a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2019 Dayton DUI.
All Rights Reserved.

9:00 - 17:00

Our Opening Hours Mon. - Fri.

Facebook

Twitter

Search
OVI Menu
 

DUI Process

Dayton DUI Attorney Charles Rowland > DUI Law  > DUI Process (Page 29)

Speed Trap Exchange from the National Motorists Association

So, you are ready to get in the car and take that big Memorial Day trip.  Beware, state troopers are on the prowl and the Ohio State Highway Patrol promises to be very active this holiday weekend making sure we behave well and get to our destination safely.  The National Motorists Association has compiled a SPEED TRAP EXCHANGE (www.speedtrap.org) to warn motorists of spots where patrols will be particularly brisk.  If you make use of this valuable tool, be sure to join the National Motorists Association as it is one of the foremost citizen rights groups in the United States.  Charles...

Continue reading

Residual Mouth Alcohol and Gastroesophogeal Reflux

Undetected, raw, unabsorbed alcohol in the mouth may falsely elevate the results of a breath test. This residual mouth alcohol (RMA) can come from items ingested just prior to the test, from regurgitated (burped) air from the stomach, or from gastroesophogeal reflux.  Ohio testing protocol attempts to guard against this testing flaw by requiring officers to observe the defendant for twenty minutes prior to the test.  They look for burping, vomiting or any ingestion of items into the mouth.  Lazy observation by the police officer...

Continue reading

Junk Science in Ohio DUI/OVI Cases

[caption id="attachment_26" align="alignleft" width="150" caption="Intoxilyzer 8000"][/caption]When you hear a DUI/OVI attorney decrying "junk science" that is used in court, they are most likely referring to the fact that the air blown into the breath test machine for purposes of testing cannot be the same air that is exchanged with the deep lung alveolar sacs. It is impossible to limit the breath test to limit itself to deep lung alveolar air. The theory breaks down because: IF THE MAJORITY OF AIR BEING MEASURED HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BLOOD EXCHANGE THEN THE TEST IS NOT MEASURING THE AMOUNT...

Continue reading

Ohio DUI/OVI Misdemeanor Charges Are Serious

Image by abardwell via FlickrUnder Ohio DUI Law, it is a serious crime to drive any vehicle while your ability to drive is impaired by alcohol or drugs. While the most common acronym for impaired driving in Ohio is DUI (driving under the influence), it is also referred to as OVI (operating a vehicle while intoxicated), and OMVI (operating a motor vehicle while under  the influence). No matter what acronym you refer to it as, it all describes the same crime and statute.  The penalties for DUI in Ohio are extremely strict, and all involve exposure to jail or prison time. In...

Continue reading

It’s Just a Decimal Point: The Dirty Secret Behind Breathalyzers

October 25th, 2007 Posted in Breathalyzers, DUI/DWI, James BaxterIn 1990, the New Jersey courts declared that the science was settled, the debate was over: breath analysis is a reliable and accurate means by which to determine blood alcohol content (BAC). This proclamation is known as the “Downie decision.” The lead witness, who held the most sway in the court’s opinion, was Dr. Dubowski, a forensic scientist with a history of research experience dealing with Breathalyzers and alcohol breath analysis. A study he published in 1985 was considered the pre-eminent work in this field.The Downie case revolved around the accuracy of breath analysis in terms of...

Continue reading

Ohio’s 6th Circuit Federal Appeals Court Embraces Speed Cameras

[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="161" caption="Image via Wikipedia"][/caption]From www.TheNewspaper.com:  A divided three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit yesterday upheld the imposition of automated tickets on individuals who may or may not have committed any crime. The judges ruled on a case that began when Kelly Mendenhall received a ticket in the mail for allegedly speeding in Akron, Ohio in December 2005. Although the ticket against her was dismissed, her husband, Warner, fought the legitimacy of the Akron ordinance all the way to the state supreme court which,...

Continue reading

Ohio BMV and Reinstatement Fees

[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="144" caption="Image by themaxsons via Flickr"][/caption]Ohio Revised Code section 4510.10 sets forth the procedure for a municipal and/or county court to follow in cases involving an offender that cannot reasonably pay reinstatement fees due and owing. The court can establish a payment plan of not less than fifty dollars per month, or give the offender an extension of their operating privileges until a future date upon which date all reinstatement fees must be paid in full. Pursuant to R.C. 4510.10 (F), reinstatement fees are debts that may be discharged in...

Continue reading

Charles Rowland’s Biography at www.DUI1.com

Charles M. Rowland II maintains an established DUI/OVI and criminal practice, representing the accused drunk drivers in State and Federal Courts in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio. Since 2005, Charles Rowland has dedicated his practice exclusively to representing the accused drunk driver and has worked to amass more credentials than any attorney in his field.DUI/OVI CREDENTIALS Charles served as the Xenia City Prosecutor and has served as a “Special Prosecutor” on high-profile felony cases. Charles is a proud member of the National College for DUI defense and in ...

Continue reading

Ohio DUI Law; State v. Craze (Reasonable Articulable Suspicion)

State v. Craze, 2010-Ohio-812, 09 COA 017 (OHCA5) This case is from the Ashland Municipal Court and raises the issue of what constitutes reasonable and articulable suspicion for a traffic stop.  On March 1, 2009, at approximately 2:06 a.m., Trooper Penny Beaty of the Ohio State Highway Patrol was performing traffic duty on Claremont Street in Ashland, Ohio when Appellant's vehicle passed her traveling on the same road. Trooper Beaty followed Appellant's vehicle onto West Main Street. While following the vehicle Trooper Beaty observed the vehicle's registration sticker on the rear license plate was blocked from view. Trooper Beaty then initiated...

Continue reading

Ohio OVI Law: State v. Lentz (Breath Test Regulations)

State v. Lentz, 2010-Ohio-762, 09 CAC 07 0065 (OHCA5) Here, in a case arising out the Delaware Municipal Court, defendant Lentz challenged the three-year record keeping requirement.  The court states as follows, Because of the very general nature of appellant's motion to suppress, specific evidence in response is not necessary, and general testimony of compliance is sufficient. See Columbus v. Morrison, Franklin App. No. 08AP-311, 2008-Ohio-5257; State v. Cook, Wood App. No. WD-04-029, 2006-Ohio-6062, at ¶ 31-33 (statement that police officer maintains log books for machine as required by rules and regulations of the Ohio Department of Health sufficient to show substantial compliance with record keeping...

Continue reading