| "Wet Reckless" Convictions in DUI/DWI Cases |
|
| In some states, motorists who have been charged with driving under the influence (DUI) or driving while intoxicated (DWI) may be able to plea bargain the charge down to a wet reckless charge. A wet reckless charge is considered a lesser charge than a DUI or DWI. In addition, a wet reckless charge usually carries a sentence of probation rather than jail time, and the fines involved are usually lower. Although the name of the offense is "wet reckless," there is no requirement that there is any reckless driving. More... |
|
|
| Failure to Yield Traffic Violations |
|
| State highway statutes and local ordinances set forth violations for offenses for which violators may be arrested without arrest warrants. One such violation is the failure to yield the right-of-way. Right-of-way merely means a preference to one of two vehicles asserting the right of passage at the same place and at approximately the same time. Generally speaking, the driver of the vehicle on the left must yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right. Moreover, the right-of-way is not absolute as the relative speeds and positions of drivers with respect to the intersection must be considered.
More... |
|
|
| Use of HawkEye Infrared Device to Check for DUI/DWI |
|
| A California company has created a new tool for law enforcement in the war on drinking or taking drugs and driving. The HawkEye law enforcement system is a lightweight, handheld device that captures a driver's eye behavior on either a computer or DVD. The device is now being used by police officers at select sobriety checkpoints throughout the United States. More... |
|
|
| The Driver License Compact and DUI/DWI Cases |
|
| The Driver License Compact (DLC) is an interstate agreement among the party states to share traffic safety information and to ensure that drivers who commit traffic and vehicle code violations in party states are sanctioned in the driver's home or licensing state. More... |
|
|
| Defendant's Right to Counsel Before Consenting to Chemical Test in Drunk Driving Case |
|
| Most people are aware that Miranda warnings must be given an accused before he or she is subjected to custodial interrogation. The warnings are intended to protect the privilege against self-incrimination, and the Fifth Amendment right to counsel was created to protect that privilege. However, if the privilege against self-incrimination is not implicated, the warnings are not required, and there is no right to counsel. The United States Supreme Court has held that "physical" evidence may be obtained from an accused without running afoul of the privilege. Therefore, the right to counsel privilege has been held inapplicable to physical or performance tests and chemical tests of bodily substances. More... |
|
|