Justifying the "calling out" of Someone Being Arrested

Austin, TX DWI Lawyer Jamie Spencer recently posted about whether or not someone should "call out" of those arrested for DWI or other crimes on blogs.

He explains:

I don’t blog about so-and-so got arrested for such-and-such. It’s
-Not my style
-Seems like making fun of people in the same situation as my clients
-Not usually relevant to my ‘niche’
-Overdone by the cut-and-paste bloggers
-Not a case I think I know anything about, since all my info about it comes from the media
-There’s about a hundred more reasons I don’t ‘do’ that type of blogging.

I'd agree with him for the most part.  This was in response to my previous post, and others who constantly tell him "hey, you should blog about ________ being arrested!"

I don't normally report on people getting arrested.  I haven't once mentioned Lindsay, Brittany, Nicole, etc.  I felt this one was different for a few reasons.

1. It happened in Austin & my Collin County Readers wouldn't necessarily pick up on it.

2. I was actually kind of proud to be what I felt was the first to report on it.  At least on the blogs I normally read.  I hadn't read about it in any of the other usual suspects blogs. Posted 5/1 at 10:48pm.

3. I felt the importance of this one mainly because my understanding is that he championed the surcharge.  Also, one of the ridiculous things about the surcharge is that it doubles with a .16 reading.  That reason alone is a good one to refuse the test.

4. He decided to refuse a breath test.  I like to point out to my readers (as does several others bloggers), that Legislators, Judges, and Policeman.. when asked, all seem to refuse the breath test!

Anyway, there's my 2c on the issue.

Oh yeah, and as far as the PC affadavit you Jamie points out, I'd start with the question of

1) An officer reading a license plate exp. date at 10PM
2) I thought the expirations were on the front windshield?
(possible explanation - l/p has only 5 digits, starting with SO.  So I'm guessing this may be a special plate?)
3) Interesting how this ofc. can tell the difference between metabolized and non-metabolized alcohol.

And all the other usual garbage...

Tags:

Longer Liquor Hours in Frisco?

Frisco is now voting on whether or not to allow longer alcohol serving hours for bars and restaurants.  The proposed (bill?) will allow restaurants and bars to serve until 2 AM, instead of the current Midnight.

I have been approached by many friends and colleagues about the possibility of Frisco having longer drinking hours.  The conversation usually starts, "wow, Hunter, this is something that will probably be great for your business, huh?"

So, here are my thoughts on the matter.

I don't think changing the law from midnight to 2AM is going to have any major horrible ramifications on the great City of Frisco.  Nor do I think that DWI arrests are going to skyrocket either.  (Remember, I'm commenting on my business going up... for that to happen, it is presumed there will be more arrests).  Nor do I think that alcohol related tragedies will go up.  Hey, I live here too.  If I thought it was a major danger that was going to occur, I'd be handing out fliers along side this group.

I got a ridiculous flier in the mail regarding the vote.  It is a group opposing the legislation.  It has a picture of 1) a beer+ 2) a clock = 3) Strippers and has the words "why risk it?"  The flier proclaims that if we allow alcohol sales to go two more hours, magically, a bunch of strip clubs will appear.  We will also have to have more police working longer hours......Hogwash.

Other cities have these hours and no strip clubs started opening up.  I'm pretty sure other cities are dry (or bring your own beer), and they have strip clubs.  Anyway, the entire flier was preposterous.  Ed Housewright of the Dallas Morning News recently wrote his opinions here. 

Honestly, in summary, I don't really care either way.  I don't think there is a vast negative effect that will occur.  I don't think there is a massive positive upside either.  Local businesses will probably profit, as will some of the hotels & service industries.  But either way, in answer to the questions I've been getting, I don't think my business is going to change much.

Tags:

To Ensure DWI Convictions -- Dont let accused get good lawyers

In one of the most insane propositions I have ever seen, Lawrence Taylor reports on a bill going through the Senate in Tennessee.

The proponent of the bill wants to stop DUI (and DWI) lawyers from advertising their expertise because it is getting to hard to convict people accused of DUI.  Hmm.. so her solution is that they should not be able to get lawyers that specialize in the area?

Hey Senator, why not cut it off at the pass, and propose legislation not to allow people to have lawyers?  Or better yet, who needs jury trials anyway?

Lawrence pointed out another article where Senator XXXX explained her reasoning:  She "said she pushed for the amendment because she was tired of suspected DUI offenders not being convicted.”

Yes, people found not guilty of a crime?  How can that be?  Surely they must be guilty, right?  Those 6 idiot jurors were fooled!

Oh wait.. maybe there was another motive?  The article also explains that her move "brought criticism from her opponent who practices in DUI law"

Ahh.. politics at their best.

(P.S.  I didnt really want to put her name in here, because that might have been "advertising" that she didnt want.  But because her opponent Timothy Barnes, a Clarksville attorney, seems to support the First Amendment, I dont see the harm in mentioning him here.)

Tags:

DWI - Enhanced Offenses and Penalties

§ 49.09. ENHANCED OFFENSES AND PENALTIES.

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), an offense under Section 49.04, 49.05,
49.06, or 49.065 is a Class A misdemeanor, with a minimum term of
confinement of 30 days, if it is shown on the trial of the offense
that the person has previously been convicted one time of an offense
relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated[0], an
offense of operating an aircraft while intoxicated[0], an offense of
operating a watercraft while intoxicated[0], or an offense of
operating or assembling an amusement ride while intoxicated[0].
(b) An offense under Section 49.04, 49.05, 49.06, or 49.065
is a felony of the third degree if it is shown on the trial of the
offense that the person has previously been convicted:
(1) one time of an offense under Section 49.08 or an
offense under the laws of another state if the offense contains
elements that are substantially similar to the elements of an
offense under Section 49.08; or
(2) two times of any other offense relating to the
operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated[0], operating an
aircraft while intoxicated[0], operating a watercraft while
intoxicated[0], or operating or assembling an amusement ride while
intoxicated[0].
(c) For the purposes of this section:
(1) "Offense relating to the operating of a motor
vehicle while intoxicated[0]" means:
(A) an offense under Section 49.04 or 49.045;
(B) an offense under Section 49.07 or 49.08, if
the vehicle operated was a motor vehicle;
(C) an offense under Article 6701l-1, Revised
Statutes, as that law existed before September 1, 1994;
(D) an offense under Article 6701l-2, Revised
Statutes, as that law existed before January 1, 1984;
(E) an offense under Section 19.05(a)(2), as that
law existed before September 1, 1994, if the vehicle operated was a
motor vehicle; or
(F) an offense under the laws of another state
that prohibit the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated[0].
(2) "Offense of operating an aircraft while
intoxicated[0]" means:
(A) an offense under Section 49.05;
(B) an offense under Section 49.07 or 49.08, if
the vehicle operated was an aircraft;
(C) an offense under Section 1, Chapter 46, Acts
of the 58th Legislature, Regular Session, 1963 (Article 46f-3,
Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), as that law existed before
September 1, 1994;
(D) an offense under Section 19.05(a)(2), as that
law existed before September 1, 1994, if the vehicle operated was an
aircraft; or
(E) an offense under the laws of another state
that prohibit the operation of an aircraft while intoxicated[0].
(3) "Offense of operating a watercraft while
intoxicated[0]" means:
(A) an offense under Section 49.06;
(B) an offense under Section 49.07 or 49.08, if
the vehicle operated was a watercraft;
(C) an offense under Section 31.097, Parks and
Wildlife Code, as that law existed before September 1, 1994;
(D) an offense under Section 19.05(a)(2), as that
law existed before September 1, 1994, if the vehicle operated was a
watercraft; or
(E) an offense under the laws of another state
that prohibit the operation of a watercraft while intoxicated[0].
(4) "Offense of operating or assembling an amusement
ride while intoxicated[0]" means:
(A) an offense under Section 49.065;
(B) an offense under Section 49.07 or 49.08, if
the offense involved the operation or assembly of an amusement
ride; or
(C) an offense under the law of another state
that prohibits the operation of an amusement ride while intoxicated[0]
or the assembly of a mobile amusement ride while intoxicated[0].
(d) For the purposes of this section, a conviction for an
offense under Section 49.04, 49.045, 49.05, 49.06, 49.065, 49.07,
or 49.08 that occurs on or after September 1, 1994, is a final
conviction, whether the sentence for the conviction is imposed or
probated.
(e) Repealed by Acts 2005, 79th Leg., ch. 996, § 3.
(f) Repealed by Acts 2005, 79th Leg., ch. 996, § 3.
(g) A conviction may be used for purposes of enhancement
under this section or enhancement under Subchapter D, Chapter 12,
but not under both this section and Subchapter D.
(h) This subsection applies only to a person convicted of a
second or subsequent offense relating to the operating of a motor
vehicle while intoxicated[0] committed within five years of the date
on which the most recent preceding offense was committed. The court
shall enter an order that requires the defendant to have a device
installed, on each motor vehicle owned or operated by the
defendant, that uses a deep-lung breath analysis mechanism to make
impractical the operation of the motor vehicle if ethyl alcohol is
detected in the breath of the operator, and that requires that
before the first anniversary of the ending date of the period of
license suspension under Section 521.344, Transportation Code, the
defendant not operate any motor vehicle that is not equipped with
that device. The court shall require the defendant to obtain the
device at the defendant's own cost on or before that ending date,
require the defendant to provide evidence to the court on or before
that ending date that the device has been installed on each
appropriate vehicle, and order the device to remain installed on
each vehicle until the first anniversary of that ending date. If
the court determines the offender is unable to pay for the device,
the court may impose a reasonable payment schedule not to extend
beyond the first anniversary of the date of installation. The
Department of Public Safety shall approve devices for use under
this subsection. Section 521.247, Transportation Code, applies to
the approval of a device under this subsection and the consequences
of that approval. Failure to comply with an order entered under
this subsection is punishable by contempt. For the purpose of
enforcing this subsection, the court that enters an order under
this subsection retains jurisdiction over the defendant until the
date on which the device is no longer required to remain installed.
To the extent of a conflict between this subsection and Section
13(i), Article 42.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, this subsection
controls.

Tags:

Driving While Intoxiated with a Child - Law in Texas

§ 49.045. DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED[0] WITH CHILD
PASSENGER.

(a) A person commits an offense if:

(1) the person is intoxicated[0] while operating a motor
vehicle in a public place; and

(2) the vehicle being operated by the person is
occupied by a passenger who is younger than 15 years of age.

(b) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

Tags:

Driving While Intoxiated - Law in Texas

§ 49.04. DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. (a) A person commits
an offense if the person is intoxicated while operating a motor
vehicle in a public place.

(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c) and Section 49.09,
an offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor, with a
minimum term of confinement of 72 hours.

(c) If it is shown on the trial of an offense under this
section that at the time of the offense the person operating the
motor vehicle had an open container of alcohol in the person's
immediate possession, the offense is a Class B misdemeanor, with a
minimum term of confinement of six days.

Tags:

Definition of Intoxication

Penal Code - Chapter 49

(2) "Intoxicated" means:

(A) not having the normal use of mental or
physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a
controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of
two or more of those substances, or any other substance into the
body; or

(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or
more.

Tags: