As we begin 2008, I thought I would post something not so serious. Obviously, DUI related topics are serious – I ran across this joke that gave me a chuckle:
A man is driving home, when is pulled over by a patrolman for a broken blinker. The cop looks into the guys’ car and sees a collection of knives in the backseat.
"Sir," the cop says. "Why do you have all those knives?"
"They’re for my juggling act," the man says.
"I don’t believe you," says the cop. "Prove it." So the man gets out of his car and begins juggling the knives. At the same time, a car with two guys in it drives by.
"Man," says the first guy. "I’m glad I quit drinking. These new sobriety tests are hard."
Let’s all make 2008 a year when you can avoid DUI or any criminal defense issues.
Filed under Uncategorized by on Jan 1st, 2008. 
California DUI lawyer Lawrence Taylor writes extensively about DUI issues in his very thorough DUI Blog. A trend that Mr. Taylor has been tracking has to do with forced blood draws – in which police forceably restrain a driver for the purpose of drawing blood to test for alcohol content.
In his post "Taking Blood by Force," Mr. Taylor references a California appeals court case in which the California Court of Appeals turned down the appeal of a citizen who was convicted on the basis of a forced blood draw.
Taylor argues that these forced blood draws may not yield accurate results – if the officer does not use the proper technique, and that a restrained motorist might very well be injured if he is restrained.
I have not heard about any forced blood draw cases in Georgia, but I mention this issue because I suspect that a forced blood draw case may eventually make its way to the Supreme Court and if the practice is approved there, then we could very face this issue here. The Supreme Court has always been fairly lenient in "search and seizure" cases involving automobiles so I would not be surprised to at least see the Supreme Court consider a forced blood draw case.
Filed under Arrest issues, Police conduct issues by on Jan 2nd, 2008. Comment.
Hawaii is considering a law whereby drivers convicted of DUI will have to pay for the installation and monitoring of breath test devices in their vehicles. The devices work by shutting off the ignition if the driver’s breath generates an alcohol reading over the legal limit.
These devices cost $150 to install and $75 per month to monitor.
I have no issue with any tactic that can take drunk drivers off the road, although I can certainly envision scenarios whereby a driver will be inconvenienced if the device malfunctions. My question – will accident victims and/or drunk drivers themselves – have any recourse against the breath test manufacturer if the device fails to stop an intoxicated driver from starting his car?
Hawaii leads the nation in the percentage of traffic deaths involving drunk driving (52% of total highway deaths).
Filed under Trial issues by on Jan 11th, 2008. Comment.
