Charleston DUI Lawyer South Carolina Criminal Law Attorney Mt Pleasant Drunk Driving Defense Lawyer

DUI Cases Won in Georgia

Because DUI laws today change on a weekly basis, I believed I could best serve clients focusing on DUI law and other complicated traffic law defense. State v. J.L.: Client stopped by DUI Task Force Officer for running red light; smell of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes; client refused field tests and breath test; a Dekalb jury is out only an hour, finds client NOT GUILTY of both DUI and Red light violation. State v. R.H.: Client arrested for DUI and registered a.16 on breath test; officer saw a dark colored car speeding on Collins Hill Road in Lawrenceville, GA., lost track of car, and then saw two dark colored cars stopped at a red light; my client turned left, and client stopped him to see if my client was the car that had been speeding; the court held the stop to be invalid and the entire case was dismissed. State v. T.L.: Client stopped for speeding; according to police report, client failed all 3 field test, officer arrested for DUI, then searched truck and found open container; while at Gwinnett County jail, officer supposedly found marijuana. Client charged with speeding, DUI, marijuana possession, open container; I obtained a copy of the video, which revealed: Officer never gave one of the field tests as in the report, told my client he was not free to leave but could have someone pick him up, then officer searched truck without client’s consent and found marijuana in truck, not at jail as stated in report. State v. S.M.: Client charged with DUI by City of Suwanee; Police report indicated client failed field tests, and blew a.13 on the breath test; however, video revealed that officer did not administer field tests correctly, and promised to bring client home if the breath test was below a.08; based on seeing the video, DUI dismissed. State v. D.S.: Client charged with DUI at.10; video revealed client to be sober, not impaired, and that officer did not administer tests correctly; DUI case dismissed and client plead to reckless driving. State v. N.F.: Client was involved in a one car accident in Lawrenceville, GA.; officer found client in car on opposite side of roadway, with 2 flat tires; after field sobriety tests, client was arrested but refused the state breath test; client was specifically charged with per se DUI; because there was no actual evidence of client’s blood alcohol level, State’s evidence was not sufficient for a conviction, and she was found not guilty. State v. S.S.: Client was charged with speeding 83 mph on I-85(which she admitted), failure to maintain lane, DUI, and obstruction of officer. The State was allowed to present evidence of 3 of client’s prior DUI convictions; even so, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on the Dui and one of the disorderly conduct charges.

Keywords: [“client”,”DUI”,”test”]
Source: http://www.mrgadui.com/dui-cases-won-in-georgia

RCW 46.61.502: Driving under the influence.

A) And the person has, within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person’s breath or blood made under RCW 46.61.506; or. B) The person has, within two hours after driving, a THC concentration of 5.00 or higher as shown by analysis of the person’s blood made under RCW 46.61.506; or. While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug; or. While the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor, marijuana, and any drug. A) It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsection(a) of this section, which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant consumed a sufficient quantity of alcohol after the time of driving and before the administration of an analysis of the person’s breath or blood to cause the defendant’s alcohol concentration to be 0.08 or more within two hours after driving. It is an affirmative defense to a violation of subsection(b) of this section, which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant consumed a sufficient quantity of marijuana after the time of driving and before the administration of an analysis of the person’s blood to cause the defendant’s THC concentration to be 5.00 or more within two hours after driving. A) Analyses of blood or breath samples obtained more than two hours after the alleged driving may be used as evidence that within two hours of the alleged driving, a person had an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more in violation of subsection(a) of this section, and in any case in which the analysis shows an alcohol concentration above 0.00 may be used as evidence that a person was under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug in violation of subsection(c) or of this section. Analyses of blood samples obtained more than two hours after the alleged driving may be used as evidence that within two hours of the alleged driving, a person had a THC concentration of 5.00 or more in violation of subsection(b) of this section, and in any case in which the analysis shows a THC concentration above 0.00 may be used as evidence that a person was under the influence of or affected by marijuana in violation of subsection(c) or of this section. 6) It is a class B felony punishable under chapter 9.94A RCW, or chapter 13.40 RCW if the person is a juvenile, if:(a) The person has three or more prior offenses within ten years as defined in RCW 46.61.5055; or. I) Vehicular homicide while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, RCW 46.61.520(1)(a);(ii) Vehicular assault while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, RCW 46.61.522(1)(b);.

Keywords: [“person”,”RCW”,”under”]
Source: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.502