The Ohio Supreme Court recently decided a case in which an officer conducted a traffic stop after learning the basis for the stop was no longer valid. The issue was whether evidence obtained from the stop was admissible in the defendant’s trial. This issue was addressed by this court in 1984. However, in the recent case, the Court reached a different conclusion.
This blog is not a bar band: we take requests without asking for tips! Yesterday, we received a question from a reader who wants to understand the interplay of Child Endangering and DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio). This article is going to answer that reader’s question. Ask and you shall receive.
A recent news story reported the arrest of a 14-year-old boy for DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio). It is somewhat unusual for a juvenile to be charged with OVI in Ohio. When a juvenile faces an OVI case, some aspects are the same as adult OVIs and some components are different. Those components include the investigation, the court process, and the penalties.
Ohio’s significantly revised law ‘Driving While Texting’ went into effect on April 4, 2023. When a criminal law is created or revised, it takes a while for the law to be the subject of appellate court decisions. In one of the first decisions interpreting the revised ‘Driving While Texting’ law, a court of appeals concluded the exceptions to the law are affirmative defenses.
In DUI cases (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio), a defendant’s blood or urine sample may be tested by a crime lab to determine the concentration of alcohol and/or drugs in the sample. In court, a lab analyst testifies regarding the blood or urine testing and the results of the test. But what if the analyst testifying is not the analyst who conducted the test? The recent case of Smith v. Arizona addressed whether this violates the defendant’s right to confront witnesses.
When an officer arrests a driver for DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio), the officer typically requests that the driver consent to a blood, breath, or urine test. However, a statute in the Ohio Revised Code (section 4511.191) says a driver arrested for OVI implicitly consents to those tests. Can a driver arrested for OVI revoke that consent? This question has not been directly addressed in Ohio but was recently answered by the Supreme Court of Colorado.
The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) recently implemented a policy of administering a breath alcohol test to every driver stopped for a traffic offense. Even if the stop is for a minor violation, and even if the officer has no suspicion the driver is under the influence, the driver must submit to a breath test. Refusing the test is a criminal offense. Could this happen in Ohio?
Patrick Mahomes, Sr. was indicted for drunk driving in Texas. According to Spectrum News, Mahomes has two prior DWI convictions. In Texas, a third DWI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio) is a felony offense which carries a prison term of two years to ten years. But what if a person is charged with a felony OVI in Ohio? Continue Reading
In Ohio, there is a difference between a ‘vehicle’ and a ‘motor vehicle’. In cases of Vehicular Homicide and Vehicular Assault, the difference matters. The Ohio Supreme Court recently decided an Aggravated Vehicular Assault case in which the defendant’s guilt hinged on the definition of ‘motor vehicle’. The Court’s decision affects both vehicular assault and vehicular homicide cases.
A truck driver hauling 43,000 pounds of beer was charged with DUI (called ‘OVI’ in Ohio). According to KRCR TV, the driver’s blood alcohol content was ‘over the limit’ for both commercial drivers and non-commercial drivers. While the irony of a beer deliverer being charged with DUI may sound comical, a commercial driver would find nothing funny about being charged with OVI. For holders of a commercial driver’s license (CDL), the rules related to OVI are strict, and the consequences are severe.
Columbus OVI/DUI Attorney Blog