Missouri DWI Information & News Blog

Missouri man sentenced to 5 years in prison for DWI "chronic offender"

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 04:29:00 +0000

Man convicted of Missouri DWI "Chronic Offender" is sentenced to 5 years in prison

Jefferson City, MO

A Mid-Missouri man is sentenced to five years in prison for hitting two cars and a house last month.

William Gipson of Ashland pleaded guilty to several charges, including being a DWI chronic offender and leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident.

Jefferson City police stopped the 28-year-old man at a convenience store a little before midnight on January 2, 2010 after he hit the cars and house while driving within Jefferson City limits.

DWI Legal Help - Missouri Criminal Defense Attorney

Nixa, MO mayor doesn't plan to resign after DWI guilty plea

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:52:00 +0000

Nixa mayor: No plans to resign after DWI guilty plea

Nixa, MO

Nixa's mayor is speaking publicly about his guilty plea for drunken driving. While some aldermen want him to resign, Brian Hayes wants to run for re-election. The mayor simply says he made a mistake and learned his lesson.

The charge against Mayor Brian Hayes was filed last June after a state trooper stopped him as he was returning from the lake, where he was drinking. Hayes now has to serve two years of probation and do 60 hours of community service.

Alderman Michael Durbin says the mayor violated the city's code of conduct and wants a hearing for the city council to vote whether to keep him in office.

“Now at this point when we have an admission of guilt. We have to take it a step further and go by the laws of our city and hold him accountable to the offenses that he's made,” said Durbin.

“To quit and resign and hide from it is just not what I think people would want in a leader. I think they want someone that's going to take responsibility, which I have, and seek re-election. If they like that job and what I'm doing, they'll have the opportunity to vote me either in or out,” said Hayes.

The mayor is up for re-election in six weeks. Some aldermen say the hearing to vote him in or out is a waste of time when the people of Nixa can just as easily decide for themselves on April 6.

St. Louis, MO DWI Criminal Defense Attorney

Only 5 DWI arrests during St. Louis Mardi Gras...?

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:48:00 +0000

St. Louis City Police arrest 5 for DWI during Mardi Gras?

St. Louis, MO

If you saw our earlier post today about the 92 arrests made by St. Louis' finest on the biggest drinking holiday of the year, you already know that a whopping 48 kids were cited for underage drinking on Saturday.

But with more than 100,000 adults (a new record, according to Mardi Gras Inc.) taking to the Soulard streets to get sloppy drunk, how many of the remaining arrests were for driving under the influence?

Go on, hazard a guess. Lower. Getting warmer....

Five.

How does that happen in a city and state, where drinking and driving caused several horrific fatal accidents last year, causing local officials to declare DWI enforcement a priority in 2010?
Katie O'Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, told the Daily RFT this morning that the arrests were made by a team of officers specifically assigned to "the Mardi Gras detail." They were working on a state grant and their "purpose was to look for impaired drivers."

So only five out of the 100,000 in attendance drove home drunk?

"You have to remember a large portion of people couldn't drive in Soulard because the streets were closed," O'Sullivan explained. "And the [Mardi Gras arrest] statistics are only up to 8:30 p.m. Saturday, so there may have been more later that night."

The bad news for the five DWI offenders is that the city recently ended the practice of "pleading down" on DWI arrest charges, meaning that their crimes will remain on their driving records as an alcohol-related offense. Mayor Slay even went so far as to remind St. Louisans of this new policy on his Twitter feed on the day of Mardi Gras.

There is, however a silver lining to all this. The number of 2010 DWI arrests was actually an improvement from last year. And how many drunk drivers did St. Louis' finest take off the road in 2009?

Four.

DWI Attorney - St. Louis, MO

Phone call from Police Board member gets nephew out of jail after DWI arrest

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:41:00 +0000

Police commissioner's nephew arrested for DWI, released with phone call

St. Louis, MO

A St. Louis Police Board member, Vincent J. Bommarito, said today that a nephew who was arrested under suspicion of drunken driving in Soulard on Saturday was released to him at his request.

Bommarito is a member of the five-person state panel that runs the police department, but he’s perhaps better known as the proprietor of Tony’s Restaurant, among the city’s top-shelf dining establishments.

In an interview at his office at the restaurant, Bommarito said he saw no problem with helping his family. He said he had been worried about the welfare of his nephew, Christopher Campo, 46, and called someone at the police station to have him released.

“I asked him if he could get my nephew out of jail,” Bommarito said. “I didn’t want this young man to spend the night in jail. I didn’t say nothin’ about fix anything, do this, do that. I just wanted to get him out of jail. I didn’t want this boy to spend the night in jail. I didn’t know I was doing wrong.”

Police, Bommarito said, dropped Campo off at the restaurant. Campo could not be reached for comment.

Bommarito said Campo appeared sober after he arrived at Tony’s downtown.

It’s unclear if police filed any formal charges against Campo. According to Bommarito, they decided against it after he was taken to the station.

“The fellow that made the arrest said, ‘After we think about it, look like he’s not drunk,” Bommarito said.

Said Bommarito: “Any uncle would do the same thing.”

He said he felt bad he had to make a phone call and couldn’t help Campo in person — Saturday was a busy night with Valentine’s Day the next day.

Bommarito added, “They’re making a big deal out of this.”

By “they” he means Chief Dan Isom, who wrote the board a letter expressing his concern. The Post-Dispatch asked the department this afternoon to immediately release the letter. The department said it would not immediately comply.

“We have three days to respond to that request and we haven’t made a decision,” said Danielle Eckrich, a paralegal for the department. “Our three days isn’t up yet.”

The board met in full in its regular monthly public meeting Wednesday — sandwiched between two closed-door sessions. The board did not discuss the situation in the open session.

Bommarito’s interference comes as a push in the legislature to dismantle the police board — and transfer the department’s reins to St. Louis City Hall — is gaining momentum.

In an arrangement dating to the Civil War, the department is governed by a panel of four commissioners appointed by the governor and the sitting mayor.

That setup has drawn fire as police department woes have piled up: a towing scandal that resulted in indictments, missing money from the police evidence locker and an internal investigation into the misuse of seized World Series tickets.

The Police Officers Association, which opposes any change in leadership, says a state-run department helps dissuade interference. The association’s Web site includes the message:

“The Board of Police Commissioners is an excellent way to keep politics and corruption out of law enforcement and because of this system, decisions are made in the best interest of the Police Department and the public, and not as a result of political deals.”

St. Louis, MO DWI Attorney

DWI guilty plea for Nixa mayor

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:29:00 +0000

Mayor Nixa pleads guilty to DWI charge

Ozark, MO

Nixa mayor Brian Hayes pleaded guilty on Tuesday for misdemeanor driving while intoxicated. Prosecuting Attorney Ron Cleek says it was a stand-up plea, which means there was no deal with the prosecutor.

Associate Circuit Judge John Waters gave Hayes a 30-day jail sentence and a $350 fine but suspended both of them in favor of two years of unsupervised probation and 60 hours of community service.

Hayes was charged last June after a traffic stop by a state trooper.

DWI Attorney - St. Louis, MO

Mardi Gras arrests and citations down from last year

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:18:00 +0000

Mardi Gras citations and arrests down from last year

St. Louis, MO

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCATCH - 02/16/2010

St. Louis police reported that 99 citations and tickets were issued Saturday at Mardi Gras, compared with 116 at last year's gala.
CRIME STATS
bullet Get the breaking news from our St. Louis Crime Beat blog
bullet See stats around St. Louis and the nation in our searchable database.

Here's the breakdown: 48 for being a minor in possession of alcohol, 12 for carrying a false ID, 11 for outstanding warrants varying from probation violations to theft, six for procuring alcohol for a minor, seven for peace disturbances, five for drunken driving, four for lewd conduct, two for urinating in public, one for assault, one for public exposure, one for failing to obey a police officer and one for destruction of private property.

Seven cars were towed for being parked in restricted areas, and 30 other vehicle owners were tracked down and agreed to move their vehicles before they were towed.

Police said 35 parking tickets were issued.

St. Louis Mardi Gras Attorney

Wentzville judge charged with DWI denies Mayor's request for resignation, denies driving while intoxicated

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:31:00 +0000

Judge Carter knows the law and is "innocent until proven guilty" -- Kudos to Judge Carter. Stand your ground, Your Honor!

Wentzville judge facing DWI charges doesn’t plan to quit

Wentzville, MO

Wentzville Mayor Paul Lambi on Thursday asked for the resignation of Michael Carter, the city’s municipal court judge, who was elected in April.

Carter said Friday he spoke to Lambi by phone and did not give him a definite answer.

“I didn’t tell him one way or another,” Carter said. “He didn’t give me a deadline. But I’m telling you that I do not intend to step down.”

Carter called Lambi’s action a “ratcheting up of political pressure” that stems from a disagreement between the two men over how Carter runs his courtroom.

Lambi wants Carter off the bench because on Tuesday night in municipal court, Carter refused to remove himself from hearing speeding and driving-while-intoxicated cases when asked to do so by Douglas Smith, the city’s prosecuting attorney.

Carter faces the same two charges after being ticketed Dec. 6 by a Missouri state trooper at 12:57 a.m. on Interstate 70 in St. Peters. Carter has denied driving while intoxicated. The charges are pending.

Lambi said Carter’s actions on the bench are enough to warrant the judge’s resignation.

“Any reasonable individual who has been following this in our court would have to ask themselves if they could get a fair hearing,” Lambi said.

Carter was elected with 64 percent of the vote, defeating longtime incumbent Larry Nesslage.

Smith said that on Tuesday night he first asked Carter to remove himself from a DWI case and, later, to remove himself from a speeding case.

The two men conferred in chambers that night.

Carter, a 38-year-old St. Charles attorney, said the proper procedure is for a prosecutor or defendant to request a different judge within 10 days of when a charge is filed. That time frame had passed, Carter said.

In the DWI case before him Tuesday, Carter said, the defendant had asked for a two-week continuance in order to hire a lawyer.

“I never said I would not recuse myself or I would not disqualify myself,” Carter said. Instead, Carter said, he wanted to give the case a two-week continuance so, first, the defendant could get a lawyer and, second, the question of removing himself from all DWI and speeding cases could be resolved by St. Charles County Circuit Judge Jon Cunningham, the presiding judge of the 11th Judicial Circuit.

Carter said it makes little sense to remove himself from a case in which a defendant is simply asking for a continuance or, in the case of a speeding ticket, wants to plead guilty, pay a fine and leave.

“I have not gotten along with the prosecutor since the day I got there,” Carter said. “There has been a lot of acrimony.”

Smith said that after he asked Carter to remove himself from the two cases it was clear the judge was intent on hearing these types of cases. Smith dismissed those two cases, as well as six or seven other DWI or speeding cases, with the intent of re-filing them later. When he re-files them, he said, he will simultaneously ask for a different judge.

Usually, either the defendant or prosecutor may ask for and receive a different judge without having to give a reason. To disqualify a judge requires a specific reason. A recusal means the judge decided voluntarily to remove himself from the case for a reason.

“It is my personal belief that I should have never had to attempt to disqualify him,” Smith said. “He should have recused himself.”

Lambi argued that having a judge on the bench hearing DWI and speeding charges, while facing those same charges, gives the appearance of impropriety. Lambi made reference to a section of the Missouri Supreme Court’s Code of Judicial Conduct, which states, “A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s activities.”

Carter said if there’s such widespread concern over his impartiality, why is it that prosecutor Smith is the only person asking him not to hear DWI and speeding cases. Not a single defendant or defense attorney has made the request, Carter said.

For months before his arrest Carter was at odds with Lambi and Wentzville Police Chief Robert Noonan over how the judge runs his court. In their view, Carter is too lenient with defendants and does not respect city ordinances. Lambi has accused Carter of playing “Let’s Make A Deal” on court fines.

In turn, Carter has said city officials do not respect the concept of an independent judiciary and are more interested in raising revenue than justice.

Carter plans to challenge Republican Jack Banas, the St. Charles County prosecuting attorney, in the November election.

Lambi is being challenged in the April 6 mayoral election by aldermen Nick Guccione, Ward 3, and Bill Schuette, Ward 2.

DWI Attorney - Wentzvile, MO

Mayor pleads guilty to DWI in Cole County

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:48:00 +0000

Russellville mayor pleads guilty to driving while intoxicated

Russelville, MO

Cole County Sheriff's Deputies arrested Philip J. Hagenoff after he failed a breathalyzer test more than a week ago.

Hagenoff's blood alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit.

The court fined Hagenoff the standard 500 dollars plus court costs. Hagenoff removed his name as a mayoral candidate for the next election and resigned his position.

Missouri DWI Attorney

St. Charles man convicted of DWI and involuntary manslaughter sentenced to eight years in prison

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:34:00 +0000

Drunken driver sentenced to eight years for fatal crash in St. Charles County

St. Charles, MO

A former St. Charles County man was sentenced today to eight years in prison for a drunken driving crash that killed a Defiance woman.

Steven A. Hicks, 23, pleaded guilty in December of involuntary manslaughter and felony assault. He drove a pickup truck that collided with a car driven by Diane Fullkerson, 55, on Jan. 19, 2009.

Police said Hicks was eastbound on Highway DD when his truck veered off the road, then crossed into the path of Fulkerson’s car in the westbound lane. His blood-alcohol level was .225 percent, they said. Peter Adams, a passenger in Fulkerson’s car, was injured.

In exchange for Hicks’ guilty plea, prosecutors agreed not to argue against probation. As a result, assistant prosecutor Philip Groenweghe said little during today’s hearing.

Christopher B. Graville, Hicks’ attorney, asked Circuit Judge Ted House to send his client to a 120-day prison treatment program. If Hicks did well, Graville said, he then could be placed on probation. He said his client knew probation alone was not the right outcome for the case.

“He committed a very serious offense, and he took someone’s life,” Graville said. “He has to pay the consequences for that, and he realizes that.”

Graville said Hicks had moved to the Kansas City area, where he had started a treatment program.

But House said a report prepared by the state Division of Probation and Parole noted that Hicks had a long history of using various drugs and alcohol. He said Hicks started drinking around age 17, and, at one point had consumed 10 to 20 beers per night.

Hicks also admitted that he used marijuana before he pleaded guilty to the involuntary manslaughter charge and that he had been arrested for driving with a revoked license while he was out on bail.

“This is the description, Mr. Hicks, of somebody who should have gotten treatment before the offense occurred,” House said.

House sentenced Hicks to concurrent terms of eight years in prison for the involuntary manslaughter count and three years in prison for the assault count. State law requires that Hicks serve at least 85 percent of the sentence for manslaughter — a little more than six years and nine months.

Fulkerson’s husband Rod read a statement at the hearing. He said he met his wife in July 1966 while he worked at his uncle’s fireworks stand. She stayed with him through his service in the Army in Vietnam. They were married for 36 years, he said.

“I hope that for the rest of (Hick’s) life, he remembers what he did to Diane,” Rod Fulkerson said.

Rod Fulkerson said his wife was well-known for her outgoing personality as a waitress at Stefanina’s Pizzeria in Wentzville, a job she held for 19 years. The staff there chipped in for a bench on the restaurant’s patio in her honor.

Laurie Rhodes, a server at Stefanina’s, said the restaurant hasn’t been the same since Diane Fulkerson’s death.

“We just keep her alive by telling funny stories,” Rhodes said. “Sometimes we get sad, and sometimes we laugh. She’ll never be forgotten. We talk about her every day.”

Rhodes said customers used to come just to sit and talk with Diane Fulkerson.

“By the time they left, they felt great,” she said.

Missouri DWI Criminal Defense Attorney

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:20:00 +0000

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

Texting while driving may be more dangerous than Driving While Intoxicated (DWI)

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:02:00 +0000

Tests show why texting-while-driving may be more dangerous than DWI

Springfield, MO

About six different bills in the Missouri Legislature this session would ban texting behind the wheel for everyone in the Show Me State. Since last Aug. 28, driving and texting is banned for those who are 21 and younger.

Some lawmakers say texting should be banned for everyone because it's just as dangerous as drunken driving. We examined that claim and came up with a surprising result. We used a practice driving course at Prime Trucking.

Two KY3 employees helped us compare drunken driving to texting-while-driving. Kristy Schiebel and Drew Douglas first wore goggles that blurred part of their vision, making them feel as if they were drunk.

"I'm wondering if I can even do this honestly," Douglas said as he got ready for the driving course.

Sitting in the backseat during the tests, Missouri State Highway Patrol Sgt. Dan Bracker evaluated their driving.

"There's no defensive driving whatsoever," Bracker said. "He makes wide sweeping turns like he's impaired."

As you might suspect, the goggles turned our sober drivers into road hazards.

"You hit a cone," said Bracker.

Next, they drove with the goggles off but their cellular telephones in their hands. First, they received text messages.

"I would look at that, yeah; not respond to it, but I'll definitely look at it," said Douglas.

"It's an addiction," said Schiebel. "It's hard to not want to look at that."

"I don't do it a lot. I thought just holding my phone up actually helped out," said Douglas.

We asked our drivers to send a text message to another phone while driving on the course closed to traffic. Right away, Schiebel got way off course and had to get back.

"Onto the road; you're off in somebody's yard!" said Bracker.

Her car's engine surged and then dropped off. Her speed went up and down as if it was a roller coaster.

"Wrong side of the road," said Bracker.

Texting-while-driving didn't go much better for Douglas.

"I'm watching his eyes while he's texting. He spends more time, his eyes spend more time on texting than he does on the road. He will text, text, text, take a quick look, and text some more," said Bracker.

"He's on the left side of the road. Hello!" the trooper said.

Riding in the car with our two test subjects, we found something a bit surprising: a texting driver may be even more dangerous than we thought.

"Texting is just as dangerous if not more than driving while impaired," said Bracker.

"I felt more in control with the goggles on because I was still able to have my mind focused on one task," said Schiebel.

"She absolutely cannot text and drive. She was all over the road," said Bracker.

"You hear about that stuff all the time and think, 'This is not going to happen to me,' which is what I think. I thought i was pretty good at doing both at the same time but that's apparently not the case. That makes you think," said Douglas.

"These texts are not important. I'm guilty, we're all guilty, we've all received them and thought, 'I can do it.' We can't do it. It's going to catch up. It's a Russian roulette. We're just spinning the gun and absolutely putting it to our head," said Bracker.

On the practice course, only the cones took the hits. Others do it for real.

At a recent Senate hearing on one of the texting-and-driving bills, no one spoke out against a universal ban. If one of the bills does pass, the ban likely would go into effect on Aug. 28 unless an emergency clause is inserted, which would mean it would go into effect as soon as the governor signs it.

Springfield, MO DWI Attorney

MADD is model for anti-texting while driving group

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 01:07:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:20:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:12:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:01:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:57:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:24:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:50:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:41:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 06:13:00 +0000

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"

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 03:31:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:32:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:59:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:54:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (iLitigate) — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 05:15:00 +0000

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