Thursday, February 11, 2010

New bill to toughen Missouri DWI law heard before MO House committee

Tough new Missouri DWI law bill heard before MO House committee

Jefferson City, MO
A bill that would toughen Missouri's DWI laws received a hearing today (Wednesday) before State House members.

The bill would do several things. Among them: Drivers who refuse to take a blood alcohol test would be charged with a Class A misdemeanor, and have two points added to their driving records.

James Clark with the Missouri Department of Public Safety testified in favor of the bill.

"About one out of every three alcohol influence reports that is received into the Missouri Department of Revenue is a refusal...so basically one time out of three, that driver who's stopped on the side of the road is going to refuse to submit to that breath or blood test," Clark told the House Crime Prevention Committee.

The bill would also require police, prosecutors and judges to submit information on all DWI offenses to the State Highway Patrol's DWI Tracking System (DWITS). And it would require all municipal judges to complete coursework that includes a review of the state's intoxication-related offenses.

The bill is sponsored by State Representative Bryan Stevenson (R, Webb City).

"I think the solution is to make sure that reporting happens the way it is happening, and to remove the repeat offenders, third time and above, to Circuit Court, and any second-time offenses that include injury or death," Stevenson said.

No one testified in opposition to the bill. The House Crime Prevention Committee will vote on it at a later date.

Missouri DWI Law Firm

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

New DWI bill would toughen Missouri's drunken driving laws

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

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

New Missouri DWI law would toughen penalties for drunken driving

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

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Missouri governor calls for stricter DWI penalties

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

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Friday, December 25, 2009

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

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

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Gov. Nixon's proposed DWI legislation under fire from St. Louis DWI defense lawyers

St. Louis, MO
Governor Nixon's plans to toughen the state's drunk driving laws is coming under fire from a local defense attorney who represents accused drivers.

Defense Attorney Ed Brown with Brown and Brown says Nixon's plan would be too tough on first-time offenders.

"I think its out of line with reality...your putting a scarlet letter on people" said Brown.

Brown also has big problems with Nixon's call for forced breathalyser tests. He called it a violation of the constitution. "you have the right not to self incriminate" said Brown.

And he says Nixon's plan would overload the state court system with drunk driving cases. Brown does agree with one proposal: tougher penalties for drunk drivers with a .15 or more blood alcohol level.

There is also reaction from the City Prosecutor's office where Pippa Barrett, the Chief Misdemeanor Officer, disagrees that bringing D.W.I. cases to the state level would overwhelm the system.

On the issue of a forced breathalyser test which Defence attorney Brown called unconstitutional, Barrett said "I think they're right in a 5th Amendment sort of arena when your talking about a criminal case. I'm not sure that driving being a privilege that the same rights apply."

Barrett says what she really likes about the Nixon proposal is requiring jurisdictions to register D.W.I. cases to the highway patrol's tracking system...so they can detect repeat offenders.

Some of Governor Nixon's legislative proposals include:

1. Requiring repeat D.W.I. offenders, drivers with a blood-alcohol level of .15 or above, and drivers who refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test to be charged in a state court, as opposed to a municipal court.

2. Create more penalties for offenders with blood-alcohol levels of .15 and above.

3. Making it a crime for any driver to refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test.

4. Expanding the use of ignition-interlock devices.

5. Eliminating the provision under current law that allows D.W.I. offenders to have their records expunged after 10 years without another offense.

6. Requiring all jurisdictions to enter D.W.I. arrest and case information into the Missouri State Highway Patrol's Driving While Intoxicated Tracking System (DWITS).

7. Prohibiting a defendant from withdrawing a guilty plea for D.W.I. when reaching the end of his probation under a suspended imposition of sentence.

The initiatives will be included in legislation that will be sponsored by Rep. Bryan Stevenson (R-Joplin) and co-sponsored by Rep. Rachel Bringer (D-Palmyra).
Missouri DWI Defense Lawyers

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Thursday, December 10, 2009

Changes to Missouri DWI law prosposed by Gov. Nixon

Proposals by Gov. Jay Nixon to change Missouri DWI law:
  • Repeat DWI offenders, drivers with a blood-alcohol level of 0.15 or above and drivers who refuse a blood-alcohol test would be charged in state court rather than municipal court.

  • Refusing a blood-alcohol test would be a crime.

  • Penalties would be increased for offenders with blood-alcohol levels of 0.15 and above. (Under Missouri law, 0.08 is the presumed level of intoxication.)

  • Ignition-interlock devices would be required when the driver’s blood-alcohol level was 0.15 or above or when a driver refused a blood-alcohol test.

  • All jurisdictions would be required to enter DWI arrest and case information into the Missouri Highway Patrol’s DWI tracking system.

  • Defendants would be prohibited from withdrawing a guilty plea for DWI when they reach the end of probation under a suspended imposition of sentence.

  • DWI offenders would no longer be allowed to have their records expunged after 10 years without another offense.

Missouri DWI Lawyers - Criminal Defense Attorneys

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Missouri DWI law reform proposed by Gov. Nixon announced at MADD office in St. Louis

St. Louis, MO
Gov. Jay Nixon on Wednesday proposed sweeping reforms to the state's DWI law that would crack down on the most severely intoxicated drivers and enforce better tracking of prior offenses.

The Democratic governor said his proposal had bipartisan support, which would be essential in the Republican-controlled Legislature.

He laid out his proposal in the Overland office of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, in front of portraits of people killed by drunken drivers. He was flanked by the House sponsor, Rep. Bryan Stevenson, R-Joplin, and co-sponsor Rep. Rachel Bringer, D-Palmyra.

The governor also visited Hannibal and Jackson to discuss the legislation. A bill had not been prefiled Wednesday.


Nixon promised reforms last month after the Post-Dispatch exposed failures by St. Louis area police, prosecutors and judges to punish drunken drivers.

The newspaper 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.

"Today we are presenting comprehensive reforms that will make Missouri safer by strengthening and reinforcing our drunken driving laws," Nixon said Wednesday.

He did not detail how much the reforms would cost or who would pay.
MORE METRO
bullet Video: Nixon proposes stronger DWI laws
bullet Special Report: DWI
bullet Get news, columns, photos and multimedia from the St. Louis area


Some of Nixon's proposals directly addressed failures identified by the Post-Dispatch investigation.

For example, the bill would take thousands of DWI cases out of municipal courts annually. The Post-Dispatch found that few DWI cases in municipal courts in the St. Louis area resulted in convictions.

Under Nixon's plan, all repeat DWI offenders, drivers with a blood-alcohol level of 0.15 or above, and drivers who refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test would be charged in state courts, where the most serious cases are prosecuted.

That would be a sea change in how DWIs are handled locally. The majority of DWI cases in the St. Louis area go through municipal courts.

Slightly more than half of all drivers who were given blood-alcohol tests registered at least 0.15, according to the newspaper's analysis of more than 25,000 DWI arrests.

It was unclear how prepared state courts would be to handle a major influx of cases, or whether municipalities would suffer from a reduction in revenue.

Last month, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert P. McCulloch expressed support for letting municipal courts manage DWI cases for most first- and second-time DWI defendants. Under Nixon's plan, many of those cases would end up on the desks of county prosecutors, where the governor said they would be handled more equitably. McCulloch could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

At least one veteran municipal prosecutor said he thought shifting cases from municipal to state courts was appropriate.

"State courts have more power than we do," said Darold Crotzer, the Clayton prosecutor. "Some of those drivers need to go to jail, and it's difficult for us to send them to jail because the money comes right out of the police budget."

Nixon also called for requiring local police departments and courts to use the Missouri Highway Patrol's DWI tracking system, which is now voluntary.

The Post-Dispatch found that poor record-keeping often prevented local authorities from recognizing when a driver had prior offenses and could be charged with a felony under Missouri's "three strikes" law.

Departments that fail to comply could be penalized by having grant money withheld, similar to sanctions in place for cities that fail to report traffic stop data.

Nixon also proposed making it illegal to refuse a blood-alcohol test. Under current law, drivers who refuse the test face an automatic one-year revocation of their licenses.

That's one of the harshest sanctions in the state law. But the newspaper found that prosecutors often bargain away those suspensions as part of plea deals in criminal cases, letting uncooperative drivers keep their licenses.

Prosecutors said it was a tool to get guilty pleas in cases that were tough to win without test results proving the drivers were drunk.

Nixon's staff said it wasn't decided yet whether a criminal sanction would replace license revocation.

A few criminal defense lawyers scoffed at the idea of criminalizing the refusal to take a breath test. Gary Earlywine, a lawyer who specializes in traffic cases in St. Charles and St. Louis counties, noted that DWI defendants often face other traffic charges, such as careless and imprudent driving.

A charge of refusing to take a breath test "would just be another one you could arrange a settlement on," he said.

Nixon also called for harsher sanctions in cases where drivers refuse a blood-alcohol test or register at least 0.15 percent, including forcing them to get a device that prevents a vehicle from starting if the driver has alcohol in his system. Currently the device is required only for repeat offenders.

The thinking is that the high blood-alcohol content would signal a problem drinker — someone who poses more of a threat than someone who made a one-time mistake of having one too many.

Travis Noble, a local defense lawyer who specializes in DWI cases, said the threshold for harsher penalties seemed arbitrary.
St. Louis, MO DWI Defense Lawyers

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Missouri DWI summit: Gov. Nixon, judges, prsecutors and activists call for MO DWI crackdown

Jefferson City, MO
Persistent drunken drivers would have their cars seized and it would be a crime to refuse to take a DWI breath test if panelists assembled by the governor have their way.

Those were two sanctions that gained traction Wednesday during a DWI summit of 34 police, prosecutors and government officials from across the state. The panel met at the request of Gov. Jay Nixon, who vowed changes to the state's DWI law in response to a Post-Dispatch investigation into ways area police, prosecutors and judges fail to punish drunken drivers.

Citing the newspaper's investigation, Nixon told the panel the status quo was "simply not acceptable" and that the system was letting too many chronic drunken drivers injure and kill innocent people.

"Thinking about the lives we can save should be our guiding principle," he said.

The governor instructed Cabinet members to write a new law based on panelists' suggestions, and find sponsors in the House and Senate. Todd Scott, chief of staff for Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Lee's Summit, said his boss hopes to prefile a bill before the legislative session begins early next year.

A few prosecutors, including St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert P. McCulloch, argued against changes that would carry unintended consequences or create loopholes that lawyers could exploit.

One issue most panel members agreed on was the need to establish an easier way for police and courts to track prior offenses, so that repeat offenders are not treated as first-timers and escape more serious penalties.

Missouri has a so-called three-strikes law, meaning any arrest after two prior convictions is supposed to be treated as a felony. But the newspaper found that about one-third of DWI offenders who qualified for felonies were charged with misdemeanors or not at all. The problem was especially severe in St. Louis County, where it happened about half the time.

Col. James Keathley, superintendent of the Missouri Highway Patrol, advocated expanding the patrol's voluntary DWI tracking system. That would make it easier for an officer to immediately tell when a DWI suspect is facing a felony charge.

If the law changed, the tracking system also would make it easier for police to seize the car and sell it, he said.

State law currently allows cities with 100,000 or more people to create ordinances that would allow taking a felony DWI suspect's car.

Andrea Spillars, deputy director of the Department of Public Safety, who is likely to have a major role in crafting a new law, liked the idea. Since license suspensions don't seem to keep hard-core drunks off the road, perhaps the threat of losing their car would, she said.

Many on the panel derided the lack of teeth to what is supposed to be one of the toughest sanctions against drunken driving in Missouri law — a one-year suspension of license for refusing the blood alcohol test. The Post-Dispatch found that since 2000, area prosecutors have let more than 10,000 drivers keep their licenses despite their refusal to take breath tests.

Drivers who refuse the test can appeal directly to civil court, where a judge automatically allows the person to continue driving until the appeal is heard.

The newspaper found that in about half the cases in a recent 12-month period, prosecutors in the St. Louis area gave up on those license appeals as part of a plea bargain.

Five states — Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rhode Island and Vermont — eliminate the appeal process by making it a crime to refuse the breath test, according to the Century Council, an anti-DWI advocacy group.

Ken Askren, an attorney in Boone County, suggested ending the practice of allowing drunken drivers to avoid a DWI conviction on their record in return for admitting to the charge and getting probation. But McCulloch and other prosecutors said the maneuver, known as a suspended imposition of sentence, has merit.

"It's a mechanism for us to assess the extent of the drinking problem that the person has," McCulloch said.

He also defended the practice of having drunken driving cases go to municipal courts, where the Post-Dispatch investigation found that just one of seven area DWI cases ended in DWI convictions. McCulloch said those cases should count as priors.

He did note that the court systems in St. Louis County's 91 municipalities ranged in quality.

"If they can't put an effective court in place, or police department in place, then they shouldn't exist," he said.

Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyers: DWI Attorneys

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Monday, November 2, 2009

DWI summit called for by Gov. Nixon to include prosecutors, judges, police and MADD


Jefferson City, MO
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon has summoned police, judges, prosecutors and anti-DWI advocates to Jefferson City on Wednesday to discuss ways to better enforce the state’s drunken driving laws.

Nixon spokesman Scott Holste said Nixon plans to have about two dozen people meet in the Truman Building to talk about ways to “close the gaps” in how the state handles DWIs.

Nixon called last month for revamping the state’s DWI laws “to improve a system that’s riddled with loopholes and dark corners.” He spoke in reaction to our stories that have exposed failures to punish drunken drivers.

The first installment found that authorities routinely fail to charge persistent drunken drivers with felonies, as the law allows. The second installment showed how metro St. Louis courts routinely plea-bargain away DWI convictions, even for many repeat offenders.

We published the third installment of our series on Sunday, reporting how prosecutors are ignoring a law that’s supposed to suspend the licenses of people who don’t cooperate with police during their arrest.

The law says those arrested have to provide blood-alcohol samples to police (commonly by breathing into a machine). Those that don’t are supposed to lose their licenses for a year, no matter what the criminal courts do. But they can also file appeals to try to keep their licenses. Prosecutors are supposed to try to win those appeals, but they routinely, purposely lose them as part of plea bargains.

Earlier this afternoon, we asked prosecutors in Jefferson, St. Charles and St. Louis counties if they are considering changes to their policies. A spokesman for St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert P. McCulloch said he’s checking. Prosecutors in the other two counties haven’t returned emails so far.

Missouri DWI Defense Lawyers

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Gov. Nixon calls for statewide DWI reform for Missouri

Jefferson City, MO
Gov. Jay Nixon is working with lawmakers this week to form a plan that will tighten loopholes in the state's current DWI laws.

Nixon's decision to reform the law came after an article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch brought light to people charged with DWI's and never convicted. In 2008 law enforcement arrested more than 9,000 people for alcohol and drug-related driving. Just under 40 percent of those people were actually convicted. Nixon's goal is to hold more accountability for those who are arrested for DWI's.

The issue is hitting home for one Mid-Missouri woman who was involved in an alcohol-related accident in 1996.

"My offender, who injured seven people, giving two of us permanent disabilities, he received 120 days in the Department of Corrections," said Phaedra Olsen. "I received a lifetime sentence in a wheelchair."

The accident paralyzed Olsen, and she says too many offenders get off without proper punishment.

"Enough is enough," she said. "It's time to be there for the families and to be there for those that we can do whatever it takes to geminate drunk driving."

Olsen said it appears that offenders often have more rights than the victims do, and that offenders are also sometimes treated with more respect than the victim's families.

Nixon spokesman Scott Holste said he is not certain of the details of the reform yet. He said he only knows that Nixon will meet with legislators sometime this week to get the plans started.

To see a breakdown of DWI's and Convictions by counties in the Mid-Missouri area, click on the web extra to the right.

Missouri DWI Criminal Defense Attorneys

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Sunday, September 13, 2009

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Sunday Front Page DWI Investigation


St. Louis, MO
"Repeat drunken drivers avoid felony DWI charges"

Michael O'Fallon is the kind of guy Missouri lawmakers meant to target when they passed a get-tough law on DWI.

Under the decades-old law, any arrest after two DWIs is supposed to be a felony, carrying a potential prison term.

But the Eureka man escaped felony charges on his third arrest.

And his fourth.

His fifth arrest came Aug. 3, after police said he swerved head-on into an SUV carrying a family on the way home from getting snow cones.

The crash sent a mother and daughter to the hospital, gave two kids nightmares and enraged a husband and stepfather. He learned that the man who nearly wiped out his family had evaded serious punishment for years.

"He should have never been on the road," said Andy Colombini. "Something's gotta be done. And it's not just us this has happened to."

A Post-Dispatch investigation has found that chronic offenders such as O'Fallon routinely avoid felony charges because of arcane laws, poor record-keeping, confused police, complicated court rulings and a justice system that is slow even when all its players do their jobs.

A computer analysis of Missouri data found that last year alone, authorities in the St. Louis area failed to file felony charges on at least a third of all drunken drivers who qualified for them. (Illinois would not provide complete data for analysis.)

The problem is particularly severe in St. Louis County, where in 2008, nearly half of the arrests reviewed have not resulted in felony charges.

The result: The most dangerous drunken drivers are getting breaks before they even get to court. The failures ensure they'll never face the penalties lawmakers have authorized.

Some chronic offenders get charged with misdemeanors or municipal ordinance violations

That's what happened to O'Fallon after his third and fourth arrests.

At least O'Fallon was charged with something. Sometimes, because of bureaucratic bungling, chronic drunken drivers are not charged at all.

Newton Keene had already been to prison for a fifth DWI, but police forgot to seek charges for two later arrests. Afterward, he slammed head-on into a subcompact car, killing three people.

The failures infuriate the loved ones left behind, including Karen Jackson, grandmother of one of the victims of Keene's crash in February.

"The judicial system is letting all these people just slip through like that, as if it's not serious," Jackson said. "But it is serious. … People are dying."

FAILING TO CHARGE

In nearly all DWI arrests — even for people with long arrest records — drivers are released from jail in a matter of hours.

For the first or second arrest, they are handed a ticket, much like a speeding ticket.

Usually, they are ordered to report in several weeks to one of the more than 100 municipal courts dotting the area. There they face municipal ordinance violations, which almost always lead to fines but no jail time.

Some first- or second-timers are directed to face misdemeanor DWI charges at county courthouses. Although considered a bit harsher than municipal cases, misdemeanor DWIs also rarely lead to jail time.

The third DWI is supposed to be handled differently — with a felony charge and potential prison time.

That's what the law says, anyway.

The reality is far different.

The newspaper analysis of Missouri data found that in St. Louis and six area counties, authorities failed to issue felony charges on 105 of the 275 arrests that qualified.

MANY PROBLEMS


The newspaper reviewed the 105 arrests that did not result in felony charges, and it found the biggest problem came in the first step of the charging process.

In nearly two-thirds of the cases, county prosecutors say, police didn't ask them to file felony charges.

To seek a felony, arresting officers must first figure out if the suspect has two prior DWI offenses that would qualify a new offense as a felony.

That's no easy task. It could involve an entire shift — or longer — trying to decipher sometimes incomplete computer records. For example, the state drivers license data omit a DWI plea agreement used routinely by the courts.

Even when officers can get a true list of all past convictions, not every conviction counts, such as cases tried by a municipal judge who isn't a licensed attorney.

Sometimes, because of new laws and court rulings, a case will count, then it won't, and then it will.

The state Supreme Court ruled in March 2008 that the Legislature did such a poor job of writing the DWI law that some types of DWI convictions couldn't count toward a felony charge. It took a year for the Legislature to fix the law.

Police, prosecutors and defense lawyers have had trouble keeping straight which past DWIs count.

When police or prosecutors do find two qualifying prior offenses, they need to prove it to a judge. That means getting courts to send certified copies of past convictions.

Sometimes the courts provide the paperwork but not the specific kind needed for a prior DWI to be usable.

Other times, the requests for copies are ignored, lost or never received — with little accountability.

In one case, St. Louis County prosecutors complained that they had waited for months for records from the county's municipal court. But the municipal court said it never got the request.

Nobody has pushed the issue, even though the offices of the court clerk are just across the street from prosecutors'.

During such waits, prosecutors often file misdemeanor charges before cases get too old to prosecute in the hope they get the records they need to eventually charge felonies.

But with prosecutors juggling cases, they can lose track of who is owed what paperwork.

"I will be the first to tell you, in some of these (cases), we sent the letters requesting the priors," said St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch. "We didn't get any response, and we haven't followed up on them in a period of time we should have."

TWO CHANCES, ZERO FELONIES

So people such as O'Fallon slip through the cracks.

The 33-year-old college teacher pleaded guilty to two DWIs in 2003, one from Pacific Municipal Court and the other from St. Louis County Circuit Court.

Both times he was found to have double the legal limit of alcohol in his system. Both times he was given a special kind of probation to keep the DWI off his driving record.

Three years later, a drunken O'Fallon ran his car off the road in Jefferson County. He tested at 2 1/2 times the legal alcohol limit.

But his third DWI didn't result in a felony charge.

Prosecutors said state databases didn't list Pacific's DWI. Even if they had, Pacific's DWI couldn't have counted because its municipal judge wasn't a licensed attorney.

So O'Fallon's third DWI was a misdemeanor.

And so was his fourth — for a different reason.

In that arrest, O'Fallon nearly sideswiped a car in Eureka in November. He refused testing but admitted he had had "too much" to drink, according to a police report. He also said he had three past DWIs.

But the officer, in checking O'Fallon's driving record, found only O'Fallon's third DWI, the 2006 Jefferson County case. O'Fallon's other qualifying DWI — the 2003 St. Louis County case — was listed in another police database the officer did not check.

So, again, O'Fallon escaped a felony charge. He pleaded guilty in July to a municipal violation for driving with an elevated blood-alcohol level. He was fined, with no jail time.

On Aug. 3 — less than a week after his fourth guilty plea — a drunken O'Fallon rounded a curve too fast in northern Jefferson County, police said.

His right tires slid onto the shoulder. He jerked the wheel to the left, and sent his pickup skidding across the center line.

Coming in the opposite direction was the Colombini family.

Andy and wife Jamie still remember barely being able to utter "Oh, my God!"

They remember the screams. The impact. The whiplash. The smoke billowing from the hood.

She can't forget the look O'Fallon gave her after the crash.

"This guy jumped out of his truck and just looked around and started smiling," she recalled.

"I knew he was drunk just by how he got out."

A highway patrol trooper agreed, arresting O'Fallon that night for DWI No. 5. He was released a few hours later.

THE PAIN, THE WAIT


On the one-month anniversary of the crash, Jamie Colombini hobbled to her couch in Fenton. A brace stretched over most of her right leg. Another brace enveloped her ankle. She has a back brace too, but it hurts too much to wear while sitting down, she said.

Doctors can't say for sure how much damage her neck, back and leg sustained, she said. She's in constant pain and expects she'll need back surgery.

Beside her on the couch was Andy, a firefighter-paramedic by trade. He's sidelined with a wrist brace to cover a gash from the collision, which sent his arm into the dashboard console. His back hurts, too, and he also may need surgery.

They worry about their children. The 16-year-old, Amanda, had a softball-sized bruise on her shoulder. She just got her license but is now too afraid to drive.

Zachary, 12, and Tyler, 10, struggle to sleep at night. Tyler wakes up screaming, sobbing and shaking from nightmares of oncoming headlights and rolling cars.

They hear their parents talk about how O'Fallon had been caught again and again for DWI.

"You have your child ask you: 'What's it going to take?'" Jamie Colombini said. "Would they finally have done something if we would have died?"

O'Fallon, through an e-mail, declined to comment. His longtime attorney, Jim Wahl, said O'Fallon admitted himself into an inpatient addiction treatment program after the crash.

"He told me that he realizes he has a problem and that he needs to deal with it, and that's what he's doing," Wahl said.

While O'Fallon gets treatment, the highway patrol is continuing its investigation. It commonly takes five to six weeks for arrest reports to be sent to prosecutors. With a backlog of cases at the prosecutor's office, the average case takes four weeks to review before prosecutors make a decision on charges.

After that — if prosecutors agree with police — O'Fallon could face his first felony DWI charge.

St. Louis, MO DWI Criminal Defense Lawyers

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Breath monitoring devices required for Missourians with two DWIs


Fulton, MO
About 70,000 Missourians with two driving-while-intoxicated convictions have been sent letters informing them that they now must have breath monitoring devices installed for six months on their vehicles in order to regain their license to operate them in Missouri.

On Tuesday three Missouri agencies announced a special statewide enforcement of the ignition interlock law that went into effect today. The enforcement effort also will involve other traffic laws, including speeding and wearing seat belts.

The agencies included in the crackdown are the Missouri State Highway Patrol, the Missouri Division of Highway Safety and the Missouri Department of Revenue.

The device was demonstrated Tuesday in Jefferson City by Abraham Garcia, who represents Smart Start, an approved manufacturer for the device in Missouri.

Garcia breathed into the device that was installed on a Chrysler sedan he brought to Jefferson City for the kickoff of the statewide "The Heat is On" enforcement effort.

The new law is aimed at repeat drunken drivers who want to regain their driver's licenses.

When the devices are installed the engine cannot be started until after the driver breaths into an alcohol detector, proving he or she is sober.

To help prevent someone else from breathing into the device to get the car started, the devices are programmed to require the driver on a random basis to stop the car and retest. It is also a crime for another person to breath into the device who is not driving.

The Missouri Department of Revenue, which issues driver's licenses, will enforce the new law on violators caught by law enforcement agencies.

The new law requires drivers wanting to get their license restored after a second drunk driving conviction to use the device for six months.

The devices are leased for the six month period at costs varying from about $70 to $100 a month. They also must be installed only by vendors approved by the state. Installation costs varies from $30 to about $200 in some cities.

There is no approved vendor for the device in Fulton. The nearest vendors are located in Jefferson City and Columbia.

In Jefferson City the authorized interlock vendors are The Entertainer, 2511 West Edgewood Drive; Mobiltek, 1805 Valley Hi Road; and Ewers Tires and Service, 1401 Missouri Blvd.

In Columbia, the authorized interlock vendors are Midwest Audio Visions, 3605 South Providence Road, Suite 7; Sound Performance, 1310 Indiana St.; and R & R Car Audio, 416 Big Bear Blvd.

Drivers with the devices installed also must have them rechecked every month at the vendor.

People required to have the device who are caught driving without it could face an additional two-year driver's license suspension.

A law was passed in Missouri in 2001 allowing judges to order interlock devices for people convicted of two drunken driving convictions.

Former Gov. Matt Blunt wanted a law to mandate the devices because he said judges were not making use of the option.

The law that goes into effect today was passed in 2008 but it did not go into effect until this July in order to allow enforcement procedures to be geared up and rule-making procedures adopted during the last year.

The law was approved by the Missouri General Assembly last year by a vote of 29-5 in the Senate and by a vote of 132-13 in the House.

Slightly more than one-third of the states in the nation also have passed laws requiring use of the devices by first or second DWI offenders.

Legislation requiring the device for first-time DWI offenders was introduced in the 2009 session of the Missouri General Assembly but it did not pass.

Missouri DWI Ignition Interlock Attorneys

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

New state law requires repeat-DWI offenders to install breathalyzer devices on their cars


Warrensburg, MO
A new Missouri state law takes effect today regarding repeat driving-while-intoxicated offenders that requires them to install an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) in their vehicle.

This device must be purchased at the offender's expense, and there are some throughout the community who have high hopes that the law will be effective in reducing alcohol-related incidents.

Beginning today, Missouri state law will require repeat DWI offenders to install a breathalyzer, or IID, in their vehicle in order to gain limited driving privileges, after serving the minimum time on their restriction period.

Although no exact price for the device was given by the Warrensburg Police Department, according to ignitioninterlockdevice.org, the person will pay an installation fee ranging from $50-$200, a monthly rental fee ranging from $50-$100, as well as fees for data downloads, maintenance expenses and calibration appointments, which are usually scheduled every 60 days.

The device must be installed by a certified person or agency throughout the state. According to a representative in the office of attorney Daniel Carter, who specializes in DWI violations, Sound By Design, 120 E. Gay St., is the only known local installer. The individual will be required to show proof of installation upon application for the reinstatement of his or her driving privileges.

“It’s through the Missouri Department of Transportation and it’s like right now, if you get a DWI, you are required -- in order to get your driver’s license reinstated -- to show proof of insurance or proof of taking an alcohol class,” said police Sgt. Scott Munsterman, of the Warrensburg Police Department’s traffic division.

“Just like that, there are certain criteria that you have to meet and you have to show proof to the (state) Department of Revenue. Failure to do so will result in your driving privileges remaining either restricted or revoked.”

The breathalyzer must be installed, and maintained, for a period of six months, beginning at the reinstatement date. Failure to maintain the device could result in the loss of driving privileges for two years, or until the reinstatement requirements are met. The requirements include paying a fine of $20 and showing proof of installation of an IID.

Not everyone is eligible for installation of the device, however. Persons with two DWI convictions within a five-year period must serve at least two years of a five-year denial period, and those with three or more convictions must serve at least three years of a 10-year denial period before being considered.

Those finished with serving their five-year denial period for vehicular manslaughter, as well as those that fail to submit to alcohol or drug testing more than once, will also be required to install an IID and maintain it for the six-month period.

Although the law has met some opposition, there are others who said they think that requiring repeat offenders to install the device will prove to be beneficial and that it is a just punishment.

“(Because of the law) there will be less drunk drivers out there, and I would hope that the community would feel a little safer,” said Avis Lowe, a senior victim advocate for Mothers Against Drunk Driving. “Now, they will have a harsher punishment, which will make them think harder about what they are doing. That way, they won’t do it again.”

Kristin Sell, Warrensburg resident, thinks it is a necessary precaution to keep the roads a little safer.

“I think that it is a good idea. I understand that people make mistakes and that they are sorry for what they have done, but I also think that the necessary precautions should be made,” Sell said. “I think that it gives people a little more sense of peace -- if you break the rules, there should be consequences.”

Munsterman said, “I think (the law) is going to help prevent people from abusing alcohol, getting behind the wheel and choosing to drive. It will have the potential to save many lives out there.”

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Monday, June 29, 2009

Missouri DWI law takes affect July 1


St. Louis, MO
A new law in Missouri will target repeat drunk drivers. Beginning July 1, people convicted of at least two drunken driving offenses, or anyone convicted of vehicular manslaughter involving alcohol, will have to get a breath-analyzing ignition interlock device installed on their vehicle.

The device will prevent the car from starting unless the breath test is alcohol-free. It is required in order to get a driver's license re-instated.

Gabrielle Millenbruck is vice-president of Interlock of St. Louis, a business that has four locations around the St. Louis area. Interlock trains ignition interlock installers, and administers tests for clients referred by the state of Missouri.

Millenbruck says the devices have proven successful in national tests.

"An ignition interlock is proven to reduce repeat offenders by 60%while the interlock is installed," Millenbruck says. "Nationally, you're looking at about a 2% success rate in any other program of drunken driving reduction."

Illinois lawmakers passed a similar law which took effect in January. That law, however, required the ignition interlock devices on first offense. St. Clair County State's Attorney Bob Haida says it is too early to know the long-term effects of that legislation. Haida added that the legislation has not resulted in a backlog in courts.

In addition to training other installers and acting as an administrator for state officials, Millenbruck says Interlock of St. Louis has about 400 clients who were convicted on drunken driving offenses.

"That client will make a monthly, 15-minute appointment, we will plug into their device, download all the data. It can record up to 30,000 events in the log," Millenbruck says. "It will tell us every time they start their car, every breath alcohol reading they have, every activity that they have that takes place in that vehicle. And then we'll calibrate the sensor and schedule the next appointment in the device."

Millenbruck says after an initial test to start the car, the device will ask the driver for a breath test every ten minutes. If they do not comply, the car's horn will start blaring; notifying other motorists the car contains a driver who is out of compliance.

A list of certified ignition interlock installers is available at the Missouri Department of Revenue website.

Missouri DWI Information

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Sunday, June 28, 2009

New law affecting repeat drunken drivers takes effect Wednesday in Missouri


Kansas City, MO
Business is about to pick up for ignition interlock providers in Missouri.

A new state law takes effect Wednesday that requires people with two or more drunk-driving convictions to install the devices on their vehicles for six months in order to get their license back.

The Missouri Department of Revenue says about 70,000 people in the state will be affected.

An interlock is a breath-testing device connected to a car's ignition system. The driver must blow into the device before the car will start. An alcohol content above a prescribed level will disable the vehicle.

The law is good news for Mothers Against Drunk Driving and other traffic safety advocates.

"If you're convicted twice, shame on you because you didn't get it the first time," said Avis Lowe, a MADD victim's advocate whose 27-year-old son was a pedestrian killed by a repeat drunk driver in downtown Kansas City in 1995.

But the law is only a partial victory for advocates like MADD spokesman Mike Boland of St. Louis, who wanted the ignition interlock required for first-time convicted drunk drivers, such as in New Mexico and Arizona.

"I believe they've seen an almost 25 percent reduction in fatalities," Boland said. "But even if we're looking at a 10 percent reduction in Missouri, if you're that one family and that knock is not coming at your door, that's a great reduction."

The Department of Revenue in May sent letters to people potentially affected by the new law and will send another round after the July 4 holiday, said Ted Farnen, director of communications.

The law will affect future repeat offenders of Missouri's alcohol-related driving laws as well as past repeat offenders who have not had their driving privileges reinstated by July 1.

The Missouri Department of Transportation has a list of certified ignition interlock providers. The offenders are responsible for paying for the system, just as they are with other court costs.

Kansas also requires an ignition interlock for repeat DUI offenders, as well as for first-time offenders if their blood alcohol level is .15 percent or higher. The legal limit is .08.

Kansas City, MO DWI Defense Attorneys

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

New Mo. law could require ignition lock devices for 70,000 drunken driving offenders


Jefferson City, MO
As many as 70,000 Missourians convicted of alcohol-related traffic crimes could have to install ignition locks on their vehicles if they want to legally drive after July 1.

The devices prevent engines from starting until drivers breath into an alcohol detector to prove they are sober.

The new Missouri law applies to people convicted of at least two drunken driving offenses, or to anyone convicted of vehicular manslaughter in which alcohol was involved.

The Department of Revenue will require proof that the device has been installed before reinstating a person's driver's license. The ignitional interlocks will have to be used for six months.

The requirement was included in a bill that passed in 2008, with a delayed effective date of July 1, 2009.

Missouri DWI Defense Lawyers

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

MADD wants to change Missouri's open container law


Jefferson City, MO
Missouri's Open Container law has not changed, but that dosen't mean people don't want it to.

The current state open container law allows all of age passengers in a car to drink, as long as the driver is not drinking. However, some cities around the state have made their open container laws stricter. State Lawmakers have not looked into the issue of open containers in cars in 2 years. But groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (M.A.D.D.) thinks it might be time for a change. Bud Balke is the Director of Court Monitoring with M.A.D.D. and hopes the governor will look into the issue.

"We would like to call for the governor, action to institute the governors DWI task force again," said Balke.

According to M.A.D.D.'s numbers 4,897 people were injured in alcohol related accidents. And Balke says the numbers show that stricter open container laws can help.

"If a state has enacted a strong open container law it actually has diminished by 5 percent or more, in those states the fatalities and injury rate of alcohol crashes,"said Balke.

He also mentioned that alcohol industries may play a role in deciding the issue.

"It's actually something they have never backed when its been in the legislature, they've backed other laws like .08, and some other alcohol laws, but they have never backed open container," said Balke.

But it's not just M.A.D.D. that thinks the law could change. Jefferson City resident Jill McDonald said she thinks the driver will be to tempted to drink if there is open alcohol in the car.

"I think if everybody in the cars drinking and there are open containers, the drivers going to be inclined to drink," said McDonald.

But Holts Summit resident Chris Buckland has a different view.

"I think the open container isn't the point. It's the point that the drivers need to be educated enough not to intoxicate themselves while driving," said Buckland. "Their friends can do it."

Missouri DWI Information

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Monday, May 25, 2009

New law for multiple DWI offenders will soon take affect

Jefferson City, MO
A new law affecting drivers with a history of multiple drunk driving offenses is about to take effect.

State officials are noting just because the law was not a requirement last time an offender went to court, does not mean they are exempt now.

When lawmakers approved the law a year ago, Missouri had more than 118,000 multiple DWI offenders on the road.

"There's 43,000 with three or more DWI convictions, and 7,400 with five or more," said former lawmaker Neal St. Onge.

Determined to change that, the legislature mandated the use of interlock devices for people with multiple drunk driving convictions.

"That's the device that you put in your car that doesn't allow the car to start until a person breathes into and it shows that they don't have any alcohol in their system," said Revenue Department Spokesman Ten Farnen.

Within the next week, some 38,000 offenders will receive letters from the department of revenue advising them that they must comply with the interlock law unless unrestricted driving privileges are restored before July 1.

"There's a re-instatement fee,” said Farnen. “They have to take an alcohol education class. Or they have to go the insurance company and have them file an SR-22, which is basically proof that you have insurance."

Farnen says it is the individual driver's responsibility to comply with the law-to have the interlock device installed. That could mean a conversation with an attorney and a visit to the MoDOT website, where you will find a list of approved interlock devices.

Missouri DWI Law Firm - Driving While Intoxicated
video

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Thursday, January 1, 2009

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Commentary: Most DWI offenders drive, despite suspended licenses


St. Louis, MO ("Commentary" page of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch)

The new law in Illinois that will allow first-time driving-under-the-influence offenders to use a Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device, which will prevent the car from starting if the driver has a blood-alcohol content of more than 0.025 percent, is a step in the right direction ("Tougher drunken driving law takes effect next week," Dec. 26). But it does nothing to address drivers who have had their licenses suspended and continue to drive.

Missouri and Illinois lawmakers overlook the fact that people still have to get to and from work to make a living. The courts take away the licenses of drivers convicted of drunken driving, but they fail to monitor those offenders once they leave the courthouse. The courts might as well give them a hardship license along with the Breathalyzer device so they can at least drive to work.


After writing insurance for suspended drivers for almost 30 years, I found that unless you have a person living with you or on call to drive you around, the suspension does not work. These drivers risk jail time if they are caught driving on a suspended license, but most drive anyway because they have to drive, not because they want to drive. From age 16 on, we consider the use of a car necessary for survival and earning a living.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

New Missouri DWI law: Calculating number of DWI offenses modified


Jefferson City, MO
Legislation signed by Gov. Matt Blunt will be enforced by Thursday and means to clarify both operation of vehicles and punishment for misuse.

At the top of the list is a measure that closes a loophole in sentencing for intoxication. The law change aims to hold those found to be driving while intoxicated accountable, regardless of where they are caught.

“In Missouri, if you have DWI one and two, then DWI three would be a felony,” said Tim Hull, a captain with the Missouri Highway Patrol. “But you have to have those in that sequence.

“Therefore, (the Supreme Court) was not allowing us to count the first one in that sequence if it happened within a municipality. If somebody got a DWI in a city, and I would get them again on a state highway, although they had that previous offense, I couldn't have counted it and would still be arresting them for their first.”

Under the old law, DWI defendants could plead guilty or receive a suspended imposition in a municipality and that DWI could not be held against a person if they reached the felony threshhold of two more intoxication offenses.

“What this does is allow us to count that conviction, that plea of guilty or finding them guilty against them in a new sentence,” Hull said. “Therefore, a previous intoxication will count whether it's state, county or muncipality ordinance and treat it just like a plea of guilty or finding them guilty.”

Other statute adjustments transfer some enforcement of DWI charges to the Department of Revenue. It will be in charge - starting July 1, 2009 - of keeping check whether multiple offenders have an ignition interlock device installed. The device checks the person's alcohol level and can prevent them from driving with alcohol in their system.

“Once a person receives that conviction, now (the Department of Revenue) will mandate an ignition interlock device be put back on their car before they can re-issue a driver's license,” Hull said.

The legislature also changed laws for particular types of vehicles. That started with utility vehicles - like John Deere Gators - and ended with statewide rules for tractor trailers.

“Until now, utility vehicles could not be operated legally on our roadways at all,” Hull said. “Under these specific guidelines, utility vehicles can be used if owned and operated by a governmental entity for official use, operated for agriculture or industrial purposes, and (legislators) also put a clause in there that utility vehicles can be operated on occasion on secondary roads between the hours of sunrise and sunset.”

While this broadens rules for utility vehicles, restrictions are in order for tractor trailers in urban areas. New changes will prohibit them from using the left-hand lane on all three-lane roads in Missouri.

“That law had already been passed in the St. Louis area, within the urbanized area, when you have three lanes going the same direction,” Hull said. “This act kind of broadens it out from the St. Louis area to other urbanized areas around the state.

“We're just making people aware of these new law changes and how it's going to affect vehicle operation and want to educate the drivers and public of what's new.”

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Saturday, August 23, 2008

New Missouri DWI laws go into effect August 28


Fulton, MO
New road rules will soon go into effect that impact how and where some drivers are allowed to steer their vehicles.

Recent legislation signed by Gov. Matt Blunt will begin being enforced by at least Aug. 28, and means to clarify both operation of vehicles and punishment for misuse.

At the top of the list is a measure that closes a loophole in sentencing for intoxication. The law change aims to hold those found to be driving while intoxicated accountable, regardless of where they are caught.

“In Missouri if you have DWI one and two, then DWI three would be a felony,” said Tim Hull, a captain with the Missouri Highway Patrol. “But you have to have those in that sequence.

“Therefore, (the Supreme Court) was not allowing us to count the first one in that sequence if it happened within a municipality. If somebody got a DWI in a city and I would get them again on a state highway, although they had that previous offense I couldn't have counted it and would still be arresting them for their first.”

Under the old law, DWI defendants could plead guilty or receive a suspended imposition in a municipality and that DWI could not be held against a person if they reached the felony threshhold of two more intoxication offenses.

“What this does is allow us to count that conviction, that plea of guilty or finding them guilty against them in a new sentence,” Hull said. “Therefore, a previous intoxication will count whether it's state, county or muncipality ordinance and treat it just like a plea of guilty or finding them guilty.”

Other statute adjustments transfer some enforcement of DWI charges to the Department of Revenue. It will be in charge - starting next July 1 - of keeping check whether multiple offenders have an ignition interlock device installed. The device checks the person's alcohol level and can prevent them from driving with alcohol in their system.

“Once a person receives that conviction, now (the Department of Revenue) will mandate an ignition interlock device be put back on their car before they can re-issue a driver's license,” Hull said.

The legislature also changed laws for particular types of vehicles. That started with utility vehicles - like John Deere Gators - and ended with statewide rules for tractor trailers.

“Until now utility vehicles could not be operated legally on our roadways at all,” Hull said. “Under these specific guidelines utility vehicles can be used if owned and operated by a governmental entity for official use, operated for agriculture or industrial purposes, and (legislators) also put a clause in there that utility vehicles can be operated on occasion on secondary roads between the hours of sunrise and sunset.”

While this broadens rules for utility vehicles, restrictions are in order for tractor trailers in urban areas. New changes will prohibit them from using the left-hand lane on all three-lane roads in Missouri.

“That law had already been passed in the St. Louis area within the urbanized area when you have three lanes going the same direction,” Hull said. “This act kind of broadens it out from the St. Louis area to other urbanized areas around the state.

“We're just making people aware of these new law changes and how it's going to affect vehicle operation and want to educate the drivers and public of what's new.”

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Changes in Missouri DWI law: repeat offenders and ignition interlock


Lake of the Ozarks, MO
According to the Missouri Highway Patrol, this year the state legislature recently passed a bill affecting vehicle operation. Gov. Matt Blunt has signed the legislation into law.

Some of the laws contained an emergency clause went into effect once it was signed, while others will be enforced after Aug. 28.

The Highway Patrol wants to increase public awareness and education by letting the public know of the changes in state law.

• Prior DWI and intoxication-related offenses. This act attempts to rectify a recent Supreme Court ruling that held that a defendant’s prior guilty plea and suspended imposition of sentence in municipal court could not be used to enhance the punishment for the defendant’s new intoxication-related traffic offense. This act specifies that a conviction, plea of guilty, or a finding of guilty followed by incarceration, a fine, a suspended imposition of sentence, suspended execution of sentence, probation or parole, or any combination thereof in any intoxication-related traffic offense in a state, county, or municipal court shall be treated as a prior plea of guilty or finding of guilty for purposes of enhanced punishment under Section 577.023 RSMo.

• Ignition interlock devices. This act makes the current ignition interlock device law for repeat offenders an administrative requirement enforced by the Department of Revenue instead of the courts. Under the terms of the act, repeat offenders must provide proof of installation to the department in order to obtain a license or limited driving privilege.
Under the terms of this act, any person who has been convicted of two or more driving while intoxicated offenses and had his or her license or driving privilege denied cannot have his or license reinstated until the person has filed proof with the director of the Department of Revenue that his or her motor vehicle is equipped with an ignition interlock device. The ignition interlock device must be maintained on all motor vehicles operated by the person for a period of at least six months following the date of reinstatement. If the person fails to maintain the proof, the restricted driving privilege will be suspended for the remainder of the six-month period or until the person files proof with the director (Section 302.060 RSMo.).
The act applies the same criteria to persons who have had their license suspended or revoked due to points for a second or subsequent conviction relating to driving while in an intoxicated condition, driving under the influence of controlled substances or drugs, or driving with a blood alcohol content of eight-hundredths of one percent or more by weight. Such persons must also file proof with the director that have equipped their motor vehicles with certified ignition interlock devices. Such devices shall be maintained on all vehicles for a period of at least six months following the date of reinstatement. If the person fails to maintain proof of maintaining an ignition interlock device, the person will be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor (Section 302.304 RSMo.).

The act specifies that a limited driving privilege may be granted to a person seeking the services of a certified ignition interlock device provider. No limited driving privilege shall be issued under Section 302.309 RSMO. until the applicant for such privilege files proof with the director of the Department of Revenue that all of the motor vehicles operated by the applicant are equipped with certified ignition interlock devices. Failure to maintain proof of installation of a functioning, certified ignition interlock device shall result in termination of the limited driving privilege (Section 302.309 RSMo.).
The provisions of the act relating to the installation of ignition interlock devices becomes effective July 1, 2009.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Governor’s Column - Keeping Drunk Drivers Off Missouri Highways and Roads


By Gov. (not for long...) Matt Blunt
Drunk drivers take thousands of innocent lives every year. My heart goes out to the parents, the children, the brothers, the sisters, and the friends who have had their lives changed forever by the irresponsibility of drunk drivers. No one should have to suffer through the pain caused by drunk driving accidents.

Thankfully, we already have tough laws to punish drunk drivers and in 2005 we passed legislation that strengthened our statutes.

Legislation I signed in 2005 addressed possession and consumption of alcohol by minors. I also signed legislation which increased the penalties for involuntary manslaughter, for those convicted of a DWI three or more times, and eliminated the ten-year statute of limitations prohibiting use of a past alcohol-related offense to enhance a current DWI to a felony. These efforts have increased the amount of time that convicted DWI offenders serve behind bars.

This year I signed legislation strengthening penalties for drivers convicted of repeat drunk driving offenses by requiring the use of interlock devices. Ignition interlocks are devices that disable a vehicle’s ignition if the driver is drunk or drinking. The legislation shifts responsibility for ignition interlock devices to the Department of Revenue and away from courts that were not enforcing compliance. These devices save lives and keep repeat drunk driving offenders off of Missouri roads and highways.

This year I also signed legislation that lowers the legal intoxication limit for boaters from .1 of one percent to .08 of one percent, ensuring consistency with the legal limits for operating a vehicle. Irresponsible boaters that choose to become intoxicated put everyone else on the water at great risk, just as drunk drivers risk lives on Missouri’s roads and highways. There is no reason that the legal limit should be higher on the water.

This legislation I signed also specifies that anyone who causes a death while boating under the influence will be guilty of involuntary manslaughter, punishable by up to seven years in prison.

I am confident that with the steps we have taken to strengthen our laws against drunk driving, and the efforts of our law enforcement professionals, we will save lives and all Missourians will be safer on our roads and waterways.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Missouri boating while intoxicated (BWI) standard drops to 0.08 percent


Jefferson City, MO
Gov. Matt Blunt has approved tougher rules for boating while intoxicated, making the threshold for drunken boating on lakes and major rivers the same as for motorists.

The governor signed legislation that lowers the legal blood-alcohol limit to 0.08 percent, which has been the limit for roadways since 2001. Blunt signed the bill at the Lake of the Ozarks, a popular vacation destination that's become known for large boats and a raunchy "Party Cove."

But Independence Day revealers from across the Midwest who flock to the lake won't have to worry about drinking less until next year. That's because the lower legal blood-alcohol limit won't take effect until Aug. 28 when the summer boating season is almost over.

In a written statement, Blunt said the same standard should apply for motorists and boaters.

Water Patrol spokesman Sgt. Jerry Callahan said that, except for coordinated drunken boating checkpoints, police generally identify drunken boaters after stopping them for another violation.

Callahan said the lower blood-alcohol threshold would give officers more time after identifying a drunken boater, which is important in those types of cases.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Blunt signs bill requiring ignition interlocks for repeat drunk drivers


Jefferson City, MO
The state of Missouri is making changes to ensure that those convicted of drunk driving more than once have to use ignition interlock devices on their cars.

In 2005, of the 3,163 repeat DUI offenders, only 19 percent were required by the courts to install the interlocks. Governor Matt Blunt says legislation he signed Thursday that shifts the responsibility for the devices from the courts to the Department of Revenue.

"What we're passing today will ensure that in the future, going forward, there will really be an administrative procedure, the Department of Revenue will develop a good standard operating procedure to ensure that people don't slip through the cracks," he said.

The legislation also closes a loophole in state law, allowing municipal DWI's to count against a defendant who could be charged as a persistent offender.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments

Monday, May 26, 2008

Roadside memorial plan seeks to increase awareness of drunken driving


St. Louis, MO

Here's an example of the incredibly confused logic of the DWI industry:

The statistics: 991 people died in traffic crashes in Missouri last year. 242 of the crashes are said to have "involved alcohol" (not caused by drunk driving).

The ridiculously illogical conclusion drawn therefrom by feeble-minded, data-analysis-impaired state Representative Bill Deeken (R-Jefferson City): "If we can get the drunk drivers off the highways, we can cut the deaths in half."

The statistic doesn't refer to any data relating to drunkenness, doesn't refer to any data relating to crash causation, doesn't indicate how many crashes occurred, etc....you get the picture.

Deeken's reasoning is on the level of that which would lead to the conclusion that fireman start house fires. They always are there, after all, when a house is burning.
She graduated from high school, married and gave birth to three children For all of these events, Gail Rehme's brothers and sisters were by her side - all except one brother, David Poenicke.

He was struck and killed by a drunken driver when Rehme was 10 year old."To not have him at my graduation was really emotional for me. To not have him at my wedding," she said. "It's hit me harder since I've been older."

In her brother's memory, Rehme, 34, of Florissant, started a campaign to memorialize people killed by drunken drivers. The prospective legislation, called "David's Law," was up for passage this session in the General Assembly, but stalled.

Rehme plans to try again. The genesis of the bill lies in Rehme's love for her brother.

A sister's love

Poenicke was 19 years old when he was killed. It was 1984. He and his girlfriend were riding home on his motorcycle from a Cardinals baseball game.

They stopped to get some fast food. A soda spilled as they were riding to the family home in Ferguson, so they pulled onto the shoulder of Interstate 70 near an interchange ramp. David got off the motorcycle. That's when a car struck and killed him.

The family didn't go to counseling. They relied on faith to get them through.

Life moved on quickly. David's funeral was on a Friday and their mother cleaned out his room before taking the family to Tennessee for a cousin's wedding that Sunday.

The affect his death had on family and friends began to echo.

Rehme's aunt, Carol Grzovic of Oakville, likened David's death to throwing a rock in a pond. The tragic event touched his family, schoolmates and co-workers at his part-time job.

"David was popular at school. He was a very likeable young man, just getting started with his life," Grzovic said. "I never personally have been at a funeral with more young people."

Her brother's death affected Rehme's choices for the next several years. She became the president of Students Against Driving Drunk - now called Students Against Destructive Decisions - at her junior high. She stayed involved with SADD in high school and also became involved with Drug Abuse Resistance Education, commonly known as D.A.R.E.

In 2004, Rehme wanted to do something special to commemorate the 20th anniversary of her brother's death. She went to bed thinking about it and woke up with the idea for roadside memorial signs.

She took the idea to the Gateway Affiliate of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, or MADD. They liked the idea, but told her it would take years to get a measure written and passed in the General Assembly. Rehme became discouraged and the idea was shelved.

Then her husband was listening to the Paul Harris Show a couple of years ago when he heard a discussion of roadside memorials. Rehme e-mailed the show and they contacted her. She spoke to Florissant Mayor Robert Lowery, who guided her to state Rep. Bill Deeken, R-Jefferson City, and state Sen. Tim Green, D-North County, who sponsored versions of the bill in the legislature.

Makeshift memorials

David's Law would establish standard highway signs in memory of people killed by drunken drivers. Many people already have been erecting memorials of their own design.

Small clusters of objects - crosses, flowers, teddy bears and other mementos - are commonplace along roadsides near scenes of fatal crashes. Some memorials have names etched on the crosses. Others are more anonymous. People usually would need to know the people killed in the crash to know who the memorials represent.

One of the area's more widely known memorials sits along Interstate 370 near the St. Louis Mills shopping mall.

The marker was erected by family and friends of Bridgeton Police Officer Scott Armstrong, who died on Jan. 12, 2005, when a drunken driver hit his patrol cruiser head-on.

Armstrong's sister, April Barthelmass of Kirkwood, now works as the victim advocate for MADD's Gateway affiliate. The memorial to Armstrong is a cross with a photograph of the officer. Barthelmass said her mother regularly goes out to place seasonal decorations at the site.

"She finds it as a comfort for her," Barthelmass said.

The state tries to discourage people from creating their own roadside memorials.

Jeff Briggs, a spokesman for the Missouri Department of Transportation, said erecting the signs can be hazardous. People put themselves in danger when they park along the highways and get out of their cars to arrange or maintain a memorial.

When people call MoDOT asking if they can put out these private memorials, MoDOT offers them the option of adopting a portion of highway. Some choose this option.

Yet when people elect to risk walking along a highway and put up their own memorial, MoDOT leaves them there.

"We realize they are important to the people who put them up. We respect that," Briggs said. "If they are already up we do our best to leave them alone unless they present a safety or visibility hazard. If we can mow around them, we do."

Deeken, the state representative, has caught himself looking off the road at the signs to try to learn if he knew the person killed there. He hopes the legislation will one day pass and provide a less distracting option for grieving families and a deterrent to people who might drive drunk.

David's Law

Green sponsored a highway memorial sign bill last year in the Missouri Senate, but it did not become law. Deeken sponsored the bill this year in the Missouri House. It was combined with other modifications to Missouri's transportation laws under Senate Bill 761. The bill failed to get a reading in the final week of the legislative session, which ended Friday.

The bill would have allowed relatives of drunken driving victims to pay a $1,040 installation and maintenance fee to have the signs erected. Rehme plans to raise money to cover the fee for families that cannot afford it.

MoDOT crews would install the signs and they would remain for 10 years with the option for another 10 years.

The signs would read "Drunk Driving Victim," include the victim's initials and the month and year of the fatal crash and ask "Who's Next?"

Nine other states have similar programs. Some offer memorial signs for victims of drunken drivers. Some extend it to drunken drivers killed in crashes. Others offer memorial signs for anyone killed in a highway crash regardless of whether alcohol was involved.

Deeken said Missouri could later expand the availability of memorial signs, but he first wants to focus on victims of drunken drivers.

Last year, 991 people died in traffic crashes in Missouri - 242 of them involving alcohol. Deeken said people seeing the signs might notice the shear volume of alcohol-related traffic deaths and possibly make them think twice about drinking and driving.

"If we can get the drunk drivers off the highways, we can cut the deaths in half," he said.

Will people want them?

Barthelmass does not join her mother at the memorial to her brother. She doesn't think it's safe, so she visits her brother's grave instead. She also does not think everyone will prefer the state version.

"I think people will probably still keep putting up the personalized ones," she said. "They are going to memorialize it in a way that comforts them. It depends on the person and how they look at the situation and what they feel brings them comfort.

"Memorializing your loved one is definitely part of the healing process."

After her brother's death, Barthelmass began noticing crosses on the highway all the time. She wanted to know the story behind each memorial.

Rehme said she ultimately plans to put up a Web site that would list the initials and crash date for each state sign and tell the story of each person killed.

Rehme realizes some people will still want personalized memorials. She also said that putting up one memorial sign will make little difference, but she hopes many people will want them.

"Seeing two and three and more is going to raise awareness again and again," she said.

Grzovic said any memorial will be beneficial to the family, which is still dealing with grief more than 23 years after her nephew's death.

"I think it's some way for the family to do something," she said. "To have something to actually do - some material thing."

What have other states done?

The Missouri Legislature might someday enact a law that would allow people to have a highway sign erected in memory of a loved one killed in an alcohol-related traffic crash.

Here's what other states have done:

Alaska: Offers signs memorializing people killed by drunken drivers, intoxicated drivers who die in crashes and people killed in non-alcohol related crashes. Signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" or "Please Drive Safely" and list the name of the victim or sponsor for the sign.

California: Offers signs memorializing people killed by drunken drivers. Signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim.

Colorado: Offers signs memorializing people killed by drunken drivers. Also offers signs for intoxicated drivers killed in crashes, but only with the consent of victim's families. The signs read "Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim.

Florida: Offers signs memorializing any person killed in a traffic crash. The signs read "Drive safely."

New Hampshire: Offers signs memorializing the victims of alcohol-related fatal crashes. The signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim.

New Mexico: Offers signs memorializing the victims of alcohol-related fatal crashes. The signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim.

Texas: Offers signs memorializing the victims of alcohol-related fatal crashes. The signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim and date of the crash.

Washington: Offers signs memorializing the victims of alcohol-related fatal crashes. The signs read "Please Don't Drink and Drive" and list the name of the victim.

Wyoming: Offers signs memorializing anyone killed in a traffic crash. The signs feature the image of a dove flying across a broken heart.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by iLitigate at 0 Comments