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 Law

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 DUI Law: State v. Cave (maximum punishment upheld)

State v. Cave, 2010-Ohio-1237, 09-CA-6 (OHCA2)This case originated in the Clark County Common Pleas Court.  The sole issue is whether or not the trial court abused its discretion in giving a maximum sentence of five years.  The Second District Court of Appeals held, "Defendant-appellant Robert appeals from his five-year sentence imposed following his conviction for Operation of a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence of Alcohol (OMVI), a felony of the third degree. maintains that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing a maximum sentence, and that the sentence is contrary to law. We conclude that 's...

Continue reading

Ohio DUI Law: ALS and Unsworn 2255

State v. Allen, 2010-Ohio-1257, 13-09-25 (OHCA3) Defendant Allen was stopped and arrested for OVI and subsequently tested over 0.08. She was given an unsworn copy of the 2255 and then the officer submitted an unsworn copy of the 2255 to the Court and the BMV. The Tiffin Municipal Court upheld the suspension. The 3rd District Court of Appeals held that the suspension was valid IMMEDIATELY upon testing over and it has nothing to do with the 2255 being sworn or not. In his dissent from this ruling, Judge Rogers states, "I submit that the requirement that BMV Form 2255 be sworn...

Continue reading

Ohio DUI Law; Mays fog-line decision upheld

State v. Burwell, 2010-Ohio-1087, 12-09-06 (OHCA3) This case originated in the Putnam County Court.  "In his first assignment of error,  argues that the trial court erred by overruling his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop. Specifically,  argues that crossing the white edge line without evidence of erratic driving or concerns for his safety does not provide reasonable articulable suspicion for a traffic stop, citing State v. Phillips, 3d Dist. No. 8-04-25, 2006-Ohio-6338.  also maintains that this case is distinguishable from State v. Mays, 119 Ohio.St.3d 406, 2008-Ohio-4539, 894 N.E.2d 1204, because: he only crossed the  line once and the defendant...

Continue reading

Ohio OVI Practice Pointer; Destroyed Audio Tape

State v. Smith, 2010-Ohio-1232, 09-CA-42 (OHCA5) Defendant-appellant Robert Smith appeals his convictions and sentences in the Licking County Municipal Court on one count of Driving under the Influence [Refusal] in violation of R.C. 4511.19 (A) (1) (a), one count of space between moving vehicles in violation of R.C. 4511.34, and one count of marked lanes in violation of R.C. 4511.33.  The Defendant was stopped and arrested for OVI, he raised many issues at the Motion to Suppress including the fact that the audio recordings from the cruiser cam were not provided. The trooper testified that the audio outside his car was not...

Continue reading

Ohio OVI Law; State v. Verity (admission of the NHTSA manual)

State v. Verity, 2010-Ohio-1151, 2009CA00156 (OHCA5) This case originated in the Massillon Municipal Court.  Verity was arrested for OVI and at the motion to suppress, the Trooper testified that he administered the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests according to NHTSA guidelines but he did not testify as to what those guidelines are. The trial court overruled the Motion to Suppress and Verity appealed to the Fifth District.  Shot down, right? No, the judgment was reversed. "Appellant claims the trial court erred in finding the standardized field sobriety tests were conducted in substantial compliance with the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA)...

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