| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Captain Compassion" |
| Date: |
12 Aug 2005 01:50:10 PM |
| Object: |
DUI law ruled unconstitutional |
DUI law ruled unconstitutional
Va. presumes guilt if blood-alcohol level is 0.08, a judge says
BY MATTHEW BARAKAT
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Aug 12, 2005
McLEAN -- A Fairfax County judge has ruled that key components of
Virginia's drunken-driving laws are unconstitutional, citing an
obscure, decades-old U.S. Supreme Court decision that could prompt
similar challenges nationwide.
Virginia's law is unconstitutional because it presumes that an
individual with a blood-alcohol content of 0.08 or higher is
intoxicated, denying a defendant's right to a presumption of
innocence, Judge Ian O'Flaherty ruled in dismissing charges against at
least two alleged drunken drivers last month.
As a district judge, O'Flaherty's rulings do not establish any formal
precedent, but word of the constitutional argument is spreading
quickly among the defense bar. Every state has similar presumptions
about intoxication at a 0.08 blood-alcohol level, so defense lawyers
across the nation are likely to make similar arguments.
"I am sure there will be lawyers out in the field making similar
arguments tomorrow," Steven Oberman, chairman of the DUI defense
committee at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,
said in a telephone interview yesterday.
Del. David B. Albo, R-Fairfax, a defense lawyer who often practices in
Fairfax, said he disagrees with O'Flaherty's ruling and sees no
difference between a presumption of intoxication at 0.08 and a
presumption of speeding at 80 mph.
He said he did not see any reason to change Virginia's drunken-driving
laws. "So far not a single judge in Virginia has ruled the same way,"
he said. "It's just one judge."
Corinne Magee, a McLean defense lawyer who successfully argued the
issue to O'Flaherty, said the judge's ruling is based on a 1985 U.S.
Supreme Court case called Francis v. Franklin, which deals with
prosecutors' obligation to prove all elements of a crime beyond a
reasonable doubt.
Magee said she came across the Francis case doing research on another
case and realized it might apply to Virginia's drunken-driving laws.
"Frankly, I was surprised" that the judge dismissed the case based on
her constitutional arguments, Magee said yesterday. "But I think Judge
O'Flaherty's ruling is based on a very solid reading of this case."
She said Virginia's law is problematic not just because of the
presumption of intoxication at 0.08, but also a presumption in the law
that the blood-alcohol level at the time the test is taken is equal to
the level at the time of the offense, even if the test occurs hours
after police make a stop. Magee said a person's blood-alcohol level
can fluctuate up or down depending on when a person had their last
drink and how their body metabolizes alcohol.
Prosecutors are now taking steps to avoid O'Flaherty on all
drunken-driving cases, withdrawing cases assigned to him and instead
obtaining indictments that send the cases directly to Circuit Court.
Prosecutors cannot appeal cases dismissed by a district court judge,
but could appeal if a circuit judge makes a similar ruling.
Fairfax County Commonwealth's Attorney Robert F. Horan Jr. did not
return phone calls seeking comment yesterday.
Patrick O'Connor, president of the Northern Virginia chapter of
Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said O'Flaherty's decision "undermines
the efforts of the police and prosecutors to enforce the DUI laws,
puts drunk drivers back behind the wheel and potentially denies
justice to victims of drunk drivers." He has requested a meeting with
the judge.
O'Flaherty, who has a reputation as a fairly tough judge among defense
lawyers, turned down a request for an interview. Rulings in District
Court are made orally, so there is no written ruling outlining his
rationale.
Oberman said laws establishing a presumption of intoxication at 0.08
blood-alcohol level have been upheld in the past, but a new challenge
like the one raised by Magee provides an opportunity to revisit the
issue in a different context. He said the argument's potential
effectiveness will vary from state to state based on the exact wording
of the DUI laws and other factors.
--
"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography" -- Ambrose Bierce
"America is a vast conspiracy to make you happy." -- John Updike
"Long term commitment in relationships is only necessary because it takes
so damn long to raise children. Marriage may well be some kind of trick
to keep the males around beyond sexual satiation." -- Captain Compassion
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
res0mp8t@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
| User: "Igor The Terrible" |
|
| Title: Re: DUI law ruled unconstitutional |
12 Aug 2005 06:04:19 PM |
|
|
Hell, I'll drink to that! :D
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
