News
 
Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

It is important for people to know that alcohol cases are different than drug-related DWI cases. In alcohol cases, law enforcement can measure a person’s blood alcohol content level with blood and breath tests to make a determination as to whether the individual is under the influence of alcohol or not. With drug DWI situations, this is a little more difficult. There are scientific tests that show that people even with certain levels of marijuana in their blood and are not intoxicated. There is a lot of complicated science concerning the levels of marijuana and the metabolites of marijuana that DWI attorneys are aware of and able to use to show that people are not intoxicated by marijuana or another drug. Due to this, skilled defense lawyers have won many cases.

Aggravated Factors in DWI Cases

There are many different types of aggravating factors in DWI cases. If a child under 15 is in the car, then that makes a DWI case a felony. When someone was injured as a result of a DWI, then a person may be charged with the felony or offense of intoxication assault. If someone dies, then the person can be charged with intoxication manslaughter. A person who has a prior DWI could have their charge raised from a Class B misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to one year in jail. If the person has two prior DWIs, then that makes the DWI a felony for which they can get up to 10 years in prison. Another aggravated factors in a DWI case is the number of drugs on the individual when they have been pulled over. This is also another example of how alcohol cases are different than drug-related DWI cases.

Penalties Associated with DWI Conviction

In Texas, a first-time DWI charge is punishable by three days up to 180 days in jail and up a $2,000 fine. Usually probation is the worst-case result in a first-time DWI. The second-time DWI is punishable by 30 days up to a year in jail and up to a $4,000 fine. Sometimes, a certain amount of jail, such as 72 hours in jail, may be mandated as a condition of probation and the second-time DWI. When someone has been charged with their third DWI, they are facing a third-degree felony, which is punishable by two years to up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.

To learn more about the penalties and how alcohol cases are different than drug-related DWI cases, contact an accomplished attorney.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

Can a passenger be charged if drugs are found in the vehicle? Yes, it does happen frequently, however, there is usually not enough evidence to convict the passenger. A common example of a passenger getting arrested for drugs in the vehicle would be at a traffic stop. In this situation, the officer may find marijuana under the seat but then nobody in the car admits to possessing the marijuana. The officer may then charge whoever they want for possession. In this case, they may arrest whoever is sitting closest to the drugs or may charge both. However, a seasoned drug lawyer could argue that the officer did not have enough evidence because the officer must be able to prove that the defendant intentionally or knowingly possessed the drugs. The fact that the drugs are in the same car as a person does not prove that the person was possessing it even if the person is the only one in the car.

Penalties for Illegal Possession, Sale, and Distribution in Fort Worth

In Texas, drug crimes are taken very seriously which is why drug penalties are so severe. Drug possession of a Penalty Group I controlled substance such as heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine of less than one gram is a state jail felony and it carries the consequences of 180 days to up to two years in jail and up to a $10,000 fine. Possession of one to four grams of one of these substances is a third-degree felony. A third-degree felony carries two to 10 years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. Possession of four to 200 grams is a second-degree felony. A second-degree felony is punishable by two to 20 years in jail and a fine of up to $10,000. Can a passenger be charged if drugs are found in the vehicle? Yes, and they could be facing felony possession charges, which carry significant penalties.

Alternative Punishments for First-Time Offenders

There are alternative punishments for first-time drug offenders in Texas such as drug courts, diversion programs, and rehabilitation programs. These options can ultimately result in dismissal and possibly even the expunction of the records. An experienced criminal defense lawyer is familiar with all these programs and how they could help you. Sometimes the alternative punishment programs are a good option and other times they are not. An attorney is going to explore all options and keep the defendant’s best interest in mind when deciding if the program is a good idea or not. If you have more questions about alternative punishments and if a passenger can be charged with drugs found in the vehicle, contact an attorney today.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

As a general rule, a prior arrest or conviction impact on current case is not going to hurt at all. A prior conviction or arrest is not going to affect the defense’s chance of winning at trial. This is because when the individual is on trial accused of a crime, evidence of prior convictions or arrests is not admissible. You cannot be tried of being a criminal in general. You can only be tried for the crime of which you are accused. The prior convictions are not going to be considered by the jury when the jury’s deciding whether or not the person is innocent or guilty of the crime they are on trial for. However, the prior arrest or conviction impact on current case is that it can certainly affect the punishment the defendant may receive if they are found guilty. That is one of the risks that a seasoned criminal lawyer will consider when deciding whether or not to go through a trial or not.

Handling Criminal Cases for Those With Prior Criminal History

It is a defense attorney’s goal in every case to get a dismissal or get a finding of not guilty so that the defense can get an expunction of the record of the case and the arrest. This means that the lawyer is prepared to fight each case. The attorney is going to thoroughly investigate the case and will not entertain resolving the case until they have gathered all the evidence and any other records that need to be requested or subpoenaed. An accomplished DWI lawyer will know the science of breath testing and blood testing in DWI cases and how to determine if there were any issues with the testing. A dedicated attorney is going to fight for an individual whether they have had a prior arrest or conviction or not. They will also ensure that a defendant has a fair trial.

Qualities to Look for in Criminal Defense Attorneys

Someone who has been charged with a crime and is concerned with a prior arrest or conviction impact on current case should obtain an experienced lawyer. A well-established attorney will know what type of defenses can be raised to defend you against your charges. Defendants should look for attorneys who have won similar cases that they are facing. In DWI cases, they should find out if the lawyer has ever won a not guilty on a blood test case or won a not guilty on a breath test case. An attorney who is well-versed in many defense strategies and knows how the process works could be very beneficial. If you have been charged with a criminal offense, reach out to a lawyer who has had success defending other individuals of such a charge. An attorney could also ease your concern about a prior arrest or conviction impact on current case. Call today to schedule a consultation. The sooner a lawyer is contacted, the sooner they can start building a defense for your case.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

There are several different types of police encounters. One particularly common one is what the police like to call consensual, and occurs when they approach someone in public and start talking to them. While that is certainly permissible, anyone who is approached by a police officer can refuse to talk to them and simply walk away. When someone chooses to talk to police officers during consensual encounters, anything that the person says may lead to a reason for the police to further investigate or detain the person. This is just one reason why it’s so important for people to understand that when approached by a police officer, they have the right to refuse to answer any and all questions. Given our nature as human beings and the way most of us have been raised to be polite and courteous, most people think they need to engage politely with officers and exchange pleasantries.

In order to avoid saying something which may lead to a detention or investigation, individuals should either refuse to answer questions or ask the police officer whether they are being detained or investigated. If an officer is trying to identify a witness to a crime, then an individual is required to provide their name, date of birth, and address, but in the United States, they are not required to provide proof of government-issued identification; proof of a driver’s license is only required when someone is operating a motor vehicle.

Another type of police encounter is a detention, which most frequently occurs after a traffic stop. A detention situation arises when officers detain someone in order to investigate them or investigate something else, and must be supported by reasonable suspicion. In other words, the officer must have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is committing a crime. In traffic stop situations, officers must have evidence that the person has actually committed the crime because stopping the person is not going to lead to more evidence of whether or not they committed a traffic violation.

A detention situation may arise when an officer approaches someone who is sitting in their lawfully parked vehicle in a business or department store parking lot. Under such circumstances, an officer might knock on the window or motion for the person to roll down their window. This type of situation is a detention and therefore must be supported by reasonable suspicion. Any time a person is involved in a situation like this, they should obey the officer’s commands and identify themselves. According to the Fifth Amendment, however, they do not have to answer any questions whatsoever.

Quite often, officers don’t have reasonable suspicion and the law is clear that just a hunch is not enough. If an officer has not developed reasonable suspicion for a detention, or probable cause for an arrest, then any arrest would actually be illegal and any evidence obtained as a result of that arrest would be what’s called “fruit of the poisonous tree.” In other words, that evidence would be considered to have been illegally obtained and would not be able to be used against the person. There is a specific statute in Texas called the Exclusionary Rule under the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 38.23. This statute states that any evidence obtained as a result of illegal activity by the police is not admissible in court and cannot be used against a person.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

Any evidence or statements made by a person prior to their arrest may be used against them if the officer had reasonable suspicion supporting their decision to perform the detention. Once a person has been arrested, any statements made as a result of custodial interrogation cannot be used against them unless they have been informed of their Miranda rights, which is the right to remain silent. There is a concept called res gestae, which is a Latin term which basically means that something happens contemporaneously or part of the arrest. Statements made at the time of an arrest or as a result of an arrest may be admissible against a person even if they haven’t been informed of their right to remain silent. The distinction here is that once a person is in custody, statements cannot be used against them if those statements were the result of custodial interrogation and if the person was not informed of their right to remain silent.

In a DWI arrest, a person is typically pulled over, investigated, and asked to perform field sobriety tests. They might be placed under arrest and not informed of their right to remain silent. Under such circumstances, many people will think that since they weren’t informed of their right to remain silent, everything will be thrown out. This, however, is not necessarily true. The police will typically take a person to the police department, ask them to submit to a breath or blood test, and then inform the person of their right to remain silent before going through a list of carefully prepared questions that essentially reads like a script. At that point, they are interrogating the person and must inform that person of their right to remain silent in order to use any of the information they obtain.

What Kind Of Training Do Police And Law Enforcement Get Regarding Questioning People?

Detectives and patrol officers are trained to interrogate people in a manner that will get them to make incriminating statements. Detectives undergo further training to use psychological ploys and methods for obtaining incriminating statements. They typically ingratiate themselves to that person, make the person feel comfortable, and create the impression that they are there to help. In fact, they might even lie to the person or appeal to their conscience. They are very well-trained at asking questions from different perspectives in ways that call for certain incriminating answers.

Can Police lie?

Yes!

Can Police Lie About Anything Or Are There Some Restrictions?

The police are allowed to lie to people.

Courts allow Police to lie. The Police can lie to suspects during questioning. What’s more, those lies don’t render confessions involuntary per se. Even if courts are supposed to investigate deceptions to see if they produced false confessions since law enforcement officials are trained to question suspects, the lies they tell hardly invalidate confessions.

Can Police lie about possessing physical evidence?

Police lie all the time of having a suspect’s DNA, fingerprints, and other forms of physical evidence. It’s worth noting that acquiring physical evidence like DNA and fingerprints takes time. County crime labs are usually backlogged. If you are arrested because of a recently committed crime, it’s highly unlikely that the Police have the DNA and fingerprints collected from the crime scene when they are interrogating you.

In fact, Police are notorious for tricking suspects into providing their DNA and fingerprints. They do this by offering suspects something to drink during interrogation. If you get arrested for a violent crime, a DNA swab can be taken as part of the booking routine. If the crime doesn’t require a swab as part of the procedural, the Police can trick you into giving them your DNA. The law allows law enforcement officers to obtain your DNA, among other evidence using such means. However, DNA tests will still take time and are hardly done on-site.

The Police can also use fake tests. You may be informed you have failed a chemical test or polygraph. The Police can go as far as claiming they have eyewitnesses or an accomplice’s confession. Such attempts may be made to get confessions. Don’t fall for this trickery. In fact, never give any statement in the absence of an attorney!

The #1 reason you should never make voluntary statements in the first place

While there are many reasons to avoid making voluntary statements, there’s one “magical” reason. If a crime is committed and the Police have sufficient ground to arrest you, they will arrest you. Law enforcement officers who have sufficient grounds to make an arrest have no business wanting to talk to you, ask a few questions, or take voluntary statements. You can’t talk your way out of an arrest!

So, why should you give them enough grounds to arrest you by giving voluntary statements? The 5th Amendment exists for a reason. You aren’t required to make statements that help the Police in incriminating you in a crime. So, don’t give any statement in the absence of your lawyer

The Police Officer Said He Will Go Easy On Me If I Cooperate. Is That True?

A frequently used tactic by the police is to tell someone that they will “go easy” on someone if they cooperate. In reality, “going easy on someone” is not even an option for police officers; they have a duty to investigate crimes, and once they have completed their investigation, they must turn over the information to the prosecutor or district attorney. At that point, it is the district attorney’s place to decide how vigorously to prosecute the defendant and whether or not to “go easy” on them.

For more information on Making Statements Without An Attorney, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling us today.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

If someone has been asked to go to a police station regarding an incident, they should call an attorney. There is no requirement for a person to comply with such a request. Once the individual contacts an attorney, that attorney can contact the police officer or detective to find out more information. Quite often, attorneys will be able to get a case dropped or prevent a client from ever being arrested. In most cases, the police will want someone to go to the police station so that they can be questioned and hopefully make an incriminating statement. In other cases, someone might just be a witness, but this is something that an attorney can determine in order to intelligently advise the client and help them make a decision. Once the nature of a client’s charge is understood, favorable information provided by the client to their attorney can be conveyed to the detectives; in this way, the information conveyed to the detectives cannot be used against the client.

When a person is innocent, they may answer questions in a way that hurts them or corroborates evidence that the police already have. This means that even if someone is truly innocent, answering questions can hurt them. Refusing to answer questions and exercising the right to remain silent are choices that can never be used against someone and can never be used to justify an arrest if the individual would not have otherwise been arrested.

If officers go to a person’s home and ask to speak with them, the individual should always refuse to speak with them until they have an attorney present. In those types of situations, we sometimes develop other evidence that we may be able to share with the detective to prove the client’s innocence and get the matter dropped. This can be hugely important for a client by preventing them from having a record of criminal arrest and preventing them from the expenses of having to defend a case once they’ve been charged with a crime.

I Was Stopped By Police. Can They Ever Order Me Out Of My Car?

The police can order an individual out of their vehicle. If this happens, the individual should comply with that request. Regardless of the fact that ordering someone out of their vehicle may be an illegal detention, the individual who is being ordered does not want to disobey the officer’s order. Later, we may be able to demonstrate that the detention was unlawful and that any evidence obtained should be thrown out.

What Rights Do Passengers In Motor Vehicles Have During Interactions With The Police?

If an officer wants to identify a passenger as a witness, that passenger should provide the officer with their name, date of birth, and address, but will not have to show proof of identification. If an officer asks a passenger to step out of the car, the passenger should comply with that request—regardless of whether they think it is an illegal detention. If it is indeed an illegal detention, then we can demonstrate that to a judge at a later point and have the evidence ruled inadmissible. It is important for an individual to remember that they have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and the right to be free from unlawful arrest. An individual should comply with an officer’s demands, identify themselves, and refuse to answer any questions.

For more information on Going Down To A Police Station About An Incident, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling today.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

The final version of House Bill 1927 Legislation, was formally signed by the Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, and is due to come into effect on the 1st of September, 2021. The controversial bill was drafted in order to protect Texas residents’ gun rights as some groups were concerned that recent gun safety bills which had been put forward by lawmakers in the past few years, infringed on Texans’ right to bear arms. To discover how the bill will be implemented in the years to come as well as how the bill handles the legal rights of local business owners to refuse individuals service, simply continue reading.

The Purpose Of The Bill

The primary purpose of the bill was to give Texans the legal right to carry a handgun in non-prohibited public places, without having a license to carry.  Prior to the implementation of the bill, only individuals who carry permits were allowed to carry their handguns in public. Regardless of whether their handguns were concealed or unconcealed. However, if individuals choose not to conceal their handguns, they are required to keep their guns in holsters and would not be permitted to carry a gun in their hand, in public.

It’s worth noting that to obtain a handgun permit prior to the implementation of house bill 1927, individuals would need to undergo at least four to six hours of gun training before passing a shooting proficiency test and a comprehensive written exam. As a direct result of the new bill, individuals who wish to carry a handgun, will no longer need to undergo gun training sessions or to pass practical or written exams.

However, in order to ensure that individuals who were interested in gun training would have adequate training opportunities to increase their knowledge of gun usage and safety, the senate required that the bill be amended to stipulate that the Texas Department of Public Safety would need to offer a free online course on the topic of handgun safety.

Age Restriction

Under the new bill, only individuals aged 21 years or older are permitted to carry a handgun in public.

Abbott’s Official Stance

The Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott was outspoken about his views on the bill and was quoted as saying that Texas must be a Second Amendment sanctuary state. At the time key Republicans also backed Abbott’s stance and were firm on their belief that the federal government should not pass new gun control laws that would restrict Texans’ constitutional right to bear arms.

Abbott however, wasn’t the only influential politician to lend his support to the bill. Texas Senate Floor Representative, Matt Schaefer campaigned for the bill’s success by claiming that it would allow law-abiding Texas citizens to carry a small handgun for self-defense. Schaefer gave the example of a woman carrying a handgun in a dark carpark, in order to protect herself as a reason why the second amendment should be upheld.

Locations Where Firearms Are Prohibited

Some of the key locations where individuals are prohibited from carrying handguns currently include schools, college campuses, courts, race tracks, hospitals, correctional facilities, nursing homes, and amusement parks. Firearms are also prohibited from high school, college, and professional sports events and bars. It’s worth noting that the state currently classifies any establishment which obtains 51% or more of its profit from the sale of alcoholic beverages as a bar. Lastly, civilians aren’t allowed to carry handguns past the security section of any airport in the state of Texas. Any individual who carries a handgun into prohibited locations and events will be subjected to harsh penalties. This is the state’s way of dissuading individuals from ignoring the stipulations of the bill.

Private Businesses Right To Ban Handguns

While under the new bill, individuals may now freely carry handguns in public without a permit, under the bill, all private businesses still have the right to refuse entry to individuals carrying handguns under Penal Code Chapter 30.05. However, businesses that opt to prohibit their customers from carrying firearms on their premises must place a clearly visible sign stating their rules, at the entrance to their premises. Such as a 30.06 sign or a 30.07 sign.

If a business fails to put up visible signs about their gun regulations, any individuals who are caught carrying firearms onto their premises are unlikely to face fines and will be let off with a warning. As by law Texas businesses which wish to prohibit firearms, are responsible for ensuring that the proper signage is put in place. If a business does place adequate signage prohibiting firearms, any individual who is caught ignoring the signage may be hit with a Class C misdemeanor and a fine of $200.

Furthermore, while a $200 fine and a misdemeanor are the maximum penalties that individuals will face if they agree to vacate the premises as soon as possible just in case of an individual refuses to leave the premises straight away, they are liable for more serious penalties. For this reason, individuals who carry a firearm into a business on accident should agree to pay a $200 fine and to leave as soon as possible, to avoid further trouble.

Exceptions

Not all individuals will be able to carry a visible or concealed gun in publicly permitted locations as a result of the bill. For instance, individuals who have been charged with specific misdemeanors in the past five years such as assault which has caused injury, and disorderly conduct with a firearm are explicitly prohibited from carrying a handgun in public.

Such individuals are only permitted to carry a handgun in their home and car. In order to deter such individuals, who may pose a significant threat to the general public, from ignoring the restrictions imposed against them, any individual who is banned from carrying a handgun due to a recent demeanor will face serious penalties if they are caught by law enforcement.

The final bill also featured an amendment to the original house bill from the senate that significantly increased the criminal penalties which can be handed out to family violence offenders and felons with previous convictions who illegally carry handguns in public.

Notable Provisions

The Right Of Law Enforcement To Disarm Individuals In Dangerous Situations

While under the new bill, individuals have the right to carry handguns in public, the bill ensured to protect the rights of law enforcement officers to disarm potentially dangerous individuals. However, under the provision a law enforcement officer must only disarm an individual carrying a handgun in legal public areas if they believe that their own safety or the safety of others is at risk. Officers are not allowed to disarm an individual, due to their physical appearance.

Individuals Can Not Be Detained Simply For Carrying A Handgun In A Public Area

In order for a law enforcement officer to legally detain a suspicious individual, they must have sufficient evidence to detain the individual in question. Currently, an individual simply carrying a handgun in public, is not deemed a strong enough reason for a law enforcement officer to detain them.

In fact, one iteration of the house bill actually went a step further and had an amendment clause that stated that law enforcement officers could not detain a person for simply carrying a firearm. This amendment was named the Dutton Amendment, while it was omitted from the final version of the bill, current case law still says that law enforcement officers are barred from detaining individuals simply for simply carrying a handgun. So, from a legal standpoint, there was no reason for the Dutton Amendment to be included in the final iteration of house bill 1927.

Opposition To The Bill

The bill was highly controversial and had to go through several amendments and while the Governor and most Texan Republicans openly backed the bill, there were a large number of prominent Democrats and state lawmakers who were openly critical of the bill. A group of Democrats and lawmakers from El Paso, which suffered horrific massacres in 2019, quickly denounced the bill which they believed could lead to future massacres in the state of Texas.

A large proportion of the general public were also opposed to relaxing gun laws and in a poll which was jointly run by the University of Texas and the Texas Tribune, more than 50% of the survey’s respondents were opposed to the bill being passed. This shows that the State of Texas is still quite split when it comes to gun control laws. As there are proud gun owners who are passionate about their right to bear arms and to protect themselves and their family members as well as gun control lobbyists who believe that allowing a large number of individuals to bear arms, will result in a greater number of shootings each year.

In Conclusion

While the bill was met with plenty of opposition and had to go through many changes before it was accepted and signed by the Governor of Texas Gregg Abbott, the bill will become law from the 1st of September, 2021. As a result, law-abiding Texas citizens over the age of 21, will be legally permitted to carry a handgun for personal protection in public, without a gun permit.

Contact The Medlin Law Firm

To learn more about how to organize a solid defense against criminal charges, contact our office today. We offer services for clients throughout Texas, including Fort Worth, Dallas, Weatherford, Arlington, North Richland Hills, Grapevine, Flower Mound, Haltom City, Grand Prairie, South Lake, Keller, Aledo, Irving, Bedford & Euless.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

n this article, you can discover:

  • Whether a toxicologist can challenge the accuracy of breath and blood tests in a DWI case.
  • How toxicologists can be questioned during cross-examination in court.
  • The effects of medication on breath and blood test results.

Can A Toxicologist Challenge The Accuracy Of A Breath Test Or Blood Result In A DWI Case?

Absolutely. In some cases, the government needs to present the testimony of a toxicologist to make the blood or breath test admissible. However, during cross-examination, the toxicologist can be challenged regarding the conduct of the test and whether proper procedures were followed. Mistakes in the test itself, as well as errors in interpretation and how the test relates to the concentration at the time of driving, can be subjects of the examination. 

Additionally, independent toxicologists can be called to testify for the defense, highlighting potential flaws in the test’s conduction and arguing for its inadmissibility. Their testimony can question the reliability of the results and challenge the notion that the person was intoxicated at the time of driving.

Can A Toxicologist Determine Whether Medication Or Other Factors May Have Contributed To A False BAC Reading In A DWI Case?

Certainly. While breath test results should not be affected by medications, there may be exceptional circumstances where this can happen. The toxicologist can testify or be cross-examined about such possibilities.

In the case of blood tests, the toxicologist can speculate whether medications might have contributed to the appearance of intoxication. 

The blood test may also reveal values for specific drugs or medications, which the toxicologist can discuss in terms of their potential impact. Cross-examination can explore the effects of the medication or drug levels on the person’s impairment at the time of driving. 

It’s important to note that the breakdown of drugs into metabolites can indicate whether the drug was taken at therapeutic levels over an extended period, potentially rendering it non-intoxicating. This aspect can be questioned during cross-examination.

How Can A Toxicologist Work With Your Defense Attorney To Challenge The Prosecution’s Case In A DWI Trial?

The toxicologist can assist the defense by examining the blood test comprehensively, including all substances tested for. They can testify about studies or lack thereof, showing whether particular levels of drugs cause impairment or intoxication. 

Additionally, the toxicologist can analyze the levels of metabolites to determine if the drug was consumed much earlier, possibly days before, and has broken down into non-intoxicating substances or reached such low levels that they would not cause impairment. 

Can The Prosecution Also Call A Toxicologist To Testify In A DWI Case?

How Can You Prepare For Cross-Examination By The Prosecution?

Yes, the prosecution can call a toxicologist, and in most cases, they must do so to make their breath or blood test admissible in court. During cross-examination, our attorneys can challenge the toxicologist’s testimony regarding the conduction of the blood or breath test. 

Supporting documentation and records obtained through subpoena can reveal improper procedures, malfunctioning machines, or inaccurate test results, casting doubt on the reliability and accuracy of the test in the specific case. By thoroughly examining the records, our DWI attorneys can demonstrate that the test may not be reliable, potentially leading to the test’s inadmissibility in court and challenging the notion that our client was intoxicated at the time of driving.

For more information on the Role Of A Toxicologist In A DWI Case In Texas, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling today.

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

What Experts Can My Attorney Call On To Help Defend DUI Charges?

When facing DUI charges, it is important to understand the role of experts in your defense. These experts include specialists in blood testing, breath testing, as well as the expertise of your attorney. Our attorneys possess extensive knowledge, training, and experience in investigating both breath and blood tests, allowing them to identify potential mistakes and errors.

Breath testing, which relies on outdated respiratory science from the 1950s, can be challenged with the help of experts. While we consult with specialists in breath test cases, our attorneys themselves have a deep understanding of the flawed science behind these tests. This allows us to expose the inaccuracies and variations in breath test results, demonstrating their unreliability. Mistakes in the administration of the tests can also render them invalid or inadmissible.

In the case of blood testing, although the science is more advanced, errors can still occur. Our attorneys are well versed in the scientific principles and procedures involved in blood testing. By thoroughly examining the records associated with a blood test, we can uncover potential mistakes, improper conduct, or even instances where the test results belong to someone else. We have the expertise to challenge blood test results effectively, even in cases with high blood alcohol concentrations.

While calling upon external experts as witnesses is an option, our Texas DWI/DUI attorneys possess the knowledge and skills to challenge blood and breath test cases. We have successfully defended numerous blood test cases, achieving favorable outcomes even with results as high as 0.33. Our expertise enables us to provide a robust defense against DUI charges.

What Is The Role Of A Toxicologist In A DWI Case?

In a DWI case, a toxicologist plays a critical role. They are called as witnesses to support the admissibility of blood or breath test results in court. Their responsibility is to demonstrate that the tests were conducted using recognized scientific principles and proper procedures, resulting in legally admissible scores. The toxicologist’s testimony is crucial in establishing possible intoxication in a client.

However, during cross-examination, the toxicologist can be questioned about potential mistakes or inconsistencies in the blood or breath tests. By skillfully challenging their testimony, we can cast doubt on the reliability or admissibility of the test results. Additionally, the toxicologist can be questioned regarding the relationship between the test result and the time of driving.

For instance, if a breath or blood test is conducted sometime after the arrest, we can question the toxicologist about whether the test result accurately reflects the blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving. Through cross-examination, we can demonstrate that the alcohol concentration at the time of driving was well below the legal limit. Alternatively, we can explore scenarios where the test results are excessively high, raising doubts about their believability.

Overall, the toxicologist’s role involves assisting in the admissibility of the test results as evidence, interpreting the results, and testifying about the proper scientific procedures followed during the tests.

For more information on the Role Of Experts In Defending Against DUI Charges, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling today.

 

Gary Medlin
Pin on Pinterest

In this article, you can discover:

● The concept of pretrial resolutions in DWI cases.

● Factors considered during the negotiation of a plea deal in a DWI case.

● Potential consequences of accepting a plea deal or settlement in a DWI case.

What Is A Pretrial Resolution In A DWI Case?

A pretrial resolution in a DWI case refers to resolving the allegation without a trial. It involves reaching an agreement or plea bargain before the actual court proceedings. The resolution can take various forms, such as negotiating a dismissal of the DWI charge or reducing it to a lesser offense, like obstruction of a highway. These resolutions can have positive effects on a person’s driving record and may ultimately be expunged. The pretrial resolution aims to reach an agreement before going through a jury trial.

What Factors Are Considered When Negotiating A Plea Deal To Settle In A DWI Case?

Several factors come into play when negotiating a plea deal in a DWI case. Defense attorneys often identify legal reasons to challenge the case, such as the legality of the arrest, the validity of the stop or detention, and the admissibility of breath or blood tests.

Factual issues related to proving intoxication or the reliability of witnesses are also taken into account. These factors help demonstrate to the prosecutor that their case may not be strong and could lead to the dismissal or reduction of the charges, potentially resulting in a non-DWI lesser offense that may be expunged from the record.

What Are Some Of The Potential Consequences Of Accepting A Plea Deal Or Settlement In A DWI Case?

Accepting a plea deal or settlement in a DWI case can have various consequences. A guilty conviction can impact a person’s driving record, driver’s license, and employment opportunities. It may lead to the loss of a professional license required for certain occupations. Consequences may include…

● Fines,

● Probation,

● Mandatory alcohol education programs,

● Victim impact panels, or

● Drug and alcohol counseling.

The severity of consequences can vary, ranging from case dismissal to high fines and potential jail time. The outcome of the case and the resulting consequences depend on how it is resolved, whether through conviction, deferred adjudication, or acquittal.

How Can A Defense Attorney Negotiate A Favorable Plea Deal Or Settlement In A DWI Case?

Defense attorneys can negotiate favorable plea deals or settlements by highlighting weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case. They may challenge…

● The legality of the arrest,

● The administration and interpretation of breath or blood tests, and

● The reliability of witnesses.

Demonstrating a track record of successfully trying and winning DWI cases can also enhance negotiation outcomes. Prosecutors are more likely to agree to favorable results when they know the defense attorney has a reputation for taking cases to trial and winning. The attorney’s talent, name, and reputation contribute to achieving more favorable resolutions.

What Is The Role Of A Prosecutor In Negotiating A Plea Deal Or Settlement In A DWI Case?

The role of the prosecutor in negotiating a plea deal or settlement is to represent the government and present a case that proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They assess the evidence and evaluate its legal and factual sufficiency to secure a conviction. However, prosecutors also consider the strength of their case and potential legal or factual hurdles they may face.

In situations where they perceive weaknesses or obstacles, they may choose to dismiss the case or negotiate a favorable resolution. The prosecutor’s role involves determining the best course of action, which can include reducing charges or agreeing to a lesser offense that may be expunged.

What Are Some Of The Potential Consequences Of Going To Trial In A DWI Case, And How Does It Compare To A Plea Deal Or Settlement?

Going to trial in a DWI case can lead to different outcomes and consequences. If the defense has a good chance of winning, the consequence can be an acquittal, allowing for immediate expungement of all arrest records and restoring the individual’s clean record. However, being found guilty after trial may not necessarily result in worse consequences than a negotiated plea deal.

Each case is evaluated to determine the likelihood of success at trial and whether the potential outcome would be more favorable than a negotiated resolution. It’s a careful balancing process to recommend the best approach for the case, weighing the benefits of going to trial against the potential risks.

For more information on Pretrial Resolution In A DWI Case In Texas, an initial consultation is your best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling today.