The Washington Post is reporting that more woman are being arrested for drunk driving.

Yet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported this fall that men were responsible for 81 percent of drinking and driving incidents in 2010.

Some of these statistics can be unreliable. For instance, law enforcement runs public relations and media campaigns trying to get people to think that OUI in Massachusetts and nationwide is on the rise.

But, studies have shown that the number of OUI incidents in Fall River, Framingham, Boston and elsewhere are actually on the decline. So, what do you believe?

Our Westborough OUI lawyers recognize that law enforcement will believe the statistics that justify their DUI road blocks and saturation patrols — DUI is a moneymaker and they are looking to make as many OUI arrests as possible. Whether numbers are up or not, police will be out in full force.

The CDC reports that adults drank and drove 112 million times in 2010 according to the agency’s survey. Men ages 21 to 34 made up 32 percent of all drunken driving episodes, but make up only 11 percent of the population. Eighty-five percent of drinking and driving involved binge drinking — 5 or more drinks for men or 4 or more drinks for women in a short period.

A study by The Century Council, as reported by The Washington Post, suggests that mothers have been drinking and driving with their children more often lately. A study found that the average female drunk driver is older and more educated than their male counterparts.

The profile of a typical female drunken driver didn’t surprise researchers, who put together the study after the 2009 accident of a mother in New York who was under the influence of drugs and alcohol and caused a wrong-way crash that killed her, her daughter, three nieces and three men in another vehicle.

The article suggests that some parents, especially mothers, may have a glass of wine or two with friends while caring for their children. This may be a more common situation than we might realize.

But like any OUI case, the charges must be proven. Even a person arrested can’t be considered guilty until it is proven in court, despite the court of public opinion. That’s what trials are for. And women may face additional charges, most commonly child endangerment, which can increase the potential penalties for a conviction.

The Commonwealth has a great burden in proving someone committed a crime and simply going on the word of the officer who pulled the vehicle over is not enough. More must be proven.

If field sobriety tests were conducted, they must have been conducted appropriately, with consideration taken for weather conditions and possibly the person’s physical ailments, could have affected the outcome. If there were witnesses and dash cam surveillance, that, too, should be a factor.

If a driver consents to a breath test machine sample, the reading should be challenged. These machines have been known to be faulty, as thousands of cases have been dismissed because the machines either weren’t properly calibrated or maintained or they weren’t manufactured correctly.

All of these are factors in a Massachusetts OUI case. Whether you’re a woman or a man, it’s no matter. An experienced Massachusetts OUI lawyer can help.
Continue Reading ›

A longtime top aide and adviser to Gov. Deval Patrick has been suspended by the Governor after being arrested recently for drunken driving in Brookline, the Enterprise News reports.

The report shows that even the most experienced and professional people can be labeled criminals with an OUI charge. While it’s not a charge that people plan to commit, it’s the most commonly charged crime in the United States.

Everyone from school teachers to firefighters to police officers have been charged. It’s not as if this is a planned, sophisticated crime. Other crimes, like thefts or even battery charges can be planned out and executed and those defendants face less serious penalties.

It is important when facing a charge of OUI in Massachusetts to plan out a strategic defense to the charges. As this case illustrates, the social consequences, including job loss, can be as serious as the criminal penalties. An experienced Massachusetts DUI defense lawyer will scrutinize every aspect of the case and help the client fend off the allegations they face.

In the case of the Governor’s aide, despite denying that he was driving while intoxicated, his boss decided to put him on unpaid leave after his arrest. While this may be more of a political move, it isn’t an uncommon reaction from employers.

Many employees face suspension or firing after being arrested, even though an arrest isn’t proof a crime was committed. While many employers may realize that, they tend to do what may be most acceptable in the public eye and get rid of the employee. More companies tend to operate in an “act first, ask questions later” mindset about their employees picking up OUI charges, which is unfortunate.

Ron Bell was pulled over one early Sunday in Brookline by police who say he was driving erratically. They charged him with OUI, speeding and marked lane violations. He denied the charges, but was still suspended until the investigation is completed.

The Boston Herald reported that Bell failed several field sobriety tests and was released on personal recognizance after his arraignment. His gout condition may have contributed to an alleged failed field sobriety test. He also is recovering from a March heart attack.

Medical issues are certainly a factor in OUI cases in Massachusetts. While police may not listen to someone who they have pulled over if they tell the officer about an existing medical condition, a judge or jury might.

Police officers are trained to be suspicious of what people say to them. Surely, they have heard every excuse in the book about why you are not really drunk. But existing medical conditions, such as imbalance issues, foot or leg issues or even weather conditions can make performing field sobriety tests difficult.

That’s why all of these issues must be brought up once the case gets into the criminal justice system. While people would rather avoid an arrest and not have to deal with that embarrassment, sometimes they must be patient and wait for the true facts to come out at trial.
Continue Reading ›

Were you charged with OUI in Massachusetts? It is possible that you are facing the reality of being charged with a criminal offense. People are quick to judge; court information is public access and family members and loved ones often find out as well. Companies are quick to fire someone when they are arrested, even before the person has made their way into a courthouse to face the charges.

A person can be arrested one night and be fired the next. And with jobs so scarce and the economy in a tough spot, losing a job can be very difficult for many people out there. But there are instances when aggressively defending against the charges with an experienced OUI Lawyer, and getting an acquittal or charges dropped, can lead to a job being restored.

The penalties for OUI in Massachusetts are more severe than other similarly unsophisticated, minor crimes. A person who steals something from a store or house can sometimes get less serious penalties than a person who is accused of driving over the legal limit.

The uncle of President Barack Obama was recently arrested and charged with DUI and is now being held without bail on an ICE detainer, Fox News reports

Being arrested and charged with OUI in Framingham can be frightening for anyone, especially an illegal immigrant.

One of the more important tasks facing any noncitizen is to understand the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction. Generally, a first offense Massachusetts OUI will not be a bar for citizenship for someone lawfully in the country. However, it is always important to individually assess any immigration consequences of a plea to a drunk driving charge and to understand those consequences if convicted after trial.

Onyango Obama, 67, was arrested in Framingham after police allege he nearly hit a police cruiser with his SUV after making a rolling stop through a stop sign.

Onyango Obama is originally from Kenya and is the half brother of the president’s late father. He has pleaded not guilty and yet is being held on a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer. Court documents cited by Fox News state that he previously had a removal order or a deportation order active.

Fox News could not determine his immigration status, but removal orders are typically for people living in the country illegally. Few government sources are commenting on the situation.

According to police, Obama was charged with operating under the influence of alcohol, failure to yield the right of way and negligent operation of a motor vehicle. According to police, the officer barely avoided the SUV and was forced to slam on his brakes to avoid a wreck. The 67-year-old allegedly told police at first that he hadn’t had anything to drink but later said he had two beers.

Police said he failed several field sobriety tests and blew a 0.14 on a breath test, nearly twice the state’s .08 legal limit.

In any case of OUI in Framingham, regardless of the status of the driver, there are many defenses. They start with the police officer or law enforcement officer who made the stop. First off, what an officer observes, if witnesses or dash camera footage can dispute it, can go a long way to showing the Commonwealth doesn’t have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime occurred.

Other factors, such as weather conditions or human error, can also affect an OUI case in Boston. Breathalyzers, devices that are designed to give a blood-alcohol level output of a driver, have been known to be faulty and can be affected by weather conditions. Condensation that builds up inside can alter a reading. Manufacturing defects or uncalibrated machines can also lead to arrest, but be exposed at trial for an acquittal.

There are many ways for a case to be fought in court. The public sometimes believes that an arrest is proof positive that a crime has been committed, but that’s only the beginning.
Continue Reading ›

As the Massachusetts DUI Attorney Blog recently reported, former NBA player and ESPN analyst Jalen Rose was sent to jail for 20 days in response to a March 11 DUI accident in Michigan.

His attorneys argued that the sentence was more excessive than sentences handed down in other DUI cases, both in Michigan and throughout the nation. A new report by USA Today shows that the attorneys are correct — where a person is arrested for DUI makes a huge difference about what type of sentence a person may receive.

But also, who the person hires is important. Hiring an experienced Attleboro OUI Attorney who knows the system and has been defending clients for years can be a critical factor in how a case is handled and the sentence a defendant receives. Obviously, the facts of the case vary, but the penalties for OUI in Quincy and throughout Massachusetts can be steep:

• Up to two and a half years of incarceration
• Up to one year driver’s license suspension
• Fines and fees
• Completion of a self-funded alcohol education course

But it’s different in Massachusetts than in other states, the USA Today article reveals that not only do judges use their discretion on a case-by-case and city-by-city basis, but that states vary in the penalties for even first-time DUI defendants.

Experts cited in the article believe that jail time is less of a deterrent for repeat offending than sanctions such as the ignition interlock device, which includes a tube that convicts must blow into in order to start the vehicle. If the device measures higher than the state’s .08 blood-alcohol level content, it won’t start.

Rose was arrested in March in the Detroit suburb of West Bloomfield. Research shows that had he been arrested in other area cities he likely wouldn’t have faced any jail time. Rose crashed his Cadillac Escalade on March 11 and was arrested that day.

The case shows how different sentences can be for DUI, a crime that was responsible for 12,744 traffic deaths in 2009, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. FBI statistics show that DUI is easily the most commonly filed charge, with 1.4 million people arrested each year for it.

Alaska, Tennessee and Georgia are among the states with mandatory jail time for first offenders, locking up defendants for three, two and one day, respectively. California, Connecticut and Indiana, however, don’t require jail time for first-time offenders.

In Wisconsin, a first-time offense for DUI isn’t even a crime. It’s a civil infraction that results in a ticket.

“There are no set guidelines on this. There’s no national standard on this,” said Alex R. Piquero, a criminology professor at the University of Texas-Dallas, who has studied drunken driving for more than 20 years. “There is a lot of discretion. It’s like a ref on the football field. Everyone holds on every play. Which one is the most egregious of the offense?”

Yet the trend is evident: Politicians continue to pass tougher DUI laws each year. We don’t know what the penalty for conviction will be next month or next year. But we can assume the sanctions will be more severe than they are today. Just one more reason it’s critical to fight DUI charges.
Continue Reading ›

A Massachusetts DUI stop must be based on the officer having reasonable suspicion that a motorist is committing a traffic violation or some violation of the criminal laws. In a DUI case, if there is not a lawful basis for the stop, a DUI lawyer may be able to have the entire case dismissed as a result of the unconstitutional stop.

Chief Justice Roberts of the United States Supreme Court in a dissenting opinion from the denial of certiorari in a case from Virginia, suggested that he would support a lowering of the standard of reasonable suspicion and allow motor vehicle stops based on anonymous tips even if the police do not witness any traffic violation. The Chief Justice stated that the impact of requiring a tipster to be known to the police or the officer to witness a traffic violation is that a drunk driver gets one free swerve before they can be legally pulled over.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against unreasonable searches and seizure and an anonymous tip has no indication of reliability, that the tip is accurate, that is not made to harass the motorist, for revenge, or that the tipster is being truthful with the police. A truly anonymous tip cannot be lawfully used to stop a motorist for an alleged drunk driving just as an anonymous tipster cannot tell the police that an individual has a weapon on them and justify the police to search the individual. The United States Supreme Court in Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000) made this holding clear. The Chief Justice is essential trying to create a DUI exception to the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizures and established case law.

If a caller does not wish to leave contact information or to identify themselves to a police dispatch, the reliability of the caller is clearly called into question. In fact, few tips are truly anonymous. Courts use the fact that cell phones can be traced to hold that the tip was not anonymous. Many courts will find that a tip is not anonymous if the police could have discovered the identity of the caller or if the caller put their anonymity at risk in any way. Accordingly, in Massachusetts the issue in a DUI tip case will be whether the tip is anonymous; if the tip is truly anonymous, a Massachusetts DUI lawyer should be successful in having the case dismissed based on a violation of the motorist’s Fourth Amendment and Article 14 rights under the Massachusetts Constitution.
Continue Reading ›