Tag Archives: DWI

MO state troopers to start patrolling St. Louis highways

The City of St. Louis highways will be getting some help when it comes to highway traffic enforcement.

The Missouri Highway Patrol will soon be patrolling the interstates in St. Louis. It will be a 90-day pilot program to free up police officers to focus on violent crimes in the city.

The patrols will focus on certain stretches of Interstates 70 and 55 that are located within city limits. Approximately 20 to 30 troopers will be assigned to the program with about eight troopers on each shift.

The trooper patrols, which are expected to start in early July, will be available to assist city police officers if they need assistance. As to how many city officers would be freed up is unclear at this point. Apparently this type of temporary program had been used once before during a spike in violent crime in February of 2015.  Then police Chief Sam Dotson had requested the assistance.

State troopers don’t currently patrol interstates that within the city.  Troopers are expected to come from Troop C which have areas of extra personnel and by combining several zones and adjusting schedules to maintain current levels of coverage.

The push this time seems to be coming from within Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens’ office.  Last December the Governor’s wife was robbed outside a café.  Crime in St. Louis has increased in recent weeks. The latest statistics show overall crime is down slightly but aggravated assaults with a gun are up 27 percent over the same time period last year. Homicides are similar to last year’s numbers.

Creve Coeur Municipal Court

Located in St. Louis County

Creve Coeur Municipal Court Jody Caswell, Court Clerk

300 N. New Ballas Rd

Creve Coeur, MO 63141

(314) 432-8844 (314) 432-1962 (facsimile)


Prosecuting Attorney Stephanie Karr

Court Dates and Docket Dates 

Did you get a ticket in the municipality of Creve Coeur? What should you do?

If you received a moving violation you have 3 options:

  1. Pay it
  2. Go to court and try to fight it yourself
  3. Hire an attorney.

If you pay it, there will be points assessed to your license. This can cause your insurance rates to go up and/or cause your license to be suspended. Eight points in 18 months can result in a license suspension.

If you try to fight it yourself, the first time you appear in court, your case will not be heard. You will be required to wait and then stand in front of the judge to plead guilty or not guilty. If you plead not guilty, the judge will set your case for trial and you will have to come back at another date. Taking care of the ticket yourself will result in at least two court appearances taking upwards of an hour a piece. Then if you lose, you will be required to pay the fine anyway.

If you hire an attorney, you will likely avoid the appearance and our goal is to get your moving violation amended to a non-moving violation. We have worked in the Creve Coeur Municipal for over 15 years. We work with the prosecuting attorney to get your ticket reduced. Often we are successful getting the ticket amended to Other Parking Violation instead of a moving violation. We then notify you via email and hard copy and all you have to do is mail in your payment. Usually this process requires no appearance in court on your part saving you time and energy. For a free consultation, fill out our easy ticket submission form and one of our attorneys will contact you.

Creve Coeur MIP Defense

  • Our Creve Coeur MIP lawyers handle MIP defense, where the object is keeping your record clean and your driver license from being suspended

Creve Coeur DWI Defense

  • Our Creve Coeur DWI attorneys handle drunk driving defense, where your driver license and your freedom are at stake. In 2017, Creve Coeur filed 67 alcohol or drug related charges.

Let our Creve Coeur Traffic Lawyers start helping you today. Contact Us

Creve Coeur Traffic Court Information

This page contains Court information Links for Creve Coeur, Missouri.

MO Speeding Ticket Lawyers | MO DWI Lawyers | MO MIP Lawyers

Missouri Speeding Ticket Defense | Missouri MIP Defense | Missouri DWI Defense

MO Appellate Court rules on State’s driving eligibility rule

The Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District (Division Three) held last week that Missouri substantive law governs the Director or Revenue’s decisions when it comes to issuance, suspension, or revocation of a Missouri license regardless of the driver’s home state at the time of conviction. The interstate Driver License Compact does not supplant the Missouri 10-year ineligibility rule under §302.060(9), the appellate court said.


Here is the background of the case.  The Director of Revenue appealed the trial court’s judgment ordering the DOR to issue a Missouri driver’s license to William Thanner.


Thanner received three DWI convictions while residing in Georgia between 1996 and 2010. He completed all requirements for reinstatement in Georgia and had a valid Georgia license when he moved in 2015 to Missouri. The Director of DOR denied Thanner’s application for a Missouri license, citing §302.060(9) imposing a 10-year ban following two or more DWI convictions. Upon judicial review, the trial court ordered the Director to issue Thanner a Missouri license, reasoning that Thanner’s Georgia license was entitled to reciprocity under the interstate Driver License Compact (§302.600).


The trial court’s judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for the trial court to reinstate the Director’s denial of Thanner’s application for an unrestricted license and proceed on his request for limited driving privileges.


 The opinion was written by Judge’s Lisa Van Amburg with judges Angela T. Quigless and Robert G. Dowd, Jr., concurring. The attorney for Appellant was Rachel Jones and the attorney for Respondent was Keith Liberman.


The appellate court stated the following as to its analysis:


“Here, the trial court adopted Thanner’s rationale and conclusions of law, relying entirely on a dissent opining that §302.160 applies only to drivers holding a Missouri license when the out-of-state offense occurred, and citing full faith and credit without analysis.2 Johnston v. Director of Revenue, 305 S.W.3d 465 (Mo. App. E.D. 2010). In that case, a Kentucky driver was convicted of DWI in 1996, but his conviction was not affirmed on appeal until 2006. In the interim, Johnston’s conviction remaining unreported, and he moved to Missouri and obtained a Missouri license in 2005. When the Kentucky DWI conviction was finally affirmed and reported in 2006, the Director suspended Johnston’s Missouri license. Despite the fact that Kentucky was Johnston’s home state at the time of the offense, this court affirmed the Director’s suspension, reasoning that the Director was entitled to rely on the conviction date as reported by Kentucky. While unusual on its chronological facts, Johnston remains instructive for its adherence to a strict liability approach to Missouri’s 10-year rule under §302.060(9), consistent with other appellate decisions cited above.


Thanner did not develop his full faith and credit argument into legal analysis and essentially abandoned it at oral argument, conceding that it does not mandate reciprocal recognition of state-specific licenses (e.g., drivers, teachers, lawyers).  Simply put, Missouri substantive law controls the Director’s issuance, suspension, or revocation of a Missouri license regardless of the driver’s home state at the time of the conviction. Nothing in the Compact mandates differential treatment.”

Fate of GPS for interlock ignition devices uncertain in Minn.

If you are a convicted drunk driver in the state of Minnesota, your location is being tracked through a GPS tracking system.  However, the Minnesota state legislature never approved its current use by the Department of Public Safety. 

It should be noted for our Missouri readers that the State of Missouri, through the Department of Revenue, requires GPS tracking for hardship licenses and reinstatement after a DWI.

There are some 11,000 convicted DUI drivers in Minnesota.  The DPS is currently tracking their whereabouts with GPS.  The interlock ignition law was passed in 2010 without the intention of tracking drivers with a GPS system.  Some legislators in Minnesota are concerned about whether this tracking is overreaching and unconstitutional.

A bi-partisan group of lawmakers are proposing a bill to end the use of GPS tracking of DUI offenders using ignition interlock equipment.

Opponents of the GPS tracking say that the issue is not that they are being tracked while driving drunk but that they are being tracked while they are sober. During recent hearings on the issue, the ACLU has stated that GPS tracking equates to a 4th Amendment search.  Criminal defense attorneys have testified that prosecutors could subpoena the GPS data for other criminal cases that are not connected to the DUI conviction.

The DPS has argued that the advantage of GPS is that they have immediate reporting of user violations, allowing them to take instant action instead of waiting at least 30 days to check a driver’s log.  Log verification was how it was done in the past.  DPS further states that they do not use or store data that they receive beyond the actual day it was recorded.

The proposed bill has received two amendments out of committee. The amendments would mandate that all DUI convicted Interlock users must be informed that their interlock device could potentially track them via GPS, and that they can be turned on by a court order.

St. Louis County Municipal court revenue down since Ferguson unrest

Looks as if the amount of revenue from St. Louis area municipal courts is way down since the social unrest in 2014 after the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson. This is according to research tabulated in an annual report by the Missouri state court system.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch tabulated information from the report and found that the data shows there has been a significant drop in revenue collected by municipal courts in St. Louis County.  Revenue was down from $53 million in fines and fees collected in year ending June 2014 to $29 million in year ending June 2016.

A similar trend can be seen in the number of traffic cases in the city of St. Louis.  The number of traffic cases filed last year fell to 66,008. This represents a drop of 69 percent compared to two years ago.

The data shows that the number of traffic cases in Ferguson last year, 1,736, had dropped 85 percent from two years ago, and non-traffic cases were down a similar percentage.  Fergusons court revenue plummeted from more than $2 million two years ago to just $579,000 this last year.  Ferguson had been under fire from the U.S. Department of Justice in the aftermath of Michael Brown. 

Ferguson’s municipal court system had been the target of a scathing U.S. Department of Justice report as well as intense scrutiny from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and other media.  Local attorneys can tell you that the long lines out the door are no longer the case.

Other cities in North County known for their intense speed traps along the I-70 corridor have also seen a drop in revenue, according to the court report.

St. Ann, for example, saw revenue drop nearly a million dollars from $2.6 million two years ago to $1.7 million this last year. Tickets issued fell during that same time period from over 25,000 to 9,880. 

Florissant municipal court revenue went from $2.6 million to $1.7 million. Normandy fell from $1.4 million to slightly over $788,000.  Pine Lawn dropped from $2,2 million to $652,925.  Berkeley was down from $1.2 million to $378,327.

Court explains annual DWI breath tester calibration requirement

The Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District handed down an opinion that better explains the calibration of breath testing devices used in DWI cases. The court ruled that the annual certification of the device, which regulations state it be done “annually,” must be taken literally. Annually means within 365 days. The Court went on to say that the purpose of the annual test is to make sure that the BAC tester is accurate when used. The case is MICHAEL RAY SLEDD, Petitioner-Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, Respondent-Appellant. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District – SD34272

Any other explanation such as how close to the use of the tester was the simulator certified, or how close to trial for an alcohol-related offense was the simulator certified is irrelevant. The court said that the circuit court erred when it excluded results of a breath test based on the certification of the stimulator. The case was remanded to admit the test results, then determine their credibility, and issue a new judgment.

Law enforcement ups efforts to prevent DWIs over holidays

Watch out for intoxicated drivers this holiday season.  At least that’s what Missouri Highway Patrol is planning to do.  Law enforcement agencies around the country are expected to step up their efforts to curtail drinking and driving these next couple weeks.

Many law enforcement agencies from across the nation will be participating in an initiative called “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over.”

According to news reports, the Missouri State Highway Patrol intends to increase the number of officers and checkpoints for the holidays.  Law enforcement officials say the combination of bad weather such as ice and snow plus driving impaired leads to a significant number of accidents.

Many Missouri courts will punish the first time DWI offender with some combination of fines, jail time, probation, community service, victim impact panels, and treatment through DWI courts.  They hope to curtail the number of DWI’s and DWI repeat offenders.   Missouri in 2015 had 870 traffic fatalities of which just under one-fourth of them involved some form of alcohol or drug impairment.

Be sure to have fun and drive safe this holiday season.  Happy Holidays.

MADD lowers grade on efforts by Missouri, Illinois to prevent drunk driving

Missouri and Illinois slipped in how Mothers Against Drunk Driving ranked both states’ efforts to prevent drunk driving.

MADD recently released its annual overview ranking each state’s progress in stopping drunken driving. There are five areas to judge and rank each state. They include the following:

1) How sobriety checkpoints are conducted;

2) The degree of punishments for putting children in danger;

3) Whether or not ignition interlocks are required, which is a machine that prevents a car from starting if a driver’s blood-alcohol level exceeds a certain limit;

4) Whether drivers licenses are revoked; and

5) The degree of punishment for refusing a blood-alcohol test.

It was just last year that Missouri and Illinois received the highest rating of five stars. This was the first year that a new half-star ranking was used in order to provide a more nuanced analysis of each category.  This year both Missouri and Illinois dropped a half star to four stars.

Each state slipped because of how it handled license suspensions, with Missouri for its blood-test refusals and Illinois for its punishments related to child endangerment.

Missouri does not have a statewide “no-refusal” law that requires police to obtain a warrant to draw blood from suspected drunk drivers who have refused to take a breath test. There are counties, such as St. Louis County since 2013, that do this on their own.  However, other counties have not chosen to do so.

Missouri does have an implied consent law that mandates that a driver who refuses to be tested will lose their driving privileges for one year.  The number of refusals have been dropping in Missouri.

Some 973 people nationwide were killed nationwide in drunken driving crashes.  These deaths occurred between Thanksgiving and New Year’s Day, amounting to almost 10 percent of all drunk driving accidents. MADD contends that almost a third of traffic deaths on the day before Thanksgiving Day and Christmas involved drunk driving.


Failure to follow instructions can count as a refusal

The Western District Court of Appeals has issued an opinion adding clarification as to what constitutes a refusal of a breathalyzer. In this case, Rader vs. DOR, WD78880, Rader agreed to take the breath test. Pursuant to trial court testimony, Rader blocked the mouthpiece of the instrument with his upper lip when he first attempted to blow. This resulted in the machine indicating that it was an insufficient sample. He was informed of this issue, but continued to place his lip over the mouthpiece on subsequent attempts also resulting in insufficient sample readings. Then, according to testimony, he indicated he wasn’t going to blow again and sat down. The Officer then noted it as a refusal to submit to a breath test.

The Appellate Court indicates that “the issue of whether a driver has refused to submit to a chemical analysis test is a question of fact to be decided by the trial court.” The Court further states: “A driver’s failure to follow instructions about the manner in which to blow into a breath analysis machine is sufficient evidence for a finder of fact to find a volitional failure to submit to a chemical analysis test as required by law.” The Court follows previous case law holding that even though an “attempt” is made, if the driver fails to follow instructions it can be deemed a refusal.