Columbus OVI/DUI Attorney Blog

March 26, 2016

Person Medically Incapable Of Urinating Is Not ‘Refusing’ The Test

A judge in Columbus, Ohio found a man to be in violation of probation because the man was unable to urinate upon request. The judge was aware the defendant, Mr. Hand, had medical problems which caused urinary difficulties and was taking medication designed to increase his urination. Nevertheless, the judge concluded Mr. Hand’s inability to urinate constituted a “refusal” to submit to a urine test. Individuals placed on probation for DUI/OVI in Ohio do not have this kind of experience, ordinarily. But this was no ordinary case.

March 19, 2016

OACDL Seminar: The Premiere Ohio DUI Defense Seminar

by Shawn Dominy

Last week was the annual DUI/OVI seminar presented by the Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (OACDL). One of the slogans now attached to the seminar is ‘The Premiere Ohio DUI Defense Seminar’. When I hear that slogan, two questions come to mind:
1. Are there any other Ohio DUI defense seminars?
2. If so, what makes this one the ‘premiere’ seminar?

February 27, 2016

Class Action Lawsuit Challenges DUI Administrative License Suspensions

by Shawn Dominy

Ohio takes drivers’ licenses before a person is found guilty of DUI/OVI. If a person is arrested for DUI/OVI and tests over the limit, or refuses to test, that person’s license is suspended immediately. No judge reviews the circumstances beforehand to determine if the suspension should be imposed. Instead, the executive branch of the government takes the driver’s license automatically.

February 20, 2016

Refrigerating Blood And Urine Samples In Ohio DUI/OVI Cases

by Shawn Dominy

When a person is arrested for DUI/OVI in Ohio, the arresting officer typically asks the person to submit to a breath, blood or urine test. For a test result to be admissible in court, the test must be administered in compliance with regulations issued by the Ohio Department of Health. One regulation requires refrigeration of blood and urine samples, and that regulation was the subject of a recent case decided by the Ohio Supreme Court.

January 30, 2016

The Speedy Trial Clock In Ohio DUI/OVI Cases With Blood Or Urine Tests

by Shawn Dominy

Four months after Brittany was arrested and charged with OVI, the government charged her with a second count of OVI. In November, Brittany was arrested for OVI. On the day of her arrest, she submitted a urine sample, and she was charged with OVI. Three weeks later, the urine sample was analyzed, and the result was provided to the police department. In March, four months after the arrest, the police department charged Brittany with a second count of OVI based on the result of the urine test. Isn’t that a violation of her right to a speedy trial?

January 16, 2016

When Are Miranda Warnings Required In Ohio DUI/OVI Cases?

by Shawn Dominy

The Miranda warnings are well-known: “you have the right to remain silent….” What is not so well-known is when the Miranda warnings are required. According to Miranda v. Arizona, the warnings must be given when a suspect is questioned while ‘in custody’. If a suspect is in custody and the warnings are not given, statements made by the suspect cannot be used in the suspect’s trial.

December 26, 2015

When Can Tickets Be Amended In Ohio DUI/OVI Cases?

by Shawn Dominy

At the last minute, without warning, the government convicted Demetrius of a more serious offense than with which he was originally charged. Demetrius received a ticket for OVI. The ticket informed him he was charged with a low-tier ‘per se’ OVI, which carries a minimum of three days in jail and does not involve mandatory restricted (yellow) license plates. Just before his case was finished, the court permitted the prosecution to change the charge to a high-tier ‘per se’ OVI, which carries a minimum of six days in jail and mandatory yellow license plates. Can the government to that?

December 13, 2015

Ohio DUI/OVI Marijuana Law Upheld After Half-Baked Attack

by Shawn Dominy

An appellate case decided earlier this month illustrates how not to attack the constitutionality of a law. In the case of State v. Topolosky, the Tenth District Court of Appeals upheld Ohio’s DUI/OVI marijuana law. Coincidentally, just before the case was published, I wrote about this topic in this blog, and I spoke about this topic at two seminars. The defendant in Topolosky did essentially the opposite of what I suggested in the blog and presentations. The defendant used an argument destined to fail…with bad timing…without an expert witness.

November 21, 2015

Court Clarifies Confusion In Ohio Felony DUI/OVI Sentencing

by Shawn Dominy

Interpreting Ohio’s DUI/OVI sentencing law can be complicated. The sentencing statutes take up many pages in the Ohio Revised Code (O.R.C.), and appellate courts have issued many decisions interpreting those statutes. One issue which has led to confusion is how a court is supposed to sentence a defendant convicted of felony OVI and a ‘repeat offender specification’. This issue is complicated enough that different appellate courts in different districts of Ohio have reached different conclusions. The Ohio Supreme Court recently acknowledged the conflict among the appellate courts and issued a decision which resolves the conflict and establishes one rule for the entire state.

November 14, 2015

Are Ohio’s DUI/OVI Marijuana Laws Constitutional?

by Shawn Dominy

Issue 3 went up in smoke last week, so it’s still illegal to use marijuana in Ohio. It’s also illegal to operate a vehicle under the influence of marijuana or with a prohibited level of marijuana metabolite in one’s urine. The last article in this blog addressed the duration of marijuana’s effects and the duration of marijuana’s detectability. The conclusion was marijuana effects last for two hours to five hours, but marijuana metabolites are detectable in urine for up to five weeks. With that backdrop, this article discusses whether Ohio’s DUI/OVI marijuana laws are Constitutional.