with other DUI offenses, you are also required to attend DUI School. It is difficult to wade through this legal process alone, and hiring an attorney is essential for your future well-being.

Call Lakeman Peagler Now if This is Your First, Second or Third Offense!
Regardless if it is your first offense or your third, a Birmingham DUI attorney from Lakeman, Peagler, Hollett and Alsobrook, LLC can help you through the daunting DUI legal process, keeping in mind your best way to get the minimum amount of license lose, fines and possible jail time. Do not go through this process alone. We are here to help you to help yourself. Give us a call at (205) 601-4DUI now!

Prior to the passage of this bill, Birmingham DUI lawyers and their clients had to be familiar with the Frye test as the standard used by Alabama State Courts to determine the admissibility of scientific testimony from expert witnesses. Originated in 1923 in an eponymously titled case, the Frye test provides that expert witnesses are prohibited from submitting testimony unless that testimony is based on a scientific technique which is generally regarded as reliable by other professionals in the relevant scientific community. Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).

Birmingham DUI Lawyers Must Be Aware of the Adoption of The Daubert Test

Birmingham DUI lawyers must familiarize themselves with the legal consequences of the passage of the legislation. This legislation functions to adopt the Daubert test as a partial replacement for the Frye test for determining the admissibility of expert testimony. The Daubert test comes from a 1931 Supreme Court case called Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and applies to some, but not all cases in Alabama. After the bill memorialized the incorporation of the Daubert test into Alabama law, the Alabama Supreme Court responded to amending Alabama Rules of Evidence to make them consistent with the new bill. The specific rule affected, Alabama Rule of Evidence 702, has been amended to substantially mirror the language of the new bill.  The new text of the Rule 702, section B now reads as follows: “Expert testimony based on a scientific theory, principle, methodology, or procedure is only admissible if:  (1) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.”

Consult with a Birmingham DUI Lawyer to Learn How These Developments Could Affect You

This new rule has a limited scope of application, so non-attorneys should consult with a qualified Birmingham DUI lawyer to determine if and how it might affect their personal situation. For example, the rule applies only to cases in criminal courts where adults (not juveniles) are charged with felonies. Therefore, these new developments would not affect misdemeanor-level DUI cases or juvenile DUI cases. As a further limitation, the new laws only affect scientific expert testimony, to the exclusion of non-scientific expert testimony. The rule took effect in 2012, and now applies to cases in which the date of arrest was on or after January 1, 2012. Call Lakeman, Peagler, Hollett & Alsobrook, LLC today to learn how this change could apply to your case, or to learn more: 205-601-4DUI.

ILLEGAL STOP OF PERSON OR VEHICLE - a driver cannot be stopped unless the officer has a reasonable and articulate basis to believe that a traffic law or other law has been violated. Similarly, a person cannot be seized unless a violation has occurred.

If your officer stopped you for no good reason, you are not guilty!

According to a recent, tongue-in-cheek, report from the Chicago Tribune, an Illinois man wearing very little clothing (on a cold winter day, no less) was recently arrested under the suspicion of driving under the influence.

The man, whose actions certainly qualify him for consideration as the year’s silliest DUI offender, was charged with a misdemeanor DUI after he rammed his black 2009 Honda into the side of a police squad car on Chicago’s Northwest Side.

Around 11:00 a.m. last Saturday morning, a concerned citizen called police to notify them that a man was driving down a back alley in the wrong direction. The caller suggested that the driver appeared to be swerving, as well.

Police quickly responded to the call, and blocked one of the alley exits. In an effort to escape the situation, the driver casually drifted into a police car.

The occupants of the police car were further surprised when the man with the poor driving skills tumbled out of his Honda wearing only underwear and some socks. Sources do not indicate the type or color of either item of clothing.

The driver, who was identified as 24-year-old Arsenio Garcia, was charged with a misdemeanor DUI, driving the wrong way down a one-way street, illegally using an alley as a through-street, failing to reduce speed, damaging public property, and driving without a license or insurance.

Garcia will also be tried in the court of public opinion on charges of bad taste. The very bad day for Garcia ended at a hospital, where he was treated for minor scrapes to his face.

The officer who was in the squad car at the time of the collision was also sent to a hospital, where he was treated and released for minor injuries.

This incident offers a few good lessons for future drivers. First, and most importantly, if you have a few drinks in your system and feel a bit wobbly, chances are that you are not in the best condition to drive.

Taking a taxi, calling a friend, or using public transportation are all much better alternatives to spending the night in jail and facing potentially thousands of dollars in fines and a loss of a driver’s license.

In addition, regardless of whether one is driving drunk or driving sober, the use of proper attire tends to make police officers somewhat more compassionate in their subsequent treatment after a traffic-related arrest.

Fully clothed drivers, to say the least, have a better chance of convincing officers of their sobriety than men clad in only their skivvies and footwear. So, noble drivers—buckled up, sober up, and, for the love of civilization, put on some pants.

January 31st, 2012 | Posted in DUI News

Tony Logan is the chief of police of Tuscumbia, Alabama. According to reports, Logan was attempting to turn into his driveway from the main road a little over two years ago when he struck his mailbox and then his police-issued vehicle that was parked in front of his house. The car he was driving then rolled onto a neighbor’s lawn; the neighbor then called police.

The patrolman who responded to the call noticed that Logan’s speech was slurred, he had bloodshot eyes, and he smelled of alcohol – all fairly obvious indications of alcohol-impairment. Logan refused field sobriety tests and was taken to the police station. There, he refused to submit to a breathalyzer test, so police obtained a search warrant from the court that would enable them to test Logan’s blood and urine for alcohol. The tests showed that Logan’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was .27 percent – over three times the legal limit in Alabama of .08.

That adds up to an easy DUI conviction for the state, right? Wrong! (Well, sort of…)

Logan was indeed convicted of DUI in court a few months later. He appealed and argued that because of all the publicity that had been generated over his arrest, he did not get a fair trial and that his appeal should be heard somewhere else. His request for a trial at another location was granted.

Next, he attacked the means by which police were able to measure his BAC. In Alabama, although the implied consent law effectively requires a driver who is pulled over and/or arrested on suspicion of DUI to submit to either a field sobriety test, a breath test, or blood or urine tests, an individual may refuse to do so at his or her own risk. That is, a driver who refuses to be tested will have his or her driver’s license suspended immediately for 90 days, and the refusal could be used against the driver later at trial as evidence of knowledge of intoxication. Logan exercised his right to refuse, and that should have led to suspension of his license, a trial, and potential conviction for DUI. However, the police took the unusual step of obtaining an order from the court to obtain blood and urine samples from Logan to be tested for alcohol. Although that is not against the law, it may hurt the prosecution’s case against Logan.

Although Logan was suspended by the police department, he has since been reinstated. Interestingly, his driver’s license has not been suspended.

This case highlights several important facts. First, the police can be just as guilty of exercising poor judgment as the rest of the public when it comes to drinking and driving. When law enforcement is accused of committing crimes, it undermines the public’s confidence in their ability to effectively carry out their duties. It also suggests police may pursue a case more aggressively depending on the individual who has been arrested, which suggests a policy of selective enforcement, which again undermines their credibility. And finally, when law enforcement deviates from normal procedures when conducting an investigation, it calls into question their integrity and dedication to the principles of criminal justice.

If you have been pulled over and arrested for DUI, it is not the end of the world. Experienced, knowledgeable and dedicated DUI lawyers can help fight the charges against you and obtain a favorable outcome. Having a Birmingham DUI lawyer who has tried these types of cases in the past on your side can be a valuable asset. Your Birmingham DUI lawyer can make sure you never see the inside of a courtroom or jail by having the charges against you reduced or dismissed. If you are ever arrested or charged with DUI, contacting a Birmingham DUI lawyer should be the first step towards putting your DUI behind you.

This blog was written by guest blogger Christopher McCann. Christopher McCann is a Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer. McCann is a practicing lawyer at the Law Offices of Christopher J. McCann and generally writes on topics related to criminal defense and DUIs. McCann was voted as a “Rising Star Attorney” in 2010 by Southern California SuperLawyers Magazine.

A study conducted by the University of Minnesota determined that one in every 12 fans leaves a major sporting event while intoxicated. Researchers measuring the blood alcohol content of 382 adults who had attended baseball and football games found that 8 percent of the fans registered a blood alcohol content in excess of the legal threshold for intoxication, 0.08%. Those participating in tailgating activities before a game were 14 times more likely to be drunk when leaving the sports venue.

In 2006, the team of researchers would approach fans at professional sporting events and ask them to submit to an anonymous breath test and answer a five minute survey. Many resisted, perhaps not wanting to know the result or an interest in leaving the stadium and getting home. An average of 20 fans per event did participate in the study. 58% of them were male, and 55% were between the ages of 21 and 35.

The significant concern is that the intoxicated fans likely would be driving home, leading to drunk driving accidents and injuries. Some have used the study to ask stadiums, universities and other sporting venues to conduct better sobriety checks, discourage tailgating and limit drinks served to fans during events.

Have you been arrested for an AL DUI and are needing help with your case from a Alabama DUI Attorney?

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Announces ‘Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over’ Crackdown on Drunk Driving
Share and Bookmark Google Favorites
RSS this page · ·
Complete list of NHTSA’s RSS Feeds.
NHTSA 22-11
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Contact: Karen Aldana
Tel: 202-366-9550

New Research Shows Major Drop in Drunk-Driving Fatalities in Many States

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today kicked off a nationwide crackdown on drunk driving coinciding with the 2011 winter holiday season. New data show drunk-driving deaths declined in 2010 in many parts of the country. However, the data also show that fatalities from alcohol-impaired driving crashes continue to account for one in three deaths on American roadways each year.

“Safety is our focus year round at DOT. But this holiday season, we’re stepping up our efforts to get drunk drivers off our roads and reminding Americans ‘drive sober, or get pulled over,’ ” said Secretary LaHood. “We’re making gains in our fight against drunk driving, but we cannot and will not let up.”

New state-by-state data for 2010 released by the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) show a decline in drunk driving fatalities in 32 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Compared with 2009, California and Florida saw the largest reductions — with each declining by more than 100 fatalities last year.

All 50 states and the District of Columbia have outlawed driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or higher. Yet NHTSA data show that last year, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, including 415 during the second half of December alone.

The education and enforcement effort is the latest push in the Department’s “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over” campaign involving thousands of law enforcement agencies across the country. The winter holiday enforcement crackdown is supported by a $7 million national Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over advertisement campaign that runs from December 16 through January 2. The ads, which first premiered this past summer, feature “invisible” law enforcement officers observing alcohol-impaired individuals and then apprehending them when they attempt to drive their vehicles. The ads are designed to raise awareness and support law enforcement activities in every state. They convey the message that law enforcement officers are vigilant in deterring drunk drivers.

“Thanks to the hard work of law enforcement and safety advocates and the incredible commitment of organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, we are making real progress in reducing drunk driving deaths,” said NHTSA Administrator David Strickland. “Our message to drivers is clear: if you decide to drink, find a safe and sober ride home or you will be pulled over.”

Secretary LaHood and NHTSA Administrator Strickland were joined for today’s announcement by Virginia law enforcement officials and Jan Withers, National President of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD).

“The data clearly show that while drunk driving remains the primary threat to American families on our roadways, we have a path to progress,” said Withers. “Increased enforcement efforts around the holidays are a vital part of MADD’s Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving®, which relies on proven drunk driving countermeasures to eliminate the leading cause of highway fatalities.”

USA Today Article:

Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Randy Babbitt officially tendered his resignation Tuesday, a move many had already assumed to be a foregone conclusion.

Babbitt’s resignation comes after it was reported he was arrested in Washington’s northern Virginia suburbs on charges of driving while intoxicated.

“I am unwilling to let anything cast a shadow on the outstanding work done 24 hours a day, seven days a week by my colleagues at the FAA,” Babbitt is quoted as saying by The Associated Press. “They run the finest and safest aviation system in the world and I am grateful that I had the opportunity to work alongside them.”

The loss of Babbitt was lamented by many in the industry, where the former Eastern pilot had earned much respect in his role as FAA chief.

Despite that, few saw any openings for Babbitt to remain in his post after his DWI arrest became public.

As The Washington Post puts it:

Babbitt’s ouster seemed inevitable after (Ray) LaHood, the transportation secretary, first learned of the arrest from a police news release more than 36 hours after the incident.

“What I told Randy is that I was very disappointed with the way that I learned about this,” LaHood said Tuesday afternoon, hours before Babbitt’s resignation.

Babbitt’s departure, less than halfway through his five-year term, leaves the FAA in turmoil, beset by a series of recent stumbles, facing funding uncertainty and tasked with developing a $40 billion guidance system based on the Global Positioning System that is expected to revolutionize air travel.

Given LaHood’s mantra of “safety” above all else and his commitment to combating drunken driving, he was thrust into an untenable position.

Reuters adds:

While the incident and resignation are not expected to give the White House political headaches, his departure leaves a sizable hole in an FAA that was in turmoil when he arrived.

Babbitt inherited an agency that had been without a permanent leader for nearly two years and was wracked by a contract dispute between the Bush administration and 15,000 air traffic controllers.

He was respected by Republicans and Democrats for his ability to resolve labor tensions with a new contract and push through a series of safety measures, including the pilot training rules.

Looking ahead, Babbitt’s departure will elevate Michael Huerta – currently the agency’s No. 2 official – to acting Administrator, a position he’s likely to hold for at least the next year.

The Associated Press expands on that, saying Babbitt’s sudden resignation … leaves the Federal Aviation Administration in the hands of Deputy Administrator Michael Huerta, who’s a well-regarded manager but lacks his predecessor’s insider knowledge of the nation’s airlines. … Industry officials and lawmakers said they expect him to continue in the post through next year since the White House probably will want to avoid a possible nomination fight before the Nov. 6 presidential election.”

Richmond County, GA. Nov. 19 – The forced resignation of a deputy assigned to the DUI task force could affect the prosecution of hundreds of cases, according to those in the legal community.
Erik Norman faced mandatory resignation from the Richmond County Sheriff’s Office on Oct. 19 after a prosecutor reported that Norman told her he had falsified readings from a hand-held alcohol-testing device.

Norman told the department’s internal affairs division that he had done it only “once or twice” but couldn’t recall exactly which cases were involved.

Norman’s credibility is gone now, no matter how many times he falsified readings, said Augusta attorney Robert “Bo” Hunter, who prosecuted drunken driving cases as the Richmond County State Court solicitor from 1988 to 1996…

Even worse, Hunter said, is that there probably were people charged with driving under the influence who shouldn’t have been.
Norman, hired as a jailer in July 2002, was transferred to the DUI task force in March 2009. An accurate count of his DUI convictions cannot be made through court records, but during his time on the task force, he arrested an estimated 250 to 400 people.
State Court Solicitor Charles Evans said his office has 62 pending DUI cases in which Norman was the arresting officer. Each will have to be judged on its merits to determine whether to continue prosecuting them as DUIs. If necessary, the office will bring in Norman as a trial witness, Evans said.
The Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training Coun¬cil is investigating to determine whether Norman can keep his certification, said Ryan Powell, its director of operations. Unless he is arrested on felony charges or his certification is suspended, Norman is free to work as an officer, Powell said.
Falsifying evidence is a felony – making false statements – but prosecuting Norman for it would be difficult, District Attorney Ashley Wright said. A prosecutor would have to prove in which case Norman falsified the results, and there is no way to uncover those cases without Norman’s admission. He claimed he didn’t know which cases were falsified…

Do you really think this Georgia deputy is the only cop out there falsifying breathalyzer readings to justify his DUI arrest?