Columbus OVI/DUI Attorney Blog

December 28, 2013

Driving With A Hangover: As Dangerous As Driving Drunk?

Everyone knows that driving under the influence of alcohol is dangerous. It impairs our vision, increases our reaction time, and makes it challenging to estimate the distance between us and other drivers or objects on the road. Few people, however, consider the danger of driving under the influence of a hangover the day after a night of heavy drinking. Most people think, ‘the alcohol level in my blood is lower than the legal limit, so it is safe to drive’. Think again. Two recent studies have shown that driving with a hangover is nearly as dangerous as driving under the influence of alcohol.

December 7, 2013

Is Ohio’s Implied Consent Law For DUI/OVI Unconstitutional?

by Shawn Dominy

Blood draw.jpg

A recent vehicular homicide case in Wisconsin triggers the question of whether Ohio’s implied consent law is constitutional. In that case, a former Lutheran bishop is accused of what Ohio calls Aggravated Vehicular Homicide; causing the death of another person by operating a vehicle under the influence. The bishop was told that he would lose his license if he did not consent to a blood test, so he submitted to the test. His attorney argued that the threat of a license suspension amounts to coercion, and that makes the implied consent law unconstitutional. In Ohio, this issue has been decided.

November 23, 2013

Driver’s License Suspended For Inability To Urinate On Cue

by Shawn Dominy

Imagine that you are arrested for DUI (called OVI in Ohio), and the officer takes you to a police station to take a urine test. You want to comply, because you’re sure the test will prove you are under the legal limit, but you don’t need to go. In fact, you can’t go. You drink a bunch of water and wait a while, but you still can’t go. The officer then says you refused the urine test, so your driver’s license is suspended for one year.

November 9, 2013

DUI / OVI In Ohio Juvenile Courts

by Shawn Dominy

Juvenile DUI.gif

I recently represented a client for a DUI / OVI in a juvenile court near Columbus, Ohio. The case went to trial, and I was sharing my experience with a colleague. The colleague happened to be coordinating a DUI / OVI seminar for the Columbus Bar Association, and he asked me to speak at the seminar on the topic of handling DUI / OVI cases in juvenile court. The topic is a good one because most attorneys do not regularly represent clients for DUI / OVI in juvenile court, and there are some differences between juvenile cases and adult cases.

October 19, 2013

Margin Of Error In Ohio DUI/OVI Alcohol Tests

by Shawn Dominy

Gas chromatograph.jpg

From your bathroom scale to a police officer’s laser gun, every measurement device has a margin of error. For a device to be considered reliable, the margin of error must be known (and should be small!). In a recent Ohio DUI / OVI case, the court decided the admissibility of test results from a device with an unknown margin of error.

October 11, 2013

The Recipe For Success In DUI/OVI Trials

by Shawn Dominy

Last week, I attend the annual DUI seminar presented by the National College for DUI Defense (NCDD) and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL). I attend the seminar nearly every year, mostly because it’s a great seminar, and partly because it’s held in Las Vegas. Before this year’s seminar, I decided I would do something different. Although it violates the rule about what happens in Vegas, I’m sharing it here.

September 28, 2013

Ohio Traffic Cases And Sealing/Expungement Of Records

by Shawn Dominy

Rules-and-Regulations-300x278 As a DUI/OVI attorney, I am frequently asked if a person can seal/expunge records for DUI/OVI offenses and other traffic offenses. The answer is “no”: Ohio Revised Code section 2953.36 says the records for DUI/OVI convictions and other traffic offense convictions cannot be sealed. Therefore, a conviction for DUI/OVI or other traffic offenses is a permanent record.

September 21, 2013

Deficient Field Sobriety Tests Are Inadmissible In Ohio DUI/OVI Cases

by Shawn Dominy

Standardized field sobriety tests (SFSTs) are administered in nearly every DUI/OVI case in Columbus and central Ohio. A previous post in this blog analyzed the standard for admitting the tests as evidence in court: the SFSTS must be administered in substantial compliance with the officers’ training manual for the tests to be admissible. A recent case in an Ohio appellate court applied that standard and concluded the tests were not admissible in Middleburg Heights v. Gettings.

August 31, 2013

State v. Lancaster May Change Interpretation Of Ohio Breath Testing Law

by Shawn Dominy

Intoxilyzer 8000 Declared Unreliable In Ohio DUI/OVI Case
This blog has discussed Intoxilyzer 8000 litigation in many previous posts. One of those posts (November 18, 2012) mentioned the case of State v. Lancaster in the Marietta Municipal Court. I was asked to help with that litigation as counsel for Lancaster. Like many of the I-8000 cases throughout Ohio, the Lancaster case involves the reliability of the I-8000. Unlike most of the other cases, however, the Lancaster case includes testimony of expert witnesses for the prosecution and defense. After five days of testimony, the verdict is in, and the breath test is out! The decision has already been appealed and is staged to possibly change the interpretation of breath-testing law in Ohio.

August 10, 2013

Is Drunk Walking A Good Alternative To Drunk Driving?

by Shawn Dominy

By driving under the influence, you could cause harm to property, yourself, and others. You could also be charged with DUI/OVI. Thanks to public awareness programs, the risks of drunk driving are well known. Not so well known are the risks of drunk walking…until now.