Archive | Ohio DUI / OVI Defense

What Does an Officer Have to See (Bloodshot Eyes, Smell of Alcohol, Etc.) To Create Reasonable Suspicion to Ask a Driver to Perform Field Sobriety Tests?

July 10, 2017  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on What Does an Officer Have to See (Bloodshot Eyes, Smell of Alcohol, Etc.) To Create Reasonable Suspicion to Ask a Driver to Perform Field Sobriety Tests?

WHAT MUST AN OFFICER SEE BEFORE ASKING A DRIVER TO COMPLETE FIELD SOBRIETY TESTS? The Ohio Court of Appeals has held that a police officer must observe certain factors before he or she may ask a driver to complete field sobriety tests. The Court also found that a minor traffic violation, coupled with a moderate […]

Share Button
Read More

Ohio Supreme Court: OVI Defendant May Challenge the Reliability & Operation of Specific Breathalyzer Machine Results

October 06, 2014  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on Ohio Supreme Court: OVI Defendant May Challenge the Reliability & Operation of Specific Breathalyzer Machine Results

Recently, the Ohio Supreme Court decided a groundbreaking case in the area of OVI law.  In Cincinnati v. Ilg, Slip Opinion No. 2014-Ohio-4258,  the Ohio Supreme Court clarified that a defendant does have the right to challenge “the accuracy, competence, admissibility, relevance, authenticity, or credibility of specific test results or whether the specific machine used […]

Share Button
Read More

OVI Dismissed: Stop By Police Unconstitutional Where Officer Pulled Car Over Simply Because He Observed Someone Yelling in the Car

August 16, 2014  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on OVI Dismissed: Stop By Police Unconstitutional Where Officer Pulled Car Over Simply Because He Observed Someone Yelling in the Car

Police generally need either a warrant or “reasonable suspicion” that a crime or traffic violation has occurred to pull over a vehicle.  In this case, an officer said he heard someone yelling in a car and the driver “gesturing wildly.” He pulled him over and ultimately charged him with OVI.   The driver challenged the […]

Share Button
Read More

OVI Dismissed Based on Mistake of Law by Officer: Failure to Stop “At” Stop Sign Includes Stopping “On” the Stop Line

July 17, 2014  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on OVI Dismissed Based on Mistake of Law by Officer: Failure to Stop “At” Stop Sign Includes Stopping “On” the Stop Line

In every OVI case, it is critical to examine the reason for the initial stop.  The police are required to have “reasonable, articulable suspicion” that you have committed a traffic stop or committed some other crime in order to pull you over.  If they think you committed a traffic violation – but were wrong on […]

Share Button
Read More

OVI Dismissed for Failure to Establish Marked Lanes Violation

July 13, 2014  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on OVI Dismissed for Failure to Establish Marked Lanes Violation

One of the most common traffic stops we see in OVI cases is marked lanes.   Marked lanes generally means weaving or otherwise moving over the center yellow line.  In this case, the officer pulled the driver over for “straddling the yellow line” while changing lanes and subsequently arrested him for OVI.   The court […]

Share Button
Read More

Cincinnati Appeals Court Upholds Intoxilyzer 8000 Breathalyzer Machine

December 05, 2013  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on Cincinnati Appeals Court Upholds Intoxilyzer 8000 Breathalyzer Machine

Courts of Appeals throughout Ohio have recently been addressing challenges to one of the breathalyzer machines used by local authorities.  Challenges to the Intoxilyzer 8000 have been a mixed bag, with some courts upholding the machine as reliable and other courts finding it to be unreliable evidence of intoxication. Most recently, the City of Cincinnati […]

Share Button
Read More

Court Finds Intoxilyzer 8000 Breath Alcohol Machine Unreliable Evidence

August 22, 2013  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on Court Finds Intoxilyzer 8000 Breath Alcohol Machine Unreliable Evidence

An Ohio municipal court has recently decided a critical case in the war on the Intoxilyzer 8000 in Ohio.  In State v. Chelsea Lancaster, decided just last week, the Court found the Intoxilyzer 8000 breath alcohol machine to be unreliable scientific evidence — and struck evidence of the breath tests as a result. The case involved […]

Share Button
Read More

Ohio Court of Appeals Overturns DUI Conviction for Failure to Establish that Driver’s Impairment was Caused by Drugs

August 07, 2013  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on Ohio Court of Appeals Overturns DUI Conviction for Failure to Establish that Driver’s Impairment was Caused by Drugs

In this case, the Defendant was found guilty of two counts of driving under the influence (“DUI”) and one count of impeding the flow of traffic. At trial, the officer testified that he and his partner observed the defendant’s vehicle stopped in the middle of the road. As the officer approached the car, he noticed […]

Share Button
Read More

Effect of an Officer’s Denial of the Right to Call a Lawyer Before Taking a Breath Test

June 18, 2013  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on Effect of an Officer’s Denial of the Right to Call a Lawyer Before Taking a Breath Test

The Licking County Court of Appeals (Fifth District of Ohio) recently decided an OVI case of note — State v. Parks, 2013-Ohio-2492.  The court in this case found that if you are arrested, ask for a lawyer before you take the breath test, are denied the opportunity to call a lawyer, and subsequently refuse the […]

Share Button
Read More

U.S. Supreme Court Says Warrantless Cheek Swab for DNA of Arrestee is Constitutional

June 05, 2013  |   Posted by :   |   Ohio DUI / OVI Defense   |   Comments Off on U.S. Supreme Court Says Warrantless Cheek Swab for DNA of Arrestee is Constitutional

Maryland v. King: Cheek Swab is Constitutional as Part of Police Booking The United States Supreme Court decided Maryland v. King, U.S. Supreme Court No. 12-207, yesterday.  Those who follow criminal law across the country were waiting for this decision — and now that it has arrived, it could impact police booking in every county […]

Share Button
Read More