millerboycott.com

A woman in New Hanover County, North Carolina says that she is facing charges for allegedly driving while impaired based solely upon an agility test that she was subjected to at the hospital after she was involved in a car accident. The woman does not remember what occurred in the wreck. The air bag on her car deployed and the woman suffered a concussion in the wreck.

The woman says that a North Carolina trooper gave her a breath test at the hospital, which she passed. But she says that the trooper did not like how she performed on a field sobriety test after she sustained the concussion. Apparently, the trooper claims that the woman did poorly in tracking his finger while she lay in a hospital bed. What is more, she says that her hospital records show that she did not have any alcohol or drugs in her system.

Law enforcement took a blood sample for purposes of a drunk driving investigation. Test results may not come back from that test for up to a year. Meanwhile, the woman is charged with DWI and she is scheduled to appear in court later this month.

Followers of this blog may recognize that car accident investigations lead from time to time to drunk driving charges. Law enforcement may subject an accident victim to field sobriety tests after a wreck a jump to the conclusion that a victim’s performance on one or more tests may not be up to the satisfaction of the officer. In the recent New Hanover County case, the woman reportedly says that she has tests to show that she was not under the influence when she was in a wreck.

Typically, news reports on an alleged drunk driving car accident are generated by government actors and carried in the press. Although there may be two sides to a story, a person suspected or accused of a crime has the right to remain silent. Most defendants do not speak to the press about an offense, as anything a person says may be used in court.

Our constitutional system acknowledges the freedom of the press, often as an important check on government power. But our constitutional system also guarantees numerous due process and other rights for people accused of a crime. Criminal defense lawyers argue in court to protect those rights, and the right to a criminal defense is important check on government power to maintain the integrity of our system.

Source: WECT, “Hospital tests negative, woman still charged with DWI,” Ashlea Kosikowski, updated April 6, 2013

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

It is no secret that an arrest for driving while impaired in North Carolina can have serious consequences for the driver accused of drunk driving. When the holder of a commercial driver’s license is arrested for DWI, the issue can have significant impact on the driver’s livelihood. However, the North Carolina Court of Appeals recently ruled that a one-year revocation of a CDL following a DWI arrest is sufficiently punitive to bar a later prosecution in criminal court on DWI charges.

On the Fourth of July in 2010, a truck driver was arrested for DWI while driving a non-commercial vehicle in Duplin County, North Carolina. Following that arrest, a Duplin County Magistrate seized the trucker’s CDL and revoked the commercial license for 30 days under North Carolina law.

The driver reportedly did not challenge that revocation order within the 10 day time frame to contest the revocation. Slightly more than two weeks later, the man received notice from the state that his CDL was disqualified for one year under North Carolina law.

Generally, courts have construed such license revocations as civil in nature. By August, the man had paid the civil revocation fees and retrieved his CDL, but he was prohibited from lawfully driving a commercial vehicle until the end of the CDL disqualification, which was one year after the DWI arrest on July 4, 2011. The man was transferred to a different job during the summer of 2010, but eventually lost that job in a staffing cut.

The man later challenged his DWI charges in criminal court, including a DWI defense argument that the CDL revocation of one year bars a later prosecution for DWI in criminal Court. In the next post, this blog will continue discussing how the courts have handled the Double Jeopardy argument.

Sources:

• Jacksonville Daily News, “Court: Prosecuting truck drivers who lose CDL for DWI is double jeopardy,” Lindell Kay, Feb. 24, 2013
• North Carolina Court of Appeals, “State v. McKenzie, No. COA12-436, Jan. 15, 2013

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

A controversial former First Nations chief has launched a public fight against his ineligibility to run for council.
Manitoba stories

In the last post, this blog began discussing a recent ruling in the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which found that a prosecution for DWI following a one-year commercial driver’s license revocation under North Carolina law is barred by the Double Jeopardy clause of the Constitution.

In late August 2011, the man sought to have the criminal DWI charges dismissed. One of his criminal DWI defense arguments was that the CDL revocation was sufficiently punitive to be a criminal punishment, and therefore barred prosecution of the DWI charges under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution (the man raised a separate argument, which was not decided in the appellate court ruling).

The Duplin County District Court agreed and dismissed the DWI charges. Prosecutors appealed to Superior Court. There, the DWI charges were reinstated. The man took the issues to the Court of Appeals.

In January, a three judge appellate panel reversed the Superior Court ruling, finding that the one-year license revocation was sufficiently criminal in nature to bar the state from pursuing the DWI charges in criminal court. The appellate panel recognized that shorter license revocations have generally been deemed civil in nature, and therefore do not act to bar a criminal prosecution under the Constitution. However, the length of the revocation-one year-is lengthy enough to constitute a criminal punishment.

Prosecutors reportedly are planning to seek a stay of the appellate ruling. The ruling was a split decision, with two judges ruling in favor of the criminal defense argument and one judge dissenting. The ruling is expected to be considered in the North Carolina Supreme Court.

Sources:

• Jacksonville Daily News, “Court: Prosecuting truck drivers who lose CDL for DWI is double jeopardy,” Lindell Kay, Feb. 24, 2013
• North Carolina Court of Appeals, “State v. McKenzie, No. COA12-436, Jan. 15, 2013

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

After a nearly three-hour journey to the nearest maternity service, she finally delivered her baby.
Manitoba stories

Disgraced doctor Mohamed Kadirsahib is the object of public humiliation, his lawyer says.
Manitoba stories

Convicted of raping his brother’s ex-girlfriend and facing a possible double digit prison sentence, Russell Harry continued to proclaim his innocence Wednesday.

Manitoba stories

A truck driver who was reportedly involved in an accident with a Durham, North Carolina, police officer is facing serious charges, including driving while impaired. After the truck accident, law enforcement noted that they thought the truck driver was showing signs of impairment. The truck driver and his criminal defense say that the man suffered a medical event before the traffic crash.

Police say that they found a blue capsule inside the trucker’s rig. Law enforcement took a blood sample to test the driver for alcohol or drugs. The trucker says that the capsule is a regular over-the-counter decongestant. Moreover, an analysis of the driver’s blood tested at Duke University Hospital after the crash reportedly turned up negative for drugs or alcohol.

News reports have broken that the truck driver told authorities after the crash that he could not remember where his truck had been loaded earlier in the day before the truck accident. Law enforcement claims the man could remember details of his trip on the day of the crash, but memory of the details of the crash itself remain a mystery to the trucker.

Durham police say that witnesses saw the truck weaving before the accident. The accident itself occurred on the side of Interstate 85 last Wednesday. An unmarked police car was parked behind a Mazda during a traffic stop. The truck reportedly crashed into the unmarked squad, sandwiching the police cruiser between the truck and the Mazda.

While police questioned the trucker, authorities say he complained of chest pain and took the trucker to a local hospital. The man’s defense says that the trucker with an excellent driving record suffered a medical event, leading to the accident.

He is now charged with felony serious injury by vehicle, DWI, reckless endangering, speeding and unlawfully passing an emergency vehicle. The man is free on 0,000 bond.

Source: WRAL, “Attorney: Trucker suffered ‘medical event,’ not drunk before crash,” July 31, 2012

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

Do you think its fair in DC mayor says ignore any crimes committed by illegals how can he allow amnesty for all illegals and state that U.S. laws in no way apply to them ? The post 9-11 world dictates that there are very public few places in Washington, D.C. where lawfully abiding residents and commuters are not discretely monitored, politely questioned, or upon entering buildings, physically searched. But while we accept scrutiny in order to enhance public safety, illegal aliens – those who have broken U.S. laws and whose unknown motives may deserve the most scrutiny – enjoy the least, thanks to a longstanding sanctuary policy reinforced this week.

Letting the powerful illegal alien lobbies know that he’s looking out for their best interests, Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray has signed an executive order formalizing the existing “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” policy which prohibits police from inquiring about the immigration status of people they arrest or reporting that status to federal authorities.

The mayor claims that D.C. police are not in the business of enforcing federal immigration laws. Does that mean his officers won’t pursue bank robbers or kidnappers if they come in contact with perpetrators of crimes typically handled by federal agencies?

If any city in America has a history of working closely with their federal partners, it’s Washington, D.C. The sanctuary policy is not about jurisdiction, it’s about defying immigration enforcement with great fanfare to whip up political support with a growing Hispanic community.

Police are authorized and have a responsibility to enforce all laws, unless of course they’re specifically told by their local jurisdiction not to. Asking about immigration status after lawful conduct and reasonable suspicion doesn’t transform any police officer into an ICE agent, it simply allows that officer to conduct a basic precept of law enforcement – don’t catch and release lawbreakers and jeopardize public safety.

Tonight somewhere in Washington, D.C., an officer will probably encounter a speeding vehicle and begin a lawful traffic stop asking for license, registration and proof of insurance – a universal verification process that is the same for everyone. And that vehicle might be loaded with 9 people who speak no English, have no driver’s licenses, no vehicle registration, no auto insurance, no social security numbers and maybe only Mexican consular cards or Gold’s Gym Cards. At that point common sense might suggest that asking about immigration status is warranted. But Mayor Gray thinks that D.C. residents will be better off if the officer ignores the obvious and just says “have a nice day” or preferably, ’que tenga un buen días.”

And the residents of Washington, D.C. – sharing their space already with 35,000 illegal aliens – won’t be having a nice day. Sanctuary city policies not only let the existing illegal aliens know they have no worries, but are also welcome mats to thousands more. Mayor Gray’s job is to allocate limited community resources to legal residents, not advertise his city as a safe haven and encourage thousands of additional illegal aliens to come in and drain finite services.

http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/national/foxnews/DC-to-Illegal-Immigrants-Dont-Ask-Dont-Tell-Dont-Worry_27368851

So if somebody illegal robs a bank, the police cannot do anything but say, have a nice day ?

This one, admittedly, makes no sense at all. I heard it this morning, on Fox News, and could not believe my ears. An executive order, putting "cuffs" on the authorities, is outrageous.

No wonder so many American citizens are out of work – their jobs are secured by those who have been given a free license to work here, without background checks or proper identification.

We are rushing towards chaos – nationwide chaos, and the "powers-that-be" are aiding and abetting the perpetrators.

Political Campaign Advertising

Winnipeg’s photo enforcement program should take note: its days may be numbered.
Manitoba stories