Missouri DWI Information & News Blog

MADD is model for anti-texting while driving group

2010-02-06T19:07:00.000-06:00

St. Louis, MO

Over and over, the comparison is made to a battle that started 30 years ago with the death of a 13-year-old California girl.

The loss of Cari Lightner, who was run down by a drunk driver, served as a catalyst for change by spawning Mothers Against Drunk Driving, one of the best known nonprofit advocacy groups in the nation's history.

For those wanting to take cell phones out of the hands of drivers, MADD provides both inspiration and a road map for how to use the power of public opinion, political pressure and heart-wrenching stories of lost mothers, sons and daughters to force change.

"We're just borrowing their game plan. Law by law, they got it done," said Jennifer Smith, founder of fledgling FocusDriven, a Texas-based nonprofit that wants to reshape how society treats cell phones.

Already, a nationwide movement is underway to regulate their use in cars. Seven states ban handheld phones, while 19 others, including Illinois, ban all text messaging. Another nine states, including Missouri, ban texting for younger drivers — though it appears Missouri could expand the ban to all drivers this year.

Legislatures across the nation are debating dozens of new laws. And the federal government, which recently banned texting for all commercial truck and bus drivers, is making noise about tying highway funding to texting bans.

"People think they can drive safely while using a cell phone, but they can't," U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a news conference last week. "We take this texting while driving as an epidemic."

Opponents of distracted driving are facing obstacles similar to those encountered by drunk-driving opponents back in the 1980s. Chief among them is the fact that many people don't see a problem with using a cell phone, or even texting, while driving.

This, despite numerous studies, including one in 2005 by researchers at the University of Utah, showing cell phone users' reaction times are on par with those of drunk drivers. For many, it comes down to the simple issue of personal freedom and not wanting to be told what to do.

Even in areas where texting or using a handheld phone is illegal, penalties are often relatively light. Along with education and public awareness campaigns, stiffer penalties is an area of focus for safety advocates such as Douglas Horn, a lawyer from Independence, Mo., who argues that cell phone violators should face the same consequences as drunk drivers.

"If you take away their driving privileges and you make some examples, you are going to get people's attention," Horn said.

Often, punishments can vary widely, even in deadly traffic accidents where cell phones are a contributing factor. Consider a pair of fatal accidents that occurred in the St. Louis area in 2008.

The first, in July, was the highly publicized Highway 40 incident in which a truck driver plowed through a line of cars, killing three people and injuring 15 others. According to police records, driver Jeffrey Knight, 49, of Muscle Shoals, Ala., said he was reaching for his cell phone when he realized the cars ahead had stopped. Knight was charged with three counts of involuntary manslaughter, felonies punishable by up to four years in prison each.

The second occurred in Arnold in August, when a pickup driver veered out of his lane and struck and killed a motorcyclist coming the opposite direction. According to police reports, driver Michael Oldani, 20, of Arnold, said he was answering his cell phone just before the accident occurred. And although Arnold police recommended manslaughter charges, prosecutors opted for a lesser charge of careless and imprudent driving, a misdemeanor punishable by a year in prison and a $1,000 fine.

Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney Forrest Wegge would not discuss Oldani's case while it is pending. But he said manslaughter charges in general require the prosecution to prove criminal negligence.

"A lot of the time, it's a judgment call on the prosecutor's part," Wegge said.

It's one of the areas where distracted driving opponents want changes. They say it's reminiscent of the days before MADD, when drunk driving was more or less ignored by society and a legal system that often handed out slaps on the wrist for violators.

"It was a joke on late-night TV. It was perfectly acceptable," said Laura Dean-Mooney, national president of MADD.

That was until Candace Lightner's daughter was killed while walking to a church carnival. The fiery Lightner unleashed a grass-roots campaign — fueled by tearful stories of lost loved ones — that spread rapidly across the country. The organization, which has hundreds of chapters across the nation and raises millions of dollars each year, is often looked upon as a model for effecting change.

Lightner and an army of volunteers attacked the issue at the local, state and national levels, pushing for increasingly strict laws and penalties for those who broke them. When they started, there were 30,000 drunk-driving deaths each year in the United States. The number was down to fewer than 12,000 in 2008.

Scoring a similar victory in the distracted driving battle won't be easy, suggests MADD founder Lightner, now a real estate agent in Florida. She empathizes with the distracted driving movement but sees obstacles that didn't exist when she started MADD.

The economy was better. There weren't nearly as many nonprofits competing for donations. And most importantly, no one had ever seen an organization like it before.

"I don't think I would be as successful today as I was then," Lightner said. "In the 1980s, we were unique. We were one of a kind."

Distracted driving opponents also face a relative dearth of statistics showing the size of the problem. According to government estimates, nearly 6,000 people die each year as result of distracted driving, with officials citing cell phones as a major source of those distractions. But the data are far from complete, with many states — until recently, Illinois was among them — doing little to track cell phone-related accidents.

Still, FocusDriven, which launched last month and has just five regional chapters, does have one of the key ingredients of MADD's success: the victims.

More specifically, they have the willingness to put names, faces and stories to the thousands of people killed each year in cell phone-related accidents. They've set up victim memorials on social network Facebook and photo-sharing site Flickr, where survivors post images and tell stories. They plan to testify and speak on the issue whenever possible.

And in today's world of instant communication, that's easier than ever.

"That's one advantage we have. They didn't have social networking," said founder Smith, whose mother was killed by a distracted driver in Oklahoma City in September 2008 while driving to get cat food.

But social networks and the Internet have their drawbacks — as anyone who has tried to reach the masses can attest.

"It's easy to create an authentic message and spread it to some people," said Matt Carlson, an assistant professor of communications at St. Louis University. "The problem is, how do you reach everybody? It's not easy."

St. Louis, MO DWI Criminal Defense Attorney

Cardinal David Freese DWI court appearance postponed

2010-02-05T01:20:00.000-06:00

Maryland Heights, MO

A court appearance scheduled for Cardinals third baseman David Freese has been postponed. A self described "clean and sober" Freese was due in traffic court in Maryland Heights Thursday for his December drunk driving arrest. Freese is already on probation for a 2007 arrest in California. At last month's Cardinals Winter Warm-Up, the Lafayette High grad apologized and said he got sober thanks to baseball's employee assistance program.

Maryland Heights DWI Defense Attorney

Missouri chief justice calls for more focus on treatment of DWI offenders

2010-02-05T01:12:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

Missouri's chief justice told lawmakers on Wednesday that putting more nonviolent offenders in prison is not the answer to the state's drunk driving problems.

"Perhaps the biggest waste of resources in all of state government is the over-incarceration of nonviolent offenders and our mishandling of drug and alcohol offenders. It is costing us billions of dollars and it is not making a dent in crime," Justice William Ray Price told the House of Representatives in the annual "state of the judiciary" speech. "We may have been tough on crime, but we have not been smart on crime."

Price's speech came hours before a major DWI bill received its first hearing. The bill, proposed by state Rep. Bryan Stevenson, R-Webb City, would require all courts in the state to enter DWI convictions into a statewide clearinghouse, making it easier for multiple drunken driving offenders to be prosecuted. The bill would also increase penalties for some multiple offenders and reduce the sentences of those who seek treatment while in prison.

Stevenson stressed that final provision in opening the hearing, with Price in attendance.

"This is directly in line with what Justice Price was talking about this morning," Stevenson said.

The issue of making various changes to the state's DWI laws promises to be one of the more high-profile debates of the 2010 legislative session.

In a series of stories in 2009, the Post-Dispatch found that persistent drunken drivers were routinely avoiding felony charges; plea deals were allowing many repeat offenders to avoid convictions; and drivers who refused blood-alcohol tests were not missing a day of driving.

Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, called for reforms in the series' wake, and in December he proposed legislation that would crack down on the most severely intoxicated drivers and enforce better tracking of prior offenses.

Tracking of the offenses — and deciding which cases get moved from municipal courts to circuit courts — received much of the attention in Wednesday afternoon's hearing.

Trying to enforce Missouri's existing tougher laws on repeat offenders is difficult, said St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch, because some municipalities don't keep good enough records on first-time DWI offenders. Without those records, McCulloch said, it's impossible to impose tough sentences on the most dangerous offenders.

McCulloch testified that he was in favor of most of the provisions in Stevenson's bill, but he warned that moving too many cases to circuit courts, without increasing funding for the courts, would be problematic.

That point was part of Price's morning speech, as he said that the state's funding for drug courts has lagged behind. Those courts focus less on punishment and more on treating the offender's underlying drug or alcohol problem, an approach that Price said should be applied in similar DWI courts.

"The goal is always to have safer highways, not spend millions of dollars on putting people in prison if they don't need to be there," Price said in an interview. "Our laws are as strict and harsh as any in the nation. But we need to make them more practical."

McCulloch agreed with Price's approach, suggesting that it's better to have a first-time offender back on the road with a restricted license than to take away his driving privileges only to have him back in court for driving without a license.

Stevenson said he supports more funding for DWI courts, though the provision isn't in the bill he presented Wednesday.

Other DWI bills have been presented in the Senate by Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, and Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Lee's Summit.

At a hearing earlier this week, Bartle said he hoped the Legislature would pass a bill "free of gubernatorial politics."

"If we just end up with a DWI bill that just puts more people behind bars, we will have done nothing to reduce drunk driving," he said.

\
Missouri DWI Criminal Defense Attorneys

DWI law reform bills discussed by senate comittees

2010-02-03T23:01:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

The Senate Judiciary committee read several bills Monday night, including one that would close some of the loopholes in the state's DWI laws.

Several lawmakers have sponsored legislation in the 2010 pertaining to restructuring the state's DWI laws. But Tuesday night, the Senate Judiciary committee's discussion focused on one in particular - Senator Jolie Justus's (D-Jackson County) bill. Her bill calls for drunken drivers to spend 48 hours in jail, unless they opt to go to a treatment center. The bill also allows separate court dockets for drunken driving offenses.

Committee chairman, Senator Matt Bartle (R-Jackson County) said he does support DWI reform, but he does have some concerns with some of the current proposals. He said he would like the committee to draft an omnibus DUI bill that is "free from gubernatorial proposals." Bartle is referencing Governor Nixon's bill, which he proposed after a St. Louis Post Dispatch investigation revealed that in 2008 fewer than half of the 9,000 people arrested for alcohol or drug related driving were never convicted. Bartle also said there needs to be a bill that not only helps put more offenders behind bars, but also do something that would stop people from drinking and driving in the first place.

DWI Attorney for Driving While Intoxicated Criminal Defense

New DWI bill would toughen Missouri's drunken driving laws

2010-02-03T22:57:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

Drunken driving laws need to be more severe, a Republican representative said Wednesday.

An extensive bill sponsored by Rep. Bryan Stevenson, R-Joplin, would increase the suspension period for drivers with a blood-alcohol level of 0.15 or higher.

An offender with no alcohol-related charges in the preceding five years would have his or her driver's license suspended for 90 days, followed by 275 days of restricted driving privileges. Current law stipulates a 30-day suspension and 60 days of restricted driving.

Repeat offenders and drivers refusing to submit to an alcohol or drug test would face steeper consequences.

Stevenson is also pushing for a more comprehensive, statewide DWI tracking system to punish repeat offenders.

The current DWI tracking system is flawed, Stevenson said. A few municipalities don't report offenses to the state, ultimately causing repeat offenders to be charged and sentenced as first-time offenders.

He said the bill would allow the governor to "withhold any state funds to a law enforcement agency or prosecuting or circuit attorney's office that fails to submit information."

"This is a very severe problem that certain municipalities are not reporting the information," Stevenson said. "We have to bring firm pressure to ensure that this information is reported."

St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch agreed with Stevenson, saying, "If nothing else comes out of it but we get the recording system straightened out, that will get a lot of the issues resolved."

McCulloch, who spoke on behalf of the Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, said there was a problem with both the "quantity and quality" of reports. He agreed that there should be "sanctions considered against those who don't comply."

McCulloch said he did not support any tracking system in particular, "as long as we have a place where that information is available."

Rep. James Morris, D-St. Louis, questioned the motive behind a municipality that did not report. McCulloch attributed the failure to "laziness" and "incompetence."

"It is not that difficult to report," McCulloch said. "There's minimal information to get in."

The bill is before the House Crime Prevention Committee.

First Offense DWI Criminal Defense Attorney

Columbia man arrest for drunk driving has 10 previous DWI convictions

2010-02-01T22:24:00.000-06:00

Columbia, MO

A 53-year-old Columbia man was arrested Saturday on suspicion of his 11th driving while intoxicated infraction.

Boone County sheriff’s deputies arrested the man near Route B and Oakland Church Road about 5:15 p.m., according to a sheriff’s department news release. Deputies said the suspect was operating a vehicle with a revoked license, and after sobriety tests, he was arrested on suspicion of DWI.

The man's driving record shows he has received 10 previous DWI convictions and 12 convictions for driving with a revoked license, the sheriff’s department said. He is in the Boone County Jail on $14,500 bond.

Although online court records do not include all 10 of the man’s previous DWI convictions, his drinking problems date back at least 24 years. He was charged as a persistent offender on Oct. 23, 1985, and was issued a five-year sentence, which was suspended in exchange for probation.

To be charged as a persistent offender, the man would have pleaded guilty or been found guilty of two or more DWIs within 10 years before his October 1985 arrest or pleaded guilty or have been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault or assault of a law enforcement officer along with one previous DWI conviction.

He also was convicted of DWI in 1990, 1991, 1993, 1995 and 2001, according to online court documents. In December 2008, the man filed a petition for a hearing in Boone County Circuit Court concerning another DWI arrest not noted in court documents. He claimed he did not refuse to take a chemical test and therefore was not arrested legally. He later requested the charge be dismissed.

The man also has been convicted of forgery and passing bad checks and has been sentenced to several years in prison, much of which has been served on probation. In 1995 and 2001, he was ordered to substance abuse treatment programs.

Felony DWI Criminal Defense Attorney - Columbia, MO

Drunk driving patrols part of Boone County Sheriff's proactive DWI enforcement plan

2010-01-28T19:50:00.000-06:00

Columbia, MO

Four drivers were arrested for driving while intoxicated during a DWI saturation and sobriety checkpoint conducted by the Boone County Sheriff's Department last weekend.

The saturation began Friday evening in a small portion of northwest Columbia and at a larger portion in rural Boone County north of Columbia, a sheriff's department news release stated. Ten deputies were focused on identifying and removing impaired drivers from the streets.

The same deputies from the saturation then set up and conducted a sobriety checkpoint at around 1 a.m. Saturday at the intersection of Brown School and Providence roads in Columbia, the news release stated. The checkpoint lasted about one hour.

"Checkpoints are late evening activities," sheriff's department Major Tom Reddin said. "Generally in large part because that's when the bars get out."

During the saturation, 18 traffic stops were conducted before the deputies moved onto the second half of their operation at the sobriety checkpoints, the release stated.

Reddin said the locations of checkpoints are usually decided depending on where there has been a history of impaired driving in a certain area.

"We also have to ask if the location will be able to handle the checkpoint safely," Reddin said.

About 50 vehicles passed through the checkpoint during its operation, the news release stated. Four people were arrested for driving while intoxicated and there were six other arrests made for other violations, the news release stated. One citation was issued for running a stop sign and 22 verbal warnings were issued for "other various violations."

Reddin said he was pleased by the effectiveness of the saturation as well as the checkpoint and hopes to keep the practice going.

"We've been very proactive in apprehending impaired drivers," Reddin said. "We've been fortunate in the past years to restructure our traffic department through resource allocation and increase the traffic unit."

The sheriff's department received a grant from the Missouri Department of Transportation Division of Highway Safety that paid for the saturation and checkpoint, the release stated.

Columbia, MO DWI Defense Lawyers

Boone County sobriety checkpoint nets 4 DWI arrests

2010-01-24T12:41:00.000-06:00

Columbia, MO

A sobriety checkpoint conducted by the Boone County Sheriff’s Department produced 10 arrests out of the 50 vehicles checked, Sgt. Brian Leer said yesterday in a news release.

Deputies conducted the checkpoint from about 1 to 2 a.m. yesterday at the intersection of Brown School Road and Providence Road.

The arrests included the following: four people on suspicion of driving while intoxicated; two people on suspicion of driving with suspended or revoked driver’s licenses; one person on suspicion of possession of 35 grams or less of marijuana; one person on suspicion of possession of drug paraphernalia; one person on suspicion of a liquor law violation; and one person on suspicion of outstanding warrants.

A citation also was issued for a stop-sign violation, Leer said, and the department gave 22 verbal warnings.

The checkpoint was funded through a grant from the Missouri Department of Transportation’s Division of Highway Safety

Columbia, MO Drunk Driving Defense Attorney

Speeding ticket cameras in St. Ann new to Missouri

2010-01-24T00:13:00.000-06:00

St. Ann, MO

St. Louis speeders are about to become unwitting film stars.

The region's first speed camera is monitoring a St. Ann school zone, and at least one other St. Louis County municipality is preparing to use cameras to catch speeders, too.

St. Ann won't begin issuing speeding tickets using its Ashby Road camera until Feb. 1, but the camera has already drawn some critics at a time when those seemingly ubiquitous red light cameras already had drivers feeling overexposed.

Critics say it's more about money than safety.

While new to Missouri, speed cameras have been deployed in several other states — with varying results. This month, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger suggested retrofitting red light cameras with speed sensors to nab speeders — and generate millions of dollars for the cash-strapped state.

But St. Ann Police Chief Bob Schrader said the pole-mounted camera in front of Hoech Middle School wasn't about generating money. It's about the safety of schoolkids.

"It's unfortunate that the only way to change driver behavior is to fine them," Schrader said. "But I have known people who could care less about the points. They don't want to pay a big fine. That tells me that if you hit them for $100 in their pocketbook, they're going to think about it."

He said red light cameras in his city had reduced violations at those intersections. St. Ann has a contract with American Traffic Solutions for those cameras.

A portable version of the speed camera has been stationed in front of the school to record the speed of passing motorists. On Friday, St. Ann began sending out the first batch of warning letters to 58 motorists caught so far by the camera.

Schrader said the camera didn't use radar or laser to record speeds. Instead, the

system uses video footage to calculate how quickly a car covers a certain distance. The camera will cover all four lanes of traffic in front of the middle school.

B&W Sensors LLC, the St. Louis-area company that was awarded the contract, provided only written information about its photo enforcement system.

"The system automatically detects, photographs and identifies those greatly exceeding the posted speed limit, and the police department completes a violation notice to the registered owners of those vehicles by mail," B&W said in a prepared statement.

Schrader said St. Ann police would review the information provided by B&W before the $100 tickets are mailed to motorists. Unlike a typical speeding ticket, those generated by photo enforcement won't result in any points against a motorist's driving record, Schrader said.

"It's a lot like a parking ticket," he said. "If it's the vehicle, you know, basically you're held responsible for who you let drive the vehicle."

The speed enforcement system was authorized by ordinance in November. State law neither allows nor prohibits the use of such a system, Schrader said. St. Ann will receive $60 from each ticket.

"They say this isn't about the money," said attorney Chet Pleban. "But when you put it under the microscope, what you find is if a police officer catches you going through a red light or in this case catches you speeding in a school zone, and you plead guilty to that, you are assessed two points on your license.

"If a camera catches you doing the same act, you plead guilty and pay $100 and no points are assessed. Why is it both these people don't get the same points?"

Pleban filed an unsuccessful federal challenge to Arnold's red light cameras.

Schrader said the cameras would free up police officers to patrol neighborhoods. But he doesn't see it taking anyone's job, Schrader said. There's still plenty for his 38 sworn officers to do.

St. Ann police officers aren't unionized, he said. St. Louis police Sgt. Kevin Ahlbrand, president of the Missouri Fraternal Order of Police, said it had no opinion on camera enforcement.

"Cameras never complain. They never get sick," Schrader said. "They may break. And we have to have B&W come out and fix it. But that's the only problem."

The camera will capture an image of the car and license plate but not of the driver.

Missouri state Sen. Jim Lembke, R-St. Louis, said the absence of a driver's photograph raised constitutional questions about due process. Lembke, too, is troubled by how the tickets are handled.

"My understanding is they are using the same kind of ordinance to treat it like a parking ticket," said Lembke, who has introduced legislation taking on red light cameras. "It is a moving violation. They are speeding down the road. It is not a parking ticket. People should be upset that it is being finessed so they are allowed to issue these tickets."

In Arizona, where the state Department of Public Safety rolled out photo speed limit enforcement on major highways in October 2008, the cameras provide images of the front and rear of each car. Images of the front of the car are used to identify the driver. The second shot captures the license plate, said Lt. Jeff King of the Department of Public Safety.

In its first year, more than 890,000 violations were recorded of motorists traveling 11 mph or more above the speed limit — the threshold speed, according to a new audit of the program.

The photo enforcement program generated roughly $37 million in its first year — far less revenue than the $90 million projected, the audit found.

Many photos had to be rejected because the license plate, driver or vehicle couldn't be seen clearly. There also are fewer cameras than originally proposed. And motorists know to slow down in enforcement zones.

The audit found that many simply ignored the tickets.

Nationally, 12 states specifically authorize speed cameras, and most of those are in conjunction with red light cameras, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Illinois uses photo speed enforcement in construction zones when workers are present.

Charlack, a city of 1,431, also is considering speed cameras, said Mayor Jim Beekman. About a month ago, the city took a one-hour survey of speeds on Interstate 170 and found that 117 vehicles traveled 15 mph or more above the posted 60 mph speed limit.

"We're evaluating it," Beekman said. "One of the biggest reasons we were concerned with it is officer safety. Our police car has to go full bore to catch the speeder, and weaving in and out of traffic is ... counterproductive."

The cameras are being considered for Lackland Road and Midland Boulevard.

The Missouri Department of Transportation would have to authorize the use of photo enforcement equipment on I-170 or any other highway, said MoDOT traffic engineer Mike Curtit.

Meanwhile Schrader wouldn't say how fast motorists would have to travel before they're given a ticket, but it would have to be in excess of the 20 mph daytime limit or 30 mph at night — and not just a smidge over, either.

He said signs would be posted warning people of the photo enforcement.

"You know, people are people, and people make mistakes," Schrader said. "Little mistakes I can live with. But flagrant mistakes I can't."

Cardinal David Freese on DWI arrest in Maryland Heights, takes "full responsibility" for the "mistake"

2010-01-17T21:31:00.000-06:00

Maryland Heights, MO

It had been 35 days since Cardinals third baseman David Freese had taken his last drink _ not that he had been counting or anything.

Freese had been arrested in the early-morning hours of Dec. 14 in Maryland Heights on suspicion of driving while intoxicated. It later had been revealed that Freese had had some previous history in this regard and Freese and the club immediately got him enrolled in the Employee Assistance Program. On Sunday at the Cardinals’ Winter Warm-Up, Freese said he had taken the steps necessary to straighten out his personal life and prepare him for spring training.

“It’s been an embarrassing and humiliating experience for me and my family and our organization,” said Freese. “They have high demands for you as a person on and off the field. You try to learn from it, which I have.

Freese said he had met for two hours with general manager John Mozeliak the day after the incident.

“I’ve had some time to think about it,” said the 26-year-old Freese, who missed much of last season with an ankle injury. “I take full responsibility for the mistake I’ve made and I’ve definitely taken care of the off-field situation. Obviously, I had a little bump in the road. I’m just trying to move on and get ready for the season.

“Signing Matt Hollday kind of opened up the door for me a little bit at third base and I think the organization is happy where I am and where I’m headed as a person.

“As of right now, I’m not drinking.”

St. Louis, MO DWI Lawyer

Missouri Supreme Court Opinion - State v. Severe - DWI Persistent Offender Law

2010-01-13T23:32:00.000-06:00

Summary of SC89948, State of Missouri v. Vanessa J. Severe

Appeal from the Gentry County circuit court, Judge Roger M. Prokes

Argued and submitted Oct. 27, 2009; opinion issued Jan. 12, 2010

Attorneys: Severe was represented by Nancy A. McKerrow of the public defender’s office in Columbia, (573) 882-9855; and the state was represented by Richard A. Starnes of the attorney general’s office in Jefferson City, (573) 751-3321.
This summary is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the communications counsel for the convenience of the reader. It neither has been reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court and should not be quoted or cited.

Overview: A woman convicted of driving while intoxicated and found to be a persistent DWI offender based on two previous offenses – including one municipal offense resulting in a suspended imposition of sentence – appeals her sentence. In a 5-2 decision written by Judge Michael A. Wolff, the Supreme Court of Missouri reverses the sentence and remands (sends back) the case to the trial court. This Court’s decision in State v. Turner, 245 S.W.3d 826 (Mo. banc 2008) (holding that a prior municipal DWI offense that resulted in a suspended imposition of sentence could not be used to enhance a subsequent offense for driving while intoxicated), requires that the woman be re-sentenced. To be a persistent offender, a person must have two previous offenses sufficient to meet statutory requirements. On remand, the state may not present additional evidence of any other previous offense it alleges support the woman’s status as a persistent offender. Allowing the state to do so would violate the timing requirement of the applicable statute.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Patricia Breckenridge argues the state presented proper and timely evidence that was sufficient to establish the woman as a persistent offender until this Court decided Turner. Noting that this case involves not insufficiency of the evidence but rather a trial court’s erroneous application of the law regarding the standard of proof for persistent DWI offender status, she would permit the state, on remand, to present additional evidence to meet the standard of proof under Turner.

Facts: In January 2007, a vehicle Vanessa Severe was driving in Gentry County flipped into a ditch. Passersby who helped get Severe and her passenger out of the vehicle reported smelling beer and seeing cans of beer in the vehicle. At the hospital, a highway patrol trooper noticed Severe smelled strongly of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes and had slurred speech, and she performed poorly on field sobriety tests he had her take. The state charged Severe as a persistent DWI offender with one count of driving while intoxicated. Before submitting the case to the jury, the trial court found Severe to be a prior and persistent DWI offender based on the state’s submission of two prior alcohol-related offenses: a 1999 municipal violation to which Severe pleaded guilty and received a suspended imposition of sentence and a misdemeanor to which Severe pleaded guilty and
received a $350 fine plus payment of all court costs. Following an October 2007 trial, the jury found Severe guilty of driving while intoxicated, and the court sentenced her as a persistent DWI offender to three years in prison. She appeals.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Court en banc holds: While Severe’s appeal was pending, this Court decided State v. Turner, 245 S.W.3d 826 (Mo. banc 2008), holding that a prior municipal DWI offense that resulted in a suspended imposition of sentence could not be used to enhance a subsequent offense for driving while intoxicated. Accordingly, Turner requires that Severe’s sentence be reversed and the case be remanded for re-sentencing. On remand to the trial court, the state may not offer evidence of other alcohol-related offenses that it did not present before the original trial. Turner did not make new law; it merely clarified the language of an existing statute, section 577.023, RSMo. At the time of Severe’s trial, section 577.023.16 permitted a guilty plea followed by a suspended imposition of sentence in state court to be treated as a “prior conviction” but did not say the same would apply for a similar municipal division case. As such, the state was on notice by the plain language of the statute that Severe’s guilty plea and suspended imposition of sentence in the municipal division could be treated as a prior conviction. The plain language of section 558.021.2, RSMo, requires that prior or persistent offender status be pleaded and proven before the case is submitted to the jury. Pursuant to section 577.023.1(4)(a), RSMo Supp. 2007, a persistent offender is a person who has pleaded guilty to or been found guilty of two or more intoxication-related offenses. Here, if the state had notice of an additional conviction that would have been treated as a prior conviction under section 558.021.2, it should have offered that prior conviction to the trial court before the case was submitted to the jury. As this Court held in State v. Emery, 95 S.W.3d 98, 101 (Mo. banc 2003), and re-emphasized in State v. Teer, 275 S.W.3d 258, 262 (Mo. banc 2009), allowing the state to present additional evidence, on remand, of alleged prior or persistent offender status would violate the timing requirement of section 558.012.2. The language of this statute does not provide an exception where evidence sufficient to prove the prior offenses at the time of trial but that later was found to be insufficient, and this Court cannot make such an exception here.

Dissenting opinion by Judge Breckenridge: The author would hold that, both when Severe was charged and when she was tried, a guilty plea to a municipal DWI charge with a suspended imposition of sentence was an “intoxication-related offense” for purposes of section 577.023. Because this case involves not insufficiency of the evidence but rather the erroneous judicial application of the law regarding the standard of proof for persistent DWI offender

New Missouri DWI law would toughen penalties for drunken driving

2010-01-13T22:59:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

Legislation being touted by Gov. Jay Nixon could cause some big changes concerning how driving-while-intoxicated charges are handled by police and the courts.

Along with judges, prosecutors and anti-drunken-driving advocates, Mr. Nixon has proposed changes to DWI laws following problems with some court systems in the state.

The proposals include: requiring repeat DWI offenders, drivers with a blood-alcohol level of 0.15 or more, and drivers who refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test, to be charged in a state court; cracking down on first-time offenders with a BAC of 0.15 or more; and expanding ignition interlock system use.

While Buchanan County has had its share of drunken drivers, a Buchanan County prosecutor's report showed 525 DWI charges out of 527 arrests for the crime in 2008.

*
The urgent problems, Buchanan County Prosecutor Dwight Scroggins said, stem from the eastern side of the state.

Currently, drivers can refuse a Breathalyzer test if they are pulled over for driving under the influence, though it results in an automatic one-year license suspension. The case then is taken to two courts: criminal court for the DWI, and civil court for the suspension. Due to the separation, a decision in one usually doesn't affect the other.

"What happens, and what was going on in St. Louis, was that ... on the criminal side, in order to get them to plead guilty on the DWI ... some of the prosecutors were agreeing to let them win on the civil side," Mr. Scroggins said. "So they let them win on the one-year suspension."

Due to the complexities of multiple municipal courts, bigger metropolitan areas don't utilize the same streamlined system as that found in Buchanan County, where the courts are connected to the same database as the sheriff's department and Missouri State Highway Patrol.

"If you have a connected state court system like St. Joe, where they do things the way they're supposed to do them, it goes into that same system," Mr. Scroggins said. "You go to St. Louis County, where there's 94 different municipalities, and some follow it, some don't."

The communication breakdown helped drivers convicted of several DWIs in multiple courts avoid receiving potentially harsher sentences, Mr. Scroggins said. "As far as they know, it's a first offense," he said. "So they never go to jail, they never go to state court."

Legislation is being written by Rep. Bryan Stevenson. R-Joplin, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, with help from Rep. Rachel Bringer, D-Palmyra, a former prosecutor, with hopes of filling in the cracks of faulty court systems. If passed, one of the biggest changes to affect Buchanan County would be having any person who blows more than a 0.15 BAC on a Breathalyzer test go to state court. Currently in St. Joseph, the minimum for state court on a first offense is 0.20.

"All the research will tell you that (more than) a 0.13 to 0.15, when people are driving, you're dealing in all likelihood with a repeat drunk driver, whether they have any prior arrests or convictions or not," Mr. Scroggins said.

Other legislation includes a more thorough alcohol assessment for first-time offenders, expansion of the ignition interlock system in vehicles, and making it a crime to refuse a Breathalyzer test.

Mr. Scroggins said the new approaches would help safeguard people.

"It's clear to us that, in order to (keep drunken drivers off the road), we're going to have fix these other things," he said.

St. Louis, MO DWI Attorney

Missouri SR-22 Filing Proof of Financial Responsibility

Missouri governor calls for stricter DWI penalties

2010-01-13T22:54:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

Intent on making Missouri roadways a safer place, one of the major objectives of the 2010 regular session is to come up with reforms to the state’s drunken driving laws.

Gov. Jay Nixon has proposed sweeping changes that would crack down on the worst offenders of Missouri’s driving-while-intoxicated law and enforce better tracking of prior offenses.

“There are simply too many gaps in our current system,” Nixon said. “We must take bold and decisive steps to reform the way DWI cases are dealt with.”

Plans call for taking thousands of drunken driving cases out of municipal courts and having them heard in state courts.

The governor and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are looking to make changes as recent national drunken driving statistics show that more than half of alcohol-impaired drivers involved in fatal crashes blew in excess of 0.15.

Missouri law makes it illegal to drive with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 percent.

Many states have rules in place targeting “hard core” drunken drivers, and Missouri officials want to add the state to the list.

Nixon’s initiative calls for making it a crime to refuse a blood-alcohol test. Those drivers, repeat DWI offenders, and anyone who registers in excess of 0.15 percent would have to go before a state court and be subject to steeper penalties.

Ignition interlocks would be required for anyone who was over 0.15 percent and found to be driving or who refused to submit to a roadside test.

Currently, refusing a blood-alcohol test can result in one-year suspensions of offenders licenses. But the governor said it is one of the state’s biggest loopholes. He said that many drivers go to municipal court where they are successful in pleading down their charges and avoiding both a DWI charge and suspension of their license.

Also on the agenda is a requirement that local police and courts enter DWI arrest and case information into the Missouri Highway Patrol’s tracking system, which is now voluntary. Failure to comply could result in withheld grant money.

DWI Lawyers - St. Louis, MO

Missouri SR-22 Insurance Quotes

DWI Saturation Scheduled In Saline County, announces Missouri State Highway Patrol

2010-01-11T23:15:00.000-06:00

Saline County

Troop A: DWI Saturation Scheduled In Saline County

MISSOURI STATE HIGHWAY PATROL
a division of the
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Troop A, 504 SE Blue Parkway, Lee's Summit, MO 64063

NEWS RELEASE

For further information please contact: Sgt. Collin Stosberg
(816) 622-0800 ext. 259
A011002
January 8, 20009

EMPHASIS: DWI Saturation In Saline County

Captain Robert L. Powell, commanding officer of Troop A, Lee’s Summit, announces that sometime during the month of January, a driving while intoxicated saturation will be conducted in Saline County.

The saturation is part of the continuing effort by the Missouri State Highway Patrol to remove intoxicated drivers from our highways. Members of the Missouri State Highway Patrol will concentrate their efforts on highways which have been found to have a higher number of alcohol-related crashes and enforcement contacts.

Captain Powell stated, “Do not let your life or someone else’s life be ruined by an alcohol-related crash or arrest. If you are going to drink, have a plan. Make sure that plan includes a designated driver.”

Missouri DWI Criminal Defense Attorneys
Missouri SR-22 Insurance Rate Quotes

Drunk driving arrests in Missouri on New Year's Eve down from last year

2010-01-06T19:11:00.000-06:00

Jefferson City, MO

The numbers are in and deaths over the New Year’s weekend are way down from last year.

The Missouri Highway Patrol said four people died in traffic accidents over the 2010 New Year’s holiday weekend compared to 24 last year.

The highway patrol said the decline could be because more people stayed home because of bad weather but also credit stepped-up patrols.

DWI arrests were also down statewide. There were 113 people arrested this weekend for driving while intoxicated which is slightly from 131 the year before.

Missouri Drunk Driving Lawyer
Missouri SR-22 Insurance Rate Quote

Portable breathalyzer test (PBT's) not accurate, say Missouri State Troopers

2010-01-01T19:19:00.000-06:00

Springfield, MO

f you're headed out for some New Year's Eve festivities, first a word from area police. Despite the popularity of those portable breath tests, state troopers say leave them at home.

The portable breathalyzers are marketed as a way to keep you safe while celebrating, but police say they provide a false sense of security that could land you behind bars... or worse.

Each new year's brings the threat of a celebration turning into a tragedy. Police try to prevent it by strictly enforcing DWI laws.
But more and more partiers are taking the law into their own hands with the help of these personal breath alcohol tests. Sold for about $10 each, they claim to detect blood alcohol levels above .02 with 99% accuracy. "The positive side is a least people are aware that there's a problem," said Lt. Terry Moore with the MO Highway Patrol Troop D.

But he says the negatives far outweigh positives. First, he's concerned about the accuracy of the device. "If you're buying $10 instrument that's supposed to do same as $3 or 400 instrument then you get $10 results."

But far more worrisome, Lt. Moore says, is that people who buy these are most likely intending to drink and drive. "People using these are going to events where they know they're gonna have a lot of drinks and they're concerned about achieving certain level rather than being impaired."

Not to mention that you're asking someone who could potentially be impaired to properly use the instrument and have the good judgment to not get behind the wheel should the test be positive. Lt. Moore says there's a much better way to prevent this. "It's not okay to be impaired and drive and only way to assure this is to not drink."

One thing to keep in mind, police say, is that when you leave a bar, your alcohol level may not have peaked. It keeps rising as the alcohol moves from your stomach into your bloodstream.

Drunk Driving Criminal Defense Lawyers - Springfield, MO

St. Louis ER doctor's opinion: DUI collisions are no accident

2009-12-31T21:30:00.000-06:00

St. Louis, MO

The author, Dr. Randy Jotte, is an emergency physician at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, an associate professor of emergency medicine at Washington University and past president of the Missouri College of Emergency Physicians.

There are certain car collisions that emergency room doctors and nurses no longer call "accidents," because most are predictable based on the circumstances. Such was the case on a Sunday afternoon in May.

"Betty" was a 70-year-old woman who was driving to a pharmacy on Watson Road when she was struck by a car that had run a red light. Her chest injuries were severe. "Janet" was a 50-year-old woman who broadsided Betty while racing from the scene of a more minor accident she had caused moments earlier. Janet was drunk. While she did not have a serious injury from the first collision, she was distraught. On probation for prior DWIs, she feared this time she might face serious consequences.

This "non-accident" was predictable from two perspectives. First, Janet's decision to get behind the wheel of a car while drunk was likely to lead to a bad end. Second, our court system — particularly in St. Louis County — allows those with obvious signs of alcohol abuse to repeatedly avoid those consequences that have the potential to both keep our roads safe and perhaps, provide a path to sobriety.

Over the last three months, Post-Dispatch reporters Joe Mahr and Jeremy Kohler exposed the flaws of a system that time after time puts drunk drivers back on our roads: prosecutors who fail to charge repeat offenders with DWI felonies, judges who routinely grant plea bargains that conceal signs of alcohol abuse and a fragmented court system.

We can do much better: first, by establishing a DWI Court in St. Louis County and, second, by instituting a 24/7 Sobriety Program similar to that in North Dakota. These changes would make our roads safer, help those addicted to alcohol and potentially save taxpayers money.

A DWI Court in St. Louis County would centralize the entire process and keep more chronic offenders off the roads. Such a court would maintain a single database of DWI offenders, circumventing the challenge of collecting and analyzing records from more than 100 regional courtrooms.

A sophisticated understanding of addiction applied by focused prosecutors and a specialized judiciary could change the behavior of those who drink and drive. An analysis of DWI Courts in Michigan showed offenders were 19 times less likely to become a repeat offender for another DWI than a DWI offender in a traditional court.

The natural partner to a DWI Court is a monitoring system similar to North Dakota's 24/7 Sobriety Program. Established as a pilot program in 2008 and expanded statewide in 2009, its 24/7 Sobriety Program provides alternatives to license suspension and incarceration while enforcing sobriety.

Those charged with a second or subsequent DWI are offered the opportunity to enroll in the 24/7 Sobriety Program as a condition of bond. Participants are allowed to continue driving with a provisional license under two conditions.

First, they must agree to abstain from alcohol. Second, they agree to twice daily breathalyzer testing seven days a week at a designated site until program completion. Under certain circumstances, as in rural settings or with work schedules that interfere with scheduled breathalyzer testing, alcohol monitoring occurs remotely by electronic bracelets capable of taking continuous alcohol readings from the skin and then reporting results to a central computer.

Participants pay the fees for testing: $2 per day for the breathalyzer or $5 per day for daily electronic bracelet monitoring. If the breathalyzer registers any alcohol, the participant immediately is taken into custody. Warrants can be issued for the arrest of those who fail to appear. North Dakota summarizes its Sobriety Program in simple terms: "If you skip or fail, you go to jail."

The most remarkable feature of the program is its end result: more than 98 percent of those enrolled in the 24/7 Sobriety Program successfully complete it. They continue to work and participate in family life while remaining sober. Roads are safer. And fewer repeat arrests, smaller jail populations and reduced court time results in savings to the taxpayer.

Janet, and ultimately Betty, probably would have benefited had a DWI Court and a 24/7 Sobriety Program already been in place in St. Louis County. Such was not the situation then, nor is it today.

Betty died on the operating room table during emergency surgery. Her case was particularly memorable as that Sunday in May happened to be Mother's Day, and we had to inform Betty's daughter what had happened.

Janet was arrested and would be facing a charge of manslaughter. The opportunity to change their stories has passed. However, by establishing a DWI Court and 24/7 Sobriety Program at this point we can avert similar tragedies on our roads in the days ahead.

DWI Criminal Defense Lawyers - St. Louis, MO

Columbia's new DWI unit prepared for New Year's Eve

2009-12-30T19:35:00.000-06:00

Columbia, MO

For the two officers assigned to the new DWI enforcement unit, New Year's Eve is just another day at the office.

Officers Chris Hessenflow and Patrick Corcoran will spend New Year's Eve at work, and three patrol officers will also be assigned to DWI enforcement. The DWI unit shifts differ from patrol unit shifts because they are not dispatched on calls.

“Their primary responsibility is traffic enforcement with an emphasis on finding impaired drivers,” Sgt. Shelly Jones, the unit's supervisor, said.

The full-time unit was implemented after the City Council accepted the Full Time DWI Unit grant from the Missouri Division of Highway Safety. The officers were assigned to the unit on Dec. 14.

Hessenflow and Corcoran were reassigned from the patrol division of the Police Department to the new unit. Jones said no additional training was required because all patrol officers are certified to conduct field sobriety tests and to use the Intoxilyzer, the machine used to determine blood alcohol content.

The officers work on a rotating schedule with shifts that run from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m., Jones said.

The blood alcohol content limit in Missouri is .08. This provides confirmation that a driver is intoxicated but is not the only thing that can be used to make a DWI arrest.

“I have to have a very solid case without that number,” said Public Information Officer Jessie Haden of the Columbia Police Department. "Sometimes it can be obvious an individual is intoxicated if the conversations or field test happen in front of that camera."

Patrol vehicles are equipped with cameras and audio recorders that document such stops.

Missouri’s implied consent law allows driving privileges to be taken away for a year if somebody refuses to take the Breathalyzer.

Columbia, MO DWI Attorney | Criminal Defense Lawyer

St. Charles County testing new ankle bracelets that monitor alcohol use and house arrest

2009-12-30T04:37:00.000-06:00

St. Charles, MO

Courts have used ankle bracelets to monitor offenders' alcohol use for a few years now, but the devices are adding a new feature — house arrest.

Judges in St. Charles County are testing a new type of bracelet that combines alcohol monitoring and house arrest for drug court participants. Often people who are in drug court, a specialized program that emphasizes alcohol and drug treatment, are sentenced to such monitoring instead of jail time.

The new device, called TAD for "transdermal alcohol detector," takes continuous readings from an offender's skin. It uploads the data to a device in the offender's home. It also tracks whether the offender is home in time for a house arrest curfew.

Associate Circuit Judge Philip Ohlms, who presides over St. Charles County's drug court, said the county is about three weeks into a trial of the new device. "We haven't had any problems so far," he said.

BI Inc., a Colorado-based company, manufactures the TAD. Monica Hook, marketing and communications director, said the company has been testing it for the past year, and it recently became available for use in limited numbers. Missouri courts are some of the first to use it.
bullet Get the latest St. Charles crime news in our Crime Beat blog

Community Services of Missouri, which is based in St. Peters, offers the TAD monitoring system to local courts.

Several courts in the St. Louis area have been using another device called SCRAM, or "secure, continuous, remote alcohol monitor," which is offered through Eastern Missouri Alternative Sentencing Services.

Alcohol Monitoring Systems Inc., another Colorado-based company, makes the SCRAM device, which has been available since 2003.

Kathleen Brown, a spokeswoman for Alcohol Monitoring Systems, said her company plans to debut SCRAMx, which will add house arrest, sometime in January or February.

"It really is kind of a trend to combine the two," she said.

Meanwhile, some judges hope to see other changes.

Circuit Judge Dan Pelikan of St. Charles County said one drawback to current systems is the requirement that an offender has a land telephone line.

"With cell phones, more and more people are getting rid of those as an unnecessary expense," he said.

Hook said BI has technology that allows for GPS or cellular tracking that works with the base station in an offender's home.

Brown said using cellular technology has not been cost-effective because alcohol monitoring requires a large amount of data to be uploaded.

St. Charles DWI Attorney - Criminal Defense Lawyer

Missouri man's DWI arrest at least his 14th

2009-12-29T23:31:00.000-06:00

St. Louis, MO

A suburban St. Louis man has been charged with felony DWI after what was at least his 14th drunken driving arrest.

Patrick O'Brien of Fenton has been convicted of DWI or a related charge at least 10 times since 1986, records show.

In October, the 42-year-old O'Brien was driving in the St. Louis area when an officer spotted him weaving. Police said O'Brien failed sobriety tests and admitting drinking, but would not submit to a blood-alcohol test.

O'Brien was being held by Missouri Department of Corrections on a probation violation.

Earlier this month, Gov. Jay Nixon proposed legislation to overhaul the way Missouri handles drunken-driving case

Repeated DWI Offender Criminal Defense Lawyer

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Opinion/Editorial: Missouri must amend open container laws as part of DUI changes

2009-12-25T22:35:00.000-06:00

St. Louis, MO

Missouri must amend open container laws as part of DUI changes

It is commendable that Kathy Casso, a vice president for Anheuser-Busch, applauds Gov. Jay Nixon and the state Legislature for responding to the Post-Dispatch articles highlighting our state's very sad drunk-driving record.

But it seems surprising that from none of these sources has mention been made that Missouri is one of only seven states that has lacks a comprehensive ban on open containers in moving vehicles. (The other six states are Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Mississippi, Virginia and West Virginia.)

Might our state Legislature be ready now to defy the lobby that has prevented Missouri from complying with the Federal TEA-21 legislation (Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century)? Has our non-compliance not only cost us in lives lost unnecessarily, but also in loss of federal funds that are shared with complying states? Are these questions on which an investigative Post-Dispatch reporter could enlighten us?

Our citizens should be aware of how our legislators have been influenced by an industry lobby to the detriment of the citizens.

E. Wolf — Ladue

DWI arrests in Boone County up, costs jump

2009-12-25T22:01:00.000-06:00

Columbia, MO - Boone County

It is a message that is repeated every year, yet in Boone County the numbers of drivers arrested on charges of Driving While Intoxicated continues to increase at an alarming rate. But it is not only the danger of drunk driving that should make holiday party-goers look for a designated driver, it is also the increasing cost of getting a DWI.

The Boone County Sheriff's Department has led the way with pulling over and arresting impaired drivers. According to Sgt. Brian Leer, the implementation of a Traffic Enforcement Unit in 2005 has paid dividends in highway safety. Keeping impaired drivers off the road is that unit's key task.

The average number of DWI arrests by the Boone County Sheriff's Department over a five-year period was just over 47 per year between 1996 and 2000. After the Traffic Enforcement Unit became a part of the department, the number jumped to 195 arrests in 2006, then settled at 132 in 2007 and 147 in 2008 - numbers well ahead of those in the late 1990s. But in the first nine months of 2009 they had made 270 DWI arrests.

"We had a 3-man unit that has increased to four this year as a part of a state grant from MoDot," Sgt. Leer said. "We have some guys in that unit who are dedicated to identifying impaired drivers and getting them off the road. They are motivated to keeping the roadways safe."

Leer says that 2009 has been a very productive year for his unit due to their use of DWI checkpoints and saturations.

"It's not just in Boone County, but around the state," Leer said. "We want to get the numbers of crashes and deaths down - and they are down. Part of that is due to our enforcement."

Leer also credits MoDot, highway engineers and other factors, but he is pleased to point to the fact that alcohol related crash deaths in Missouri and across the country are down, leaving little doubt that the increase in DWI arrests is having a positive impact.

The national DUI fatality rates have dropped 7% from 2007-2008, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced last week. LaHood cited "aggressive drunk driving crackdowns by law enforcement groups for the drop," in a press release.

Leer says that while enforcing DWI laws in a college town means there will be more young drinkers with DWI arrests, his unit has arrested offenders young and old.

"It really runs across the board," Leer said. Obviously when college is in session we have more young people receiving DWIs, but recently we have seen more young people with higher blood-alcohol-content (BAC). We have had several recently arrested with a BAC over .20 and at that level you are looking at being three-times the legal limit of alcohol in your body."

Beyond the dangers of driving while impaired, the financial risk of a DWI is significant.

While local insurance agents all assured the Journal that auto insurance rates would increase by as much as 35% for a number of years after a DWI charge. However, it is difficult for insurance agents to provide specific claims as the amount of increase is predicated by the driver's past driving record and claims, age and even credit rating.

But the increased cost of insurance is only a starting point.

Ashland attorney Jeff Kays provided a sample list of probable costs, charges and fines when you are pulled over and charged with your first DWI.

"It's very expensive, time-consuming and leaves a long trail on your record," Kays said. "Mostly, though, driving under the influence is very dangerous."

Kays said on a first DWI a driver will have attorney fees of $500 to $1,000. The driver's car is towed and impounded for $75 and a $500 bond will be necessary to get the accused out of jail. The bond is returned, Kays said, but the bondsman will be paid $50.

A first DWI is a Class B misdemeanor is punishable with up to six months of jail time and no more than a $500 fine. "Depending upon the jurisdiction, most of the fine will be suspended and a DWI will pay about $250 with a two-year unsupervised probation period with special conditions - no entering establishment that serves alcohol, no occurpying private motor vehicle under the influence and alcohol education programs."

Those conditions are an added expense. The SATOP is an assessment of drinking and drug habits and costs $245. An Offender Education Program costs about $100, but can run as much as $815.

First-time DWI offenders also are required to attend a VIP class where they hear from victims what drinking and driving can do to others' lives. The class costs $35.

Other costs include: Court costs - $118.50; Crime Victim Compensation Fund - $11; Recoupment costs $100-$150 which pays for the costs of a breathalyzer, arrests costs, etc.; SR-22 Insurance form $45 and a license reinstatement fee - $45.

The total cost of working your way through the legal system totals, using Kays' estimate, $1,574.50

But Kays emphasizes the cost goes beyond just money.

"There is the 90-day license suspension and the first 30 days is a hard walk - no driving at all," Kays said. "The next 60 days there is limited driving as the privilege can be issued for going to school, work, treatment and court-ordered classes. The reinstatement fee is $45, and the cost of taking a cab, or bumming rides which irritates family and friends for 30 days is priceless."

Missour Gov. Jay Nixon proposed programs that would support Sgt. Leer's Traffic Unit's efforts.

Gov. Nixon said his proposal had bipartisan support, essential for the upcoming legislative session with a Republican-controlled Legislature.

Boone County - Columbia, MO Drunk Driving Criminal Defense Lawyers

Court documents: DWI arrest is not the first for Cardinals' David Freese

2009-12-21T21:07:00.000-06:00

St. Louis, MO

David Freese's DWI arrest last week is not the first time he's been charged with drinking and driving.

Ballwin Police arrested Freese for drunk driving in 2002 in Maryland Heights. Court documents from the St. Louis County Court show David R. Freese was arrested on November 30, 2002 for driving while intoxicated.

Ballwin Police said Freese was stopped after failing to drive in a single lane. Freese was 20 years old at the time, not old enough to legally drink in Missouri. Following the arrest, the state revoked Freese's driver's license.

A document on file in the St. Louis County Circuit Court says, "The petitioner was notified that his privilege to operate a motor vehicle would be suspended/revoked due to the petitioner's excessive blood alcohol content as determined by a chemical analysis test."

Lawyers for Freese filed a court case against the Missouri Department of Revenue in 2003, challenging the administrative revocation of his driver's license. The court denied his request to reinstate that license.

A judge said the order of the Director of Revenue suspending/revoking the petitioner's driving privileges is sustained. It is standard procedure for the state to revoke a driver's license following an arrest for driving while intoxicated.

Another DWI arrest came 7 years later for Freese, on December 12th of this year.

Maryland Heights Police say Freese had a blood alcohol level of nearly three times the legal limit when he was stopped for a traffic violation at the intersection of Lindbergh and Page around 2:40 a.m.

Freese has a February court date on the 2009 case. The 2002 DWI case is no longer on his record. The state statue requires his record be cleared after the mandatory revocation period.

Newschannel Five has repeatedly requested additional information from Ballwin Police regarding the matter.

We also asked the attorney representing Freese's on this December's arrest, for comment regarding the 2002 DWI. He has refused comment.

Drunk Driving Criminal Defense Lawyers - St. Louis, MO

St. Charles County DWI saturation patrol nets 24 arrests over weekend

2009-12-21T21:00:00.000-06:00

St. Charles, MO

St. Charles County Sheriff’s Lt. Craig McGuire called today with the results of this weekend’s DWI saturation patrol.

McGuire said 20 officers from the sheriff’s department, the Missouri Highway Patrol and the St. Peters, St. Charles, O’Fallon and Cottleville police departments worked overtime shifts patrolling the eastern half of St. Charles County between 10 p.m. Saturday and 3 a.m. Sunday. The patrol area included O’Fallon and Dardenne Prairie, McGuire said.

Officers made 24 arrests, McGuire said. Of those:

* 20 were for driving while intoxicated.
* Three were for people wanted on outstanding warrants.
* One was for minor in possession of alcohol.

Also, McGuire said, officers wrote 27 tickets for other driving violations.

Sheriff’s Cpl. Travis Jones said officers did not seek warrants to draw blood, although three motorists refused blood-alcohol tests.

Jones also updated the cost for the operation. He said his original estimate of $1,600 was only for the sheriff’s department. He said the estimated overtime cost for all officers was closer to $2,600, which will be covered by federal grant money.

Jones said the ages of people arrested — except for the minor in possession charge — ranged from 23 to 48.

St. Charles DWI Defense Lawyers

David Freese blood alcohol level was .232 percents, says Maryland Heights Police Report

2009-12-17T16:24:00.000-06:00

Maryland Heights, MO

We now have the official police report from the early morning DWI arrest of Cardinals player David Freese. The report shows his blood alcohol content was almost three times over the legal limit when he was arrested early Saturday morning in Maryland Heights. The police report obtained through the Freedom Of Information Act shows Freese took a breathalizer test. His blood alcohol content was .232. Almost three times over the legal limit of .08.

The report goes on to say Freese was swerving while driving on Page Avenue around 2:00 a.m. The officer pulled the Cardinals player over. Freese smelled like alcohol. The officer asked for his insurance card. Freese gave him his health insurance card.

Freese said he'd had seven beers to drink and was on his way from downtown to his home near Lafayette High School.

But Freese was going east on Page. When the officer asked him if he knew where he was, Freese said he thought he was at I-270 and Highway 40.

Freese was cooperative. He was arrested and jailed. A friend picked him up about an hour later.

The 26 year old's agent says Freese is remorseful and eager to put the incident behind him.

Freese is a top candidate to be the Cardinals third baseman this year.

Maryland Heights police say Freese was not treated any differently because he's a baseball player. The officer on patrol was on a special DUI enforcement detail paid for by a special state grant.

St. Louis, MO DWI Lawyers - Maryland Heights DWI Attorneys