Author Archives: wthornburg

Bill pending in the house to ban camera tickets

Camera tickets have been taking a big hit in Missouri lately. The Court of Appeals has stricken red light cameras in Ellisville and Speed Camera tickets in Moline Acres.

Missouri lawmakers have introduced a bill to the House of Representatives to ban these automated systems across the state. Sponsored by Republican Bryan Spencer from District 63 and Republican Ron Hicks from District 107, HB 1533 aims to prohibit the use of automatic traffic enforcement beginning August 28, 2014. Any political entity that had a contract would have one year to terminate the contract.

The bill was introduced on January 21, 2014. The public hearing was just held last week.

We will update the progress on HB 1533.

Man held in contempt for drinking experiment during DWI deliberations

A 70 year old business man’s self-published book has gotten him in hot water with the Florida Court system. The man was a juror on a criminal DWI case in which the defendant allegedly crashed into a 23 year old man sending the victim’s car into a canal where the victim ultimately drowned.

The juror indicated that he proposed a drinking experiment during deliberations to see how drunk he would be had he consumed as much alcohol as the victim. The jury ultimately convicted the defendant, but that conviction has been overturned for juror misconduct. The juror was sentenced to 6 months in jail. He also failed to disclose a pending DWI against his ex-wife during voir dire.

To add to the strangeness of this case, the defendant adopted his 42 year old girlfriend to avoid civil liability. This adoption, which his ex-wife claims no knowledge of, gave the girlfriend 1/3 of a $300 million trust fund set up for his children. In 2012, the driver agreed to give $45 million to the parents of the victim.

Filing an insurance claim can up your rates

A recent study by insurancequotes.com shows that your auto policy rates can go up when you make a claim. In Missouri the rate increase is about 27.5% with Illinois increasing at 29.4%. These are on the low end of the scale. In Massachusetts the rate increase averages 67.4%.

This is usually for at fault accidents resulting in property damage and/or bodily injury. According to the article, it makes it more risky for the insurance company to cover you after an at fault claim. These increases usually last approximately three years.

If the damage is close to your deductible it would make more sense to not make a claim admitting fault.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/Media/Default/Blog-Images/auto-insurance-claim-rate-increase-table.png

Reasonable grounds must exist prior to the arrest for DWI

Warren vs. DOR SD32501, 12-11-13

Southern District Court of Appeals from Camden County

In this case the Department of Revenue (hereinafter “DOR”) appealed the Circuit Court’s judgment to reinstate Warren’s driving privileges, contending that that trial court misapplied the legal standard for reasonable grounds.

The arresting officer responded to the scene of a one-vehicle accident where no one was present at the scene. He determined the vehicle belonged to Warren. During his investigation he was called to assist an individual (Warren) who was requesting medical assistance five miles from the scene of the accident.  In the Findings of Fact, the trial court determined that the time of the accident was unknown and that while Warren had admitted to drinking, the time and amount of alcohol was also unknown. The trial court determined that the Officer did not have reasonable cause to arrest Warren on a charge of Driving While Intoxicated without knowing those facts.

Missouri Revised Statute 577.041.4 provides that an individual who has had his or her license revoked for a refusal may request a hearing. The court will then determine: Whether the person was stopped/arrested; whether the officer had reasonable grounds to believe the person was driving a motor vehicle under the influence; and whether the person refused. Prior case law requires that the reasonable grounds must exist at the time of the arrest. Not obtained after the fact, for example admissions after the officer has arrested the driver. It does allow for circumstantial evidence. The trial court determined reasonable grounds did not exist and the Appellate Court defers to the trier of fact for determination of credibility on circumstantial evidence.

Initial refusal of a chemical test can be negated by voluntarily withdrawal

Rothwell vs. Director of Revenue, WD76060

Western District (Platte County) 12-10-13

In this case Rothwell was arrested for Driving While Intoxicated. Pursuant to the facts, he initially consented to a breath test and then withdrew his consent to speak to an attorney. He then was combative with a nurse who attempted a warrantless blood draw. Finally he consented to a blood draw at the hospital. The Director of Revenue (DOR) suspended his license for a year due to the initial refusal. The trial court determined that he eventually consented and that negated his initial refusal.

In this appeal, the DOR argues that the trial court erred in allowing the voluntary consent to negate his prior refusal. The DOR argues that the case precedents in this matter misapplied the law as well.

Case law holds that a driver’s license cannot be administratively revoked if a driver voluntarily submits to a chemical test. To allow that would be contrary to the intent of the statute allowing both the year revocation for a refusal with the chemical test to prove guilt. The Court did note that the officer upon an initial refusal has the choice of either permitting the withdrawal of the refusal of chemical testing or letting the initial refusal stand.