Lawmakers recently passed a law in North Carolina to protect teens from prosecution for underage drinking or drug offenses in a narrow set of circumstances. Last year, more than 1,100 people died from drug overdoses in North Carolina alone. Commentators say that many overdose deaths involve kids. Lawmakers say that the new 911 Good Samaritan law in North Carolina is aimed at trying to save lives related to drug overdoses. The law is aimed at protecting teens who call 911 to report a possible drug overdose situation from being prosecuted for specified offenses.

A spokesperson for the North Carolina Harm Reduction Coalition recently told WTVD-TV News that, “If someone is experiencing a drug overdose or is witnessing a drug overdose and they call 911 they can’t be prosecuted for misdemeanor possession of drugs or paraphernalia or underage drinking.”

The law is fairly limited in scope. It provides criminal immunity from prosecution for alleged misdemeanor drug possession or paraphernalia charges to people who call 911 related to alcohol poisoning or a drug overdose. The person may be the same person who is experiencing the issue, or a witness to the alcohol poisoning or overdose. In cases involving drug possession, the law only protects against prosecution for small amounts of drugs.

The idea has been making its way across the country. Eleven states that previously enacted such protections say that the law is already saving lives. College kids are often afraid to call 911 when an incident arises for fear of being personally prosecuted after the emergency response.

One family who lost a loved one eight years ago is hopeful that the law will save lives in North Carolina. Eight years ago, a 19-year-old college student died of a drug overdose in her dorm room. A friend reportedly waited to call 911 due to fear of prosecution, according to WTVD. Her older brother says that the friend panicked and fled from the dorm room. The older brother is left wondering if the new 911 Good Samaritan law could have saved his sister’s life, but he is encouraged that other lives may indeed be saved in the future.

Source: WTVD-TV News, “Good Samaritan law intended to save lives,” Caitlin Knute, May 21, 2013

Greenville DUI Attorney Blog | North Carolina Underage Drinking Lawyer | Pitt County First DUI Law Firm

In People v. Bransford, to cite one notable example, the California Supreme Court was confronted with a defendant who was challenging his conviction for driving with over .08% blood in his blood on the grounds that he was not permitted to offer scientific evidence to the jury. Specifically, he was not permitted to offer the testimony of recognized experts that the breath machine’s computer was programmed to assume that there were 2100 parts of alcohol in his blood for every 1 part it measured in his breath.

He was also prevented by the trial judge from offering further evidence from expert witnesses that this 2100:1 ratio was only an average – and that the actual ratio varied widely from person to person, and within one person from moment to moment. If, for example, a suspect’s ratio had been 1300:1 at the time he blew a .10% on the machine, his true blood-alcohol would have actually been .06% — that is, he would have been convicted…but innocent.

The Supreme Court of California affirmed the conviction, however, ruling that such scientific facts are irrelevant: the law was written in a way that concerned the amount of alcohol in the blood ”as measured on the breath”. In a display of either twisted logic or ignorance of the scientific facts involved, the Court simply said that the crime consisted of the amount of alcohol in the blood– but only as measured on the breath. In other words, although the crime is having .08% alcohol in the blood, you can’t offer evidence that this doesn’t accurately reflect the amount of alcohol actually in the blood!

An amazing decision.

More interesting, perhaps, is the language in the Court’s opinion — an opinion which gives us a window into the justices’ minds. In what must have been a complete failure to appreciate the significance of what they were writing, the Court justified its ruling in a rather frank — and incredible — admission of its hidden agenda:

"It will increase the likelihood of convicting such a driver, because the prosecution need not prove actual impairment…Adjudication of such criminal charges will also require fewer legal resources, because fewer legal issues will arise. And individuals prosecuted under such a statute will be less likely to contest the charges." People v. Bransford, 8 Cal.4th 894 (1994).

In other words, preventing an accused from defending himself with scientific truth serves justice by making it easier to get convictions!

Are all judges oblivious to the truth? Not entirely. One judge, Justice Joyce Kennard, dissented from the majority opinion. Recognizing the truth, she wrote in a separate opinion:  "The majority has on its own created the new crime of driving with alcohol in one’s breath."
 

DUI BLOG

A recent study from Erie Insurance confirms this. The insurance companies reviewed data from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and concluded that one in ten traffic collisions across the country are caused by distracted driving. According to the study, the most common causes of distraction were:

•Daydreaming or loss of focus (associated with 63% of fatal distraction-related car accidents between 2010 and 2011)
•Cell phone use (12%)
•Outside distraction (7%)
•Passengers (5%)
•Drinking or eating while driving (2%)
•Adjusting car controls or devices (2%)
•Moving items inside the car (1%)
•Smoking (1%)

The problem with these types of distractions is that it is impossible to pass legislation to target these types of behaviors. It is impossible to tell, for example, if a driver is daydreaming or simply not focused on the road – even though this appears to be the biggest danger behind the wheel. While a texting ban may help prevent some truck accidents in Fort Lauderdale and other cities, there is no legal way to address all the possible types of distractions that can lead to collisions.

Instead, it is up to motorists to take the steps necessary to prevent accidents caused by distraction. According to Erie Insurance and other experts, there are a number of things that drivers can do to avoid being in (or causing) a distracted-driving collision:

•Pull over to make phone calls or use mobile devices
•Keep your mobile devices turned off while you drive
•Do not drive when you are having trouble focusing or when you are fatigued
•Provide a good role model for your children by driving responsibly
•Never drink or eat while driving – pull over and eat in your car if you go through a drive-through
•Adjust your mirrors, radio, and other controls before you start to drive
•Secure pets in a cage or kennel while driving – this makes the drive safer for you and your pets
•Keep your windows rolled up on warm days to prevent debris and insects from flying in your car
•Wear sunglasses when driving on sunny days
•Keep the interior of your car tidy

Florida Car Accident Lawyer Blog

Feds Float Lower DWI Limit; Some Say It Will Reduce Fatalities; Others Say It's a Money-Grab

Newsday, New York.  May 14 — One drink for a 120 pound woman, two drinks for a 160 pound man.

That's all it would take to be considered legally drunk under a new federal recommendation to lower the driving while intoxicated blood-alcohol limit from .08 percent to .05 percent. It's another step in what the National Transportation Safety Board calls "Reaching Zero," a long-term effort to reduce the number of drunken driving-related fatalities.

"It is an aggressive approach," said Jared Altman, a Montrose-based defense attorney. "One would be surprised at how little you can drink and hit the .08 limit now."

Reaction to the NTSB's recommendation on Tuesday ranged from full support from road safety advocacy groups to a cautious wait-and-see approach from others.

White Plains-based attorney Richard Portale said changing the definition of "intoxicated" every few years is disingenuous. He said he'd be more willing to support the law if it merely set a limit for driving and did not try to redefine intoxication, but said he believes it's ultimately a "money-grab" by the government. Several studies have found that towns and cities enjoy a boom in court fees and related fines when blood-alcohol limits are lowered.

"They're dying for money. They don't get enough of our tax money, so now they want to change our DWI laws to generate more revenue," Portale said…

If lawmakers act on the NTSB's recommendation and lower the legal limit for drivers, it would mark the second time in a decade that the limit was lowered. New York lowered the legal limit from .10 to .08 in 2003, two years after president Bill Clinton signed a law that would withhold federal aid to states that did not lower limits to that number…

A 2000 study by Boston University's Social and Behavioral Sciences Department found that states that had dropped BAC limits to .08 percent saw a 6 percent decline in alcohol-related deaths. But a 2002 study by Connecticut's Office of Legislative Research found there was "no statistical difference" between the rate of fatalities between states with a .10 blood alcohol limit and states with a .08 limit.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving on Tuesday thanked the NTSB "for bring the American public's attention to the fact that drinking and driving continues to be a major problem on our highways … and that additional steps have to be taken to save the unnecessary loss of life and injuries that occur as a result of these crashes."…
 

DUI BLOG

According to meteorologists and other experts, there a number of things that drivers can do to help prevent weather-related car crashes in Miramar and other communities:

1) Understand what conditions to look for. Many people understand that snow, ice, and water can mean slippery conditions, but a range of weather conditions – including whiteouts, fog, sunny days, wildfire smoke – can create potentially dangerous conditions. Any situation that interferes with visibility or makes the roads slippery can cause dangerous road conditions.

2) Be prepared for different weather conditions. Even a very sunny day with glare can lead to a car or truck accident in Miramar if you aren’t prepared for it. In your car, keep the tools you need to stay safe. This may mean sunglasses and a hat for sunny weather and extra windshield wiper fluid for days where visibility is a problem and you need your windshield to be as clean as possible for the best visibility.

3) Keep your car in good condition. Good brake systems, tires, and windshields ensure that your car is prepared for various weather. Take your car in for regular tune-ups to ensure that it drives safely. Consider getting all-season tires, even if you never plan on driving outside of Florida and don’t need to worry about ice and snow. Tires with good treads can really help in any wet or slipper road conditions and could potentially help you prevent a pedestrian accident in Miramar or your community.

4) Stay alert about weather conditions. Get into the habit of checking weather conditions before hopping in your car. Don’t head out when the weather is very bad and if you do need to drive in inclement weather, be prepared to give yourself extra time to get to your destination.

In the future, there may be new ways to help prevent weather-related car and truck accidents in Miramar and across the country. The U.S. Department of Transportation is funding new technology, the “Vehicle Data Translator,” which would gather and share up-to-date atmosphere and road conditions with drivers in real time, giving motorists the information they need to stay safer on the roads. The system would collect data from cars and from local weather stations as well as other sources in order to give drivers more information to prevent collisions.

Florida Car Accident Lawyer Blog

North Carolina officials say that the Highway Patrol and other agencies, including the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Division of Alcohol Law Enforcement, will be setting up DWI checkpoints near parks and water recreation areas across the state during the summer months.

Enforcement efforts will be especially focused on the three big summer holidays, Memorial Day, the Fourth of July and Labor Day. Each year, the state runs DWI enforcement campaigns during the holidays, as well as at random times throughout the year.

Later this month, state officials plan to kick-off the summer DWI enforcement season surrounding the Memorial Day weekend. The campaign, dubbed “On the Road, On the Water, Don’t Drink and Drive,” is slated for kick-off May 24. Needless to say, DWI checkpoints and saturation patrols may arise in other areas not associated with parks and recreational areas.

Troopers and other law enforcement agents plan to set up sobriety checkpoints to enforce DWI laws. However, followers of this blog may recognize that a wide variety of allegations can arise during a DWI checkpoint, ranging from a variety of alleged traffic offenses, to allegations of felony-level offenses as cars pass through a checkpoint.

Years ago, the United States Supreme Court ruled that sobriety checkpoints do not necessarily violate the constitutional guarantees prohibiting unreasonable government intrusion. However, the high court did not suggest that DWI checkpoints can never be individually found to be unconstitutional.

The justices say that a checkpoint can become overly intrusive to the level of a constitutional violation if conducted without proper safeguards to protect individual rights. Any constitutional level issue may involve complex legal principles. A person accused of a crime may speak with a criminal defense lawyer for assistance in defending against the charge.

Source: The Herald-Sun, “Highway Patrol plans DWI checkpoints near boating areas,” Keith Upchurch, May 13, 2013

Greenville DUI Attorney Blog | North Carolina Underage Drinking Lawyer | Pitt County First DUI Law Firm

About 30 years ago, federal highway officials began urging states to reduce the per se legal limit to drive under state DWI laws from 0.10 percent to 0.08 percent blood alcohol level. States began to follow that recommendation, and by 2004, all 50 states had lowered the legal limit.

Congress does not control state DWI laws, but the federal lawmakers do have authority over federal spending and can use that authority in funding issues to help coerce states to change their laws.

Now, the National Transportation Safety Board is starting a new surge to lower the legal limit to drive. The board made a recommendation Tuesday, urging states to lower the legal limit to 0.05 percent BAC.

The recommendation has brought opposition from a number of groups who say that the recommendation is just too low. The idea would potentially make it a crime to have even one drink before driving for some people. Alcohol behaves differently in different people.

Blood alcohol concentration levels can vary widely between people of different genders and different sizes. For instance, a 130 pound woman may be able to have three drinks over a 90-minute period and still be legal to drive under the current level. Dropping the level ton 0.05 would generally drop that to two drinks.

However, a “drink” itself can vary between the type of product, the pour of the bartender and other factors. A petite woman may not be able to legally drive home after one drink with friends after work if the level were dropped to 0.05.

The recommendation is coming from the NTSB, and has no force of law in any state. Lower legal limits already exist for some drivers, such as drivers under the age of 21, and others whose driver’s license sets a different level.

Source: New York Times, “States Urged to Cut Limit on Alcohol for Drivers,” Matthew Wald, May 14, 2013

Greenville DUI Attorney Blog | North Carolina Underage Drinking Lawyer | Pitt County First DUI Law Firm