DUI Virginia Certificate Analysis Influence Alcohol Lawyers Alexandria City
DUI Virginia Certificate Analysis Influence Alcohol Lawyers Alexandria City
Rock v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed her convictions by the Circuit Court of the City of Alexandria (Virginia), for driving under the influence of alcohol in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266 and for involuntary manslaughter in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-36.1(A).
DUI Virginia Certificate Analysis Influence Alcohol Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erroneously admitted the certificate of analysis and improperly relied on the test results’ statutory presumption of intoxication?
Discussion:
Defendant was driving her vehicle when she struck and killed a pedestrian. She was arrested on a charge of hit and run fatality and administered a breathalyzer test. She was indicted for driving under the influence of alcohol and involuntary manslaughter. The trial court admitted her breathalyzer results despite her objection that it was inadmissible because she had not been arrested for driving under the influence within two hours of the offense, as required by Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-268. The court concluded that reversible error occurred because the trial court erroneously admitted the certificate of analysis and improperly relied on the test results’ statutory presumption of intoxication. The commonwealth did not offer evidence on the significance of the test results in the certificate. Clear evidence therefore implied that the trial court applied the statutory presumption of intoxication, and the court was unable to say that this error did not affect the trial court’s decision. The court ruled that exigent circumstances did not exist because the commonwealth failed to introduce independent evidence of the significance of the test results. The court reversed defendant’s convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol and for involuntary manslaughter. The court remanded for further proceedings if the commonwealth so desired.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers Rockingham County
DUI Virginia Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers Rockingham County
Charles v. Commonwealth
Facts:
After the Circuit Court of Rockingham County, Virginia denied his motion to suppress, defendant entered a conditional guilty plea of driving under the influence (DUI), third or subsequent offense within 10 years, under Va. Code § 18.2-266. He then appealed, contending the trial court erred finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest him.
DUI Virginia Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest defendant?
Discussion:
An officer stopped defendant for running a red light. Defendant had an odor of alcohol emanating from him, and failed one of three field sobriety tests. Before administering the PBT, the officer read defendant an “implied consent card” and told him he was not required to take the PBT, that it was strictly “for the benefit of probable cause,” and that the result of the PBT could not be used against him “in court” (rather than “in any prosecution,” as set forth in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-267(F)). The appellate court held that the advisement, though inartful, complied with § 18.2-267(F). The officer’s testimony that the PBT machine he used had been calibrated and checked for accuracy and that he had properly cleared it before administering the test supported the trial court’s finding that the test results were admissible at the hearing. As defendant never argued that the trial court could not rely on the PBT result because it was not in evidence, he could not raise this argument on appeal. Evidence that defendant ran a red light, smelled of alcohol, failed a field sobriety test, and registered positive on the PBT gave the officer probable cause to arrest him. The judgment was affirmed.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers Lee County
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers Lee County
Danny v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed his conviction in the Circuit Court of Lee County (Virginia) for impaired driving, a violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-56.1.
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to quash the warrant?
Discussion:
Defendant had been charged with unlawfully operating a motor vehicle over the highways while under the influence of intoxicants or self administered drugs. He was tried in the county court and acquitted of the charge, but was found guilty of impaired driving. Defendant contended that the trial court erred in denying his motion to quash the warrant because the terms of the impaired driving statute did not permit his prosecution in the circuit court upon a charge of impaired driving. He contended that he could not be prosecuted or convicted for a violation of § 18.1-56.1 except as a lesser included offense of a prosecution for violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-54. The court affirmed, finding that § 18.1-56.1 did not permit an interpretation that required automatic dismissal of every charge of impaired driving reaching a court of record on appeal. The court found that the language of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-56.1 made it clear that impaired driving was a lesser included offense included within the driving under the influence statute. The court held that the statutory definition of impaired driving was sufficient to withstand an attack of vagueness. The court affirmed defendant’s impaired driving conviction.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers York County
DUI Virginia Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers York County
Tim v. Commonwealth
Facts:
After the Circuit Court of York County, Virginia denied his motion to suppress, defendant entered a conditional guilty plea of driving under the influence (DUI), third or subsequent offense within 10 years, under Va. Code § 18.2-266. He then appealed, contending the trial court erred finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest him.
DUI Virginia Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest defendant?
Discussion:
An officer stopped defendant for running a red light. Defendant had an odor of alcohol emanating from him, and failed one of three field sobriety tests. Before administering the PBT, the officer read defendant an “implied consent card” and told him he was not required to take the PBT, that it was strictly “for the benefit of probable cause,” and that the result of the PBT could not be used against him “in court” (rather than “in any prosecution,” as set forth in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-267(F)). The appellate court held that the advisement, though inartful, complied with § 18.2-267(F). The officer’s testimony that the PBT machine he used had been calibrated and checked for accuracy and that he had properly cleared it before administering the test supported the trial court’s finding that the test results were admissible at the hearing. As defendant never argued that the trial court could not rely on the PBT result because it was not in evidence, he could not raise this argument on appeal. Evidence that defendant ran a red light, smelled of alcohol, failed a field sobriety test, and registered positive on the PBT gave the officer probable cause to arrest him. The judgment was affirmed.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Suspended License Habitual Offender Lawyers Bath County
DUI Virginia Suspended License Habitual Offender Lawyers Bath County
Hardy v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant sought review of a judgment from the Circuit Court of Bath County (Virginia), which convicted him of being an habitual offender under the Virginia Habitual Offender Act, Va. Code Ann. §§ 46.1-387.1 to 46.1-387.12, based on a conviction of driving under the influence and two subsequent convictions of driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license.
DUI Virginia Suspended License Habitual Offender Lawyers
Issue:
Whether the two subsequent convictions, having resulted from offenses occurring at the same time, arose “out of separate acts” within the meaning of Code § 46.1-387.2 and thereby constitute defendant an habitual offender?
Discussion:
Defendant was convicted of being an habitual offender under the Virginia Habitual Offender Act, which was based on a conviction of driving under the influence and two subsequent convictions of driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license. On appeal, defendant argued that his convictions for driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license arose out of but one act of driving and did not, therefore, result from “separate acts” as contemplated by the Act. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that because defendant could have been convicted of driving under the influence without evidence of the suspension of his driver’s license and he could have been convicted of driving on a suspended license without evidence of his intoxication, the act of driving an automobile on one occasion could give rise to several acts and offenses under the Act. The court further held that it was not the same act that gave rise to each violation of the two statutes under which defendant was convicted. The court affirmed the judgment.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers Lee County
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers Lee County
Coles v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant sought review of orders from the Circuit Court of Lee County (Virginia), which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence previously entered against defendant in a case brought by the Commonwealth of Virginia.
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the judgment of the circuit court affirming the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence entered against defendant should be reversed?
Discussion:
Defendant was convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The conviction resulted in the suspension of defendant’s permit to operate an automobile for a year. Defendant subsequently was arrested on a warrant charging him with reckless driving and driving after his operator’s license had been revoked. On appeal, the court held that the reading of the plain language of the statute showed that both the suspension of sentence and the revocation of such suspension were left to the discretion of the trial court. There was no requirement that the suspension could be revoked only upon the conviction of a subsequent criminal offense. However, the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain an order of revocation was a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court. Its finding of fact and judgment thereon were reversible only upon a clear showing of abuse of such discretion. The judgment of the circuit court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of sentence, was affirmed. The judgment of the circuit court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence entered against defendant, was affirmed
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Warrantless Arrest Constitution Violation Lawyers Carroll County
DUI Virginia Warrantless Arrest Constitution Violation Lawyers Carroll County
Commonwealth v. Reggie
Facts:
Defendant was charged with failing to dim his headlights by plaintiff commonwealth. The key issue in the case was whether or not the warrantless arrest of defendant in his home at night violated the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution because it violated the right of defendant to be secure in his house against unreasonable searches and seizures which are made without a warrant based upon probable cause.
DUI Virginia Warrantless Arrest Constitution Violation Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether or not the warrantless arrest of defendant in his home at night violated the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution?
Discussion:
A state trooper was driving and saw defendant’s car proceeding in the opposite direction failing to dim its lights. The trooper followed defendant’s vehicle and turned on his emergency flashers and siren for approximately 1.2 miles. Defendant never increased his speed or attempted to elude the trooper, drove to his home, exited his vehicle and walked directly to his house. The trooper followed defendant to the door of the house and grabbed him by the shoulder and turned him around as he was entering the house. After the trooper stopped defendant, he proceeded to obtain evidence to support a charge of driving under the influence. The trooper testified that when he was following defendant, he was not following him for any reason but to try to ascertain why defendant did not dim his lights. The court dismissed the case against defendant finding that the offense for which the police officer was following defendant was not serious and did not involve violence. As a result, no exigent circumstances existed which justified the arrest of defendant without a warrant. The charge of failing to dim lights against defendant brought by the commonwealth was dismissed.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Habitual Offender Bifurcated Trial Lawyers Craig County
DUI Virginia Habitual Offender Bifurcated Trial Lawyers Craig County
Commonwealth v. Thomas
Facts:
Defendant appealed from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Craig County (Virginia), which convicted him of driving under the influence, a third or subsequent offense within five years in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266, and of driving after being declared an habitual offender in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 46.1-387.8.
DUI Virginia Habitual Offender Bifurcated Trial Lawyers
Issue:
Whether the trial court erred by admitting evidence of Defendant’s prior DUI convictions during the guilt stage of the trial and by admitting evidence of his refusal to perform field sobriety tests
Discussion:
Following a bifurcated trial, defendant was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI), a third or subsequent offense within five years, and of driving after being declared an habitual offender. The court found that the trial court did not err by admitting evidence of defendant’s prior DUI convictions, but did err in admitting evidence of defendant’s refusal to submit to field sobriety tests. The court noted that Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-943 prohibited the introduction of the entire traffic record during the guilt stage of trial but held that evidence of the prior DUI convictions was admissible because prior DUI convictions did not constitute the “traffic record” as contemplated by § 46.2-943 where the offense charged was a subsequent offense of DUI. The court held that evidence of a refusal to submit to field sobriety tests, when used as evidence that defendant refused because he believed he might fail, violated defendant’s right against self-incrimination under Va. Const. art. I, § 8. The court found that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of defendant’s refusal and that the error was not harmless. The court affirmed defendant’s conviction for driving after being declared an habitual offender, reversed the conviction for driving under the influence, and remanded for a new trial
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
Former State Trooper
