Many times, after being hired, I get the reports, the video, and any other evidence I can gather. I then look at that evidence to determine if there is a way to get the case dismissed as quickly as possible without going to trial. If I see an issue, I file a motion to suppress the evidence and ask for a hearing for the Judge to determine if evidence should be suppressed. Many people don’t understand this process. This is a video of a suppression hearing that took place in Logan, Utah. This case started in the North Logan Justice Court. That particular judge denied my motion. I appealed the motion to the District Court. The Judge at the District Court suppressed the evidence based on an illegal pull over. The Judge, in his ruling, stated "we are not a police state yet!"
Law Office of Glen W. Neeley
Top Utah DUI Attorney, Board Certified in DUI Defense by the National College of DUI Defense
-
A friend of mine, an attorney, told me about a case where he went to sentencing with his client. The friend argued to the judge that his client is not a party animal and that this was a one time mistake. When he was done, the prosecutor stood up with printed photos from the client’s myspace account. Needless to say, the photos did not depict a man kneeling and praying at church (although he was kneeling with large cups of beer in his hand.
My point is this:
- Take your myspace and facebook pages down.
- If you can’t do that, tone your pages down.
- Most of all, confessing your sins on these pages is just as good as a signed confession to convict you.
Here is a story my friend sent me on this very issue entitled Don’t drink and drive, then post on Facebook.
This is is a quote "If it shows up under your name you own it," he said, "and you better understand that people look for that stuff."
(more…) -
The Utah Highway Patrol had 22 officers out on the weekend and made 24 DUI arrests. They made and exceeded their quota. The DUI Blitz is the modern DUI check point. Check points are generally unconstitutional unless rigorous guidelines are followed. The police don’t do checkpoints very often anymore. I wonder why? Perhaps there is an easier way to make their quota. Here’s the story.
A Utah Highway Patrol drunken driving blitz netted 24 DUI arrests in Salt Lake County over the weekend. Twenty-two state troopers patrolled the roads in Salt Lake County from 9 p.m. Friday to 2 a.m. Saturday, said UHP Sgt. Blaine Robbins. The blitz was to promote safety on the roads.
Here’s another story. They almost seem happy about the sad issue that people are still drinking and driving when there is all this publicity about DUI enforcement. Well, pat yourselves on the back for now. I mean the public will only here this number of arrests. They won’t hear about the innocent people you may have arrested.
24 impaired drivers arrested in 5 hours
Published: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:06 a.m. MDT
1 comment
E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + –
A DUI enforcement blitz conducted Friday night by the Utah Highway Patrol netted 24 impaired drivers in a five-hour period.UHP Sgt. Blaine Robbins said Sunday that 22 state troopers were assigned to locations throughout Salt Lake County. He noted the number of arrests, which occurred between the hours of 9 p.m. Friday and 2 a.m. Saturday, is exceptional for the size of the task force.
"That’s a very, very good enforcement day," Robbins said. "We’re always out enforcing, but on a big weekend like this, with the number of troopers involved … more than one arrest per trooper is outstanding."
Robbins said that dedicated UHP DUI enforcers are out on a regular basis and typically make two to three arrests per shift."Our DUI Squad that’s out every weekend … our ‘graveyard cars’ … do very well," Robbins said.
The high number of arrests occurred in spite of UHP publicity efforts last week that warned weekend holiday travelers of heightened enforcement efforts by the department.
Finally, KSL ran their story. The story revolves around the arrests and an accident. The accident is presumed without more information that it involves a drunk driver. This of course will justify the cause. Perhaps this accident happened because the driver just made a poor decision and a driving mistake in trying to pass a diesel.
Troopers make 24 DUI arrests in one night
May 25th, 2008 @ 5:34pmTonya Papanikolas reporting
A man who may have been drinking died in a car crash. The news comes the morning after Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) troopers remove more than two dozen drunk drivers from the streets.
Sgt. Blaine Robbins, with the UHP, said, "We had our fair share of DUIs. I believe there were 24 DUIs apprehended, 22 troopers were out." And that was just Friday night alone, meaning the number could grow.
Despite their efforts to stop people from driving drunk, there was at least one fatality already this weekend. Yesterday morning, troopers say a Ford Escort tried to pass a semi truck on I-80 in Echo Canyon. The car hit a median, overcorrected and ended up beneath the wheels of a semi.
"The semi truck rolled over and ended up on top of that vehicle, killing the passenger in that vehicle," Sgt. Robbins said.
That accident is under investigation, but troopers say they believe the driver of the car may have been drinking. They say, no matter how many times they try to warn people of the dangers, it’s something they see time and again. "It seems to be a message that people still have a hard time with, is if you’re going to go out and have fun, which is great, we want you to be able to do that, but just drink responsibly and make sure you have a designated driver to get you home," Sgt. Robbins said.
Troopers will be out through Monday, looking for people who still choose to drink and drive. They’ll also be watching to see if you’re buckled up when they pull you over. If you’re not, it’ll cost you $45.
-
Its Memorial Day weekend for 2008. Troopers have often claimed in the newspapers and in open court that there are no quotas to make arrests. In this story below, Trooper Cameron Roden tells the news reports that the troopers are encouraged to average at least one DUI arrest per officer involved in the DUI Blitz. Further, the Trooper is asked if the Blitzes work to deter drunk driving. The Trooper responds that the Blitz is not effective in that regard. The DUI arrests never go down, according to the Trooper. Well that brings up an interesting point. If officers are encouraged to get one arrest per officer, then there seems to be an incentive to arrest borderline cases and perhaps innocent people.
- Here’s another story on the DUI blitz held for this weekend.
-
I found an interesting article this afternoon. It was really interesting to me because it was my case. This case was first heard in the North Logan Justice Court. The judge in that Court heard the exact same evidence but ruled that the officers had reasonable suspicion. I didn’t agree with the judge’s decision so we appealed the case to the District Court. The District Court Judge Judkins listen to the evidence, analyzed, and questioned the evidence. He made the correct ruling regarding an unpopular crime. Here’s the article.
4th Amendment holds in a case of mooning, alcohol
The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 05/08/2008 02:18:46 PM MDTPosted: 2:20 PM- LOGAN — A judge threw out a drunken-driving charge in a case that involved bare bottoms and a defiant step on the gas.
Police stopped Nicholas Johnson, 22, after he revved his pickup truck in response to friends who mooned him at a traffic stop.
An officer smelled alcohol and arrested Johnson, who had a blood-alcohol level of 0.13 percent, above Utah’s legal threshold.
But defense attorney Glen Neeley claimed the officer had no probable cause to stop the pickup truck last September in North Logan. First District Judge Clint Judkins agreed.
"We’re not a police state yet," Judkins said Wednesday. "Revving your engine is not illegal.
"This has to be looked at through two windows. The first being that the police officer was on the street simply doing his job, the other is a person’s Fourth Amendment right," the judge said, referring to an unreasonable search.Here is two other links to the same story.
It is interesting to read the comments at the end of these posts. Some people feel that Officer Elleman was justified in trampling over the 4th Amendment, that he did the wrong thing but for the right reason. Many others agree with the judge. I am proud of judges that make the right decisions regardless of the popular vote. This type of judge protects what little rights we do have–even in a case that involved someone "accused" of a DUI. While getting a criminal justice degree, students learn the importance of respecting peoples constitutional rights, and because the judge did not just protect this young man’s rights, he protected all of us from an unreasonable search and seizure. Imagine a police state where an officer can pull you over for no reason. Many say, "I don’t have anything to hide." To you I say good for you; can’t wait for the government to intrusively invade your life for no reason and find that one imperfection in your life so you can say, "I have nothing to hide". Then you will be looking down the barrel of a prosecution that is wrongful and false, and your only defense is "I have nothing to hide."
-
If a person is convicted of a DUI and the breath test was over a .16, most courts will require the person to put an ignition interlock device on any car they own and any car they drive. If a person has more than one conviction within 10 years, it is mandatory by state law to have this device. The device is basically a breathalyzer that will not allow a car to start if the driver has alcohol in their system. Kutv News did a story on this which I have posted below in the continue reading button. Here’s the problem that many clients experience with this device:
- They constantly malfunction.
- They can read alcohol if the person has perfume on them or an alcohol based fragrance.
- They misread other substances on the breath as alcohol.
- They have to be maintained and checked constantly.
-
I often get calls from people asking where they can get substance abuse counseling when they are being charged with a DUI. If a person is convicted of a DUI, a person is required to have an evaluation to determine if a treatment is necessary. I don’t think I have ever had a client convicted of a DUI and the evaluator did not recommend treatment. It just cuts against the grain and common sense. Some people have felt these classes are not about rehabilitation so much as money. I disagree with that opinion and often recommend a client get into treatment before going to Court. Whether we are contesting the charge or not, the treatment is relatively cheap and it can only help the person. My theory is that an alcoholic is not necessarily a person who has to drink everyday. My definition of an alcoholic is when alcohol begins to interfere with a person’s life regardless of how much or how often they drink. Getting a DUI is definitely an interference with a person’s life.
There are a lot of great programs out there. However, for the Courts and the DMV to recognize the class, it must be a State Certified "Prime for Life" class. This web site is great to find classes all around the country and in a person’s own city. I suggest you call them directly and verify that they are state certified and teach a class that is recognized by the Courts. Hitting the continue reading button will give you a list of providers in the Ogden area.
-
I saw this story about Cynthia Sommer and was overjoyed that an innocent woman was released from jail. I was saddened that it took 2 years of jail, a jury conviction, and a "second test" to finally exonerate her. Why did it take so long for a second test. This was a murder case. This was a case that the prosecutors convicted an innocent woman. This was a case that could have been solved without ruining a life of a grieving woman with a simple duplicate test. What does this story have to do with DUI’s in Utah? People in Utah accused of DUIs are requested to take a single test. The breath sample is not preserved for later testing by an independent agency. Compare the breath test machine that has the same computer chip of the 1970 version of the Atari computer game with the high tech blood testing machines used in most murder cases, and yet the first test was wrong. How many innocent people have been convicted of DUIs because only one test was given? In Utah the answer could be astonishing.
The story follows: (more…)
-
A couple of years ago I attended the Indiana University Borkenstein Course. This is a course that Utah Breath Test technicians are required to take to qualify for their job as technicians. The taxpayer spends a lot of money on these people to take this course. The course is taught by the top scientists in the country and the world. For example, AW Jones from Sweden is probably considered as the worldwide expert on breath testing. Dr. Kurt Dubowski is probably considered the leading expert on breath testing in the nation.
All of the scientists and experts that taught at the program taught one common theme for forensic breath testing: Quality Assurance is the most important aspect of forensic breath testing. Each expert emphasized that any breath test program should employ duplicate breath testing to ensure an accurate result. The Utah Department of Public Safety chooses to ignore the quality assurance safeguards of duplicate breath testing. I have heard the excuses that it would cost too much to "we don’t have to and we don’t care." A fellow National College for DUI Defense member posted his research on states that require duplicate testing and those that don’t. http://www.wvdui.com/StateBreathMachines.asp
- The interesting thing is that 27 states reported duplicate breath test requirements. 18 states still employ single breath test requirements.
If it is important to ensure that tests are accurate, that innocent people are not convicted, and to ensure that justice is served, why doesn’t Utah step up to the plate. It is not expensive, it is just a software issue. The state has recently purchased brand new Intoxilyzer 8000 machines. Those machines are designed to do duplicate testing. Yet, duplicate testing is still not employed. It seems to me that if the state employed a system to ensure accurate results, they may have to employ the idea that maybe the officer made a mistake in making the arrest. (more…)
Law Office of Glen W. Neeley 