Archive for March, 2008

The National College for DUI Defense

Tuesday, March 11th, 2008

Until a few years ago, attorneys attempting to defend a client against drunk driving charges were general practitioners who had little, if any, understanding of the nature of the offense. They were unfamiliar with such DUI investigatory methods as field sobriety tests, and there was an almost complete lack of seminars on how to defend these clients. Most importantly, defense lawyers were completely ignorant about the complexities of forensic alcohol analysis — whether of blood, breath or urine. How does this breathalyzer work? What is infrared analysis? Gas chromatography? How is alcohol metabolized in the human body? What is Widmark’s formula? Hematocrit? What is retrograde extrapolation and how does it work? Are there  physiological variables in alcohol metabolism between individuals? What medical conditions can effect a breath reading and how? How does radio frequency interference affect a breat test? What happens if blood samples ferment or coagulate?

Chemical analysis of blood, breath or urine involved knowledge of such highly technical fields as physiology, organic chemistry, physics, biophysics, electrical engineering — subjects far beyond the experience and training of lawyers.

Then a few years ago twelve of the most prominent DUI defense attorneys in the country met in a hotel conference room at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. Over the following three days they hammered out plans for a new professional organization: The National College for DUI Defense. They created this as a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the quality of the DUI Defense Bar, primarily through providing educational seminars. An important secondary purpose of the organization was to address the problem of insularity in the profession — the isolation of lawyers; the College would be a medium through which attorneys across the country could share information, ideas and experiences.

I am proud to say that I was one of those twelve original founders, and have since served as Dean and on its Board of Regents. For each of us, the College was a true labor of love.

The first national seminar was held at Harvard Law School. It was an intense 3-day series of lectures, demonstrations and workshops, featuring a faculty of 22 of the top lawyers, scientists and forensic toxicologists in the field. The experiment was a huge success, and has been repeated every July at Harvard for the past 14 years. In fact, the College’s governing Board of Regents soon expanded this educational effort by creating an annual 2-day seminar in the winter as well. This proved another resounding success: in the recent session held in Las Vegas in October, 2007, there were over 600 lawyers attending from all over the country.

The National College for DUI Defense also created an internet website, along with an email discussion group where attorneys nationwide could share information and ideas. There are currently hundreds of members across the country using this forum — and discovering that what one lawyer in Texas has found effective in dealing with field sobriety tests can be helpful to another in Oregon.

Having provided the means to develop greater skills in this demanding field, the College next addressed the need to recognize those lawyers who had achieved the highest levels of competence. Within recent years, they began certifying attorneys as specialists in DUI defense. In order to be Board-certified, an applicant must satisfy demanding requirements of practice and trial experience, as well as pass intensive written and oral examinations. Subsequently, the College’s accreditation process was recognized by the American Bar Association for a new legal specialty: DUI Defense. After considerable study, the A.B.A. went further and recognized the National College for DUI Defense as the sole organization authorized to certify attorneys as specialists in this new field.

The College maintains its headquarters in Montgomery, Alabama, and currently has a membership of over 900 attorneys.


Catheter Forced Up Penis After DUI Arrest

Wednesday, March 5th, 2008

I don’t think the following story needs any commentary from me:

Tube Inserted Into Man Who Refused to Give Urine Sample

Kelso, Wa.  March 4  –  When a man who was suspected of drunken driving in Longview refused to give blood and urine samples he was taken to a hospital.

His lawyer says he was held down kicking and screaming for a blood draw. And a tube was inserted into his bladder to withdraw the urine.

He sued Cowlitz County. A settlement was reached Friday in which he was paid $15,000, without authorities admitting they did anything wrong…

Welcome to "The War on Drunk Driving".


“The Federal DUI Immunity Act of 1998″

Wednesday, March 5th, 2008

My last two posts, concerning the notorious lack of convictions for drunk driving when a cop, prosecutor or judge is involved, has triggered a flood of email…wanting to know about “The Federal DUI Immunity Act of 1998″.

Hmmm…Sorry, folks, that was just my attempt at humor.  Or perhaps sarcasm.  Or maybe anger.


“Do As I Say, Not As I Do” (redux)

Tuesday, March 4th, 2008

Apparently, Utah does not subscribe to the provisions of the Federal DUI Immunity Act of 1998 that I mentioned in yesterday’s post….or at least not as to DUIs committed by heads of the Highway Patrol’s DUI Enforcement Unit. 


Former Head of UHP’s DUI Unit Ends Appeal of Alcohol-Related Conviction 

West Jordan, UT.  Mar 3  – The former commander of the Utah Highway Patrol’s DUI enforcement team on Monday pleaded guilty — for the second time — to alcohol-related reckless driving for crashing his police cruiser in 2006…

Swain crashed his cruiser into a concrete barrier on Bangerter Highway near 400 West at 2:20 a.m. on June 23, 2006…

Later, after Swain’s arrest, an intoxilyzer measured his blood-alcohol level at 0.11 percent, which exceeds Utah’s legal limit of 0.08 percent.

Hmmm…He pled guilty to reckless driving rather than to drunk driving?  With a 0.11% blood-alcohol level?  Maybe Utah has a modified version of the DUI Immunity Act.


“Do What I Say, Not What I do”

Monday, March 3rd, 2008

The latest example of the ubiquitous DUI Double Standard:

Regional Agency Head Suspended After DUI Arrest

Palm City, FL.  –   The leader of a Treasure Coast-wide agency established to provide classes for people convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs was suspended from her job Wednesday in the wake of her DUI arrest Monday.

The Comprehensive Offender Rehabilitation and Education program will continue to operate normally despite the arrest and suspension of its executive director, Margot “Peggy” Cioffi, 59, of Palm City, program officials said…

Cioffi, whose blood alcohol level was measured in a breath test at 0.336, could not immediately be reached for comment. The legal driving limit in Florida is 0.08 percent.

Cioffi was accused of striking another car with her Nissan SUV near Matheson Avenue, driving home, pulling away from a deputy as he tried to handcuff her, and screaming so loud neighbors came out of their homes, a deputy’s report says.

Apparently, Ms. Cioffi didn’t qualify under the provisions of the Federal DUI Immunity Act of 1998, which has previously been held to apply only to police officers, prosecutors and judges. 

(Thanks to David Baker.)