George C. Creal, Jr., P.C. DUI Trial Lawyers Email Consultation:
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
, or Phone Consultation: (770) 961 5511, or Submit an free online DUI case analysis using the "Contact" tab above. | |
|
George C. Creal, Jr., P.C. is a law firm representing those charged with DUI or driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. We have been representing DUI Defendants for ten years in the City of Atlanta and its surrounding counties including Fulton, Clayton, DeKalb, Henry, Fayette, Rockdale, Gwinnett, Cherokee, Forsyth, Coweta, Cobb, Douglas and Spalding. We also represent Defendants upon request outside of the Atlanta area through out the State of Georgia.
The toughest DUI laws in Georgia History went into effect on July 1, 2001. These laws require jail time for all DUI convictions, license suspensions, twelve months of reporting probation, and extensive community service. Some DUI offenders will have all of their license plates confiscated and be required to perform 30 days or 240 hours of community service! In your DUI, you will face two courts: a criminal court and a driver's license court. Further, if you do not request a hearing with in ten business days, your license shall be suspended thirty days after your arrest for as much as five years in some cases, usually before you even go to court for your DUI.
Our firm has advised thousands of DUI clients primarily in Metro Atlanta: including the City of Atlanta, Fulton, DeKalb, Cobb, Cherokee, Forsyth, Henry, Clayton, Fayette, Rockdale, Spalding and Coweta Counties. We know the Court system, the Judges, the Prosecutors and how they work. I was a staff attorney for a Superior Court Judge in Clayton County in 1993-1994.
Georgia's Tough New DUI penalties make legal representation essential. If you do not contact us, please contact another attorney. Do not go to court unrepresented. If you can't afford to miss work for a year, you can't afford not to hire a DUI attorney. We take all major credit cards and have payment plans for qualified applicants. We are an established law firm here to help you. We will not plead your case guilty unless you tell us you do not want a trial. Call us at (770) 961-5511 for a free consultation, email
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
or fax us a copy of your tickets or police report at (770) 961-5544.
Closing Argument Quotable
"I consider [trial by jury] as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789. ME 7:408, Papers 15:269
DUI Myths:
Myth: Driving at 0.08 is dangerous or a driver is impaired.
Fact: A University of Utah study found that drivers talking on cell phones with and without earbuds were more dangerous than drivers who had consumed enough alcohol to be in excess of the 0.08 legal blood alcohol limit for most states. See blog link Strayer, D. Human Factors, Summer 2006; vol 48: pp 381-391. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: “DUI/DWI Laws.” News release, University of Utah.
Myth: Mouthwash or breath spray will help you beat a DUI.
Fact: Mouthwash or breath spray is the worst thing you can do when faced with a DUI. Both mouthwash and breathspray will artificially inflate alcohol breath tests.
Myth: Sucking on pennies will fool a dui breath machine.
Fact: Pennies have no effect on alcohol breath test results.
Myth: “Alcohol on the breath” is a reliable sign of alcohol consumption and intoxication.
Fact: Alcohol is odorless. The smell of alcholic beverages is not alcohol on the breath but is actually the odor of the things in or ingredients of the alcoholic beverages. Non-alcoholic beer like Odouls will produce the same smell the as drinking a regular beer. Georgia law even recognizes that a mere odor of alcohol is not enough to convict someone of DUI.
Myth: A Breath test will clear diabetics who exhibit characteristics of alcohol impairment like slurred speech, confusion, stumbling, sleepiness, uncoordinated behavior and red face cause them to fail field sobriety tests.
Fact: Diabetics frequently have acetone in their breath, which Breath Test Machines can confuse with alcohol in the blood stream.
Myth: Field sobriety evaluations are validated by the National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration, and accurately identify drunk drivers.
Fact: The three standardized test the HGN(eye jerking test), Walk and Turn and One Leg Stand are 77%, 65% AND 68% when performed under ideal conditions with those under 65 years of age, with no back, leg, knee, ankle or inner ear conditions on a flat, level, dry, debris free surface in heels less than two inches. On the side of a highway at night with strobe lights flashing sometimes in the shivering cold, these conditions are rarely met. Further, Police Officers rarely perform these test as they are trained. The results are stupid people tricks as opposed to field sobriety evalutions.
Myth: Alcohol breath test machines are accurate.
Fact: There are many sources of error in breath tests. Mouth alcohol, acetone, radio frequency interference, certain solvents and chemicals, mouth wash, asthma inhalers which contain albuterol suspended in ethanol or alcohol vapor. Even in the absence of any of these common problems and under ideal conditions, alcohol breath testers simply lack precision. The Georgia Intox. 5000 breath testing manual states that breath testing has inherent sample variability of 0.01 for one sample and 0.02 for two samples.
This means that under ideal conditions, which is a highly unlikely situation, a breath alcohol reading of .08 reflects an actual blood alcohol reading of anywhere from .06 to .1. That is a margin of error of 25 percent of the legal limit. At the under 21 level of .02 the error rating is 100%!
Myth: A person accused of DUI by breath test is presumed innocent. A fact guaranteed by the both the and Georgia Constituion.
Fact: Although the presumption of innocence is guaranteed by law, it is denied in fact with a state administered breath test. The breath test is presumed accurate and you have to prove it doesn’t work by hiring an expert to debunk the test or having an extremely effective cross examination by an experienced DUI lawyer using the Officer's own training materials.
Myth: Law enforcement officers can’t influence the BAC reading of a breath-testing machine.
Fact: Law enforcement officers can and do influence BAC readings. The first part of lung air, after discarding the dead space, has an alcohol concentration much lower than the equivalent Blood Alcohol Content. Whereas, the last part of lung air has an alcohol concentration that is much higher than the equivalent Blood Alcohol Content. The last part of the breath can be over 50% above the alcohol level. Thus, a breath test reading of 0.14% taken from the last part of the breath may indicate that the blood level is only 0.09%." Thus, police often yell at drivers “Blow, Blow, Blow, Blow” much longer and deeper than is necessary for the machine to inflate the result.
Myth: Alcohol breath testers measure the concentration of alcohol in a person’s blood stream (blood alcohol concentration or BAC).
Fact: Alcohol breath machines don’t actually measure blood alcohol content, which can only be achieved with a blood test. They attempt to measure alcohol in the breath in order to estimate the concentration of alcohol in the blood. As a result not all states permit alcohol breath test. Alcohol breath machines detect any chemical compounds that contain the methyl group in its molecular structure. There are thousands of such compounds such as gasoline, glue, acetone, asthma inhalers, paint, paint remover, “new car smell,” celluloid, cleaning fluids, etc.
Breath Machines also assume as constants certain ratios within the human body that actually vary widely from person to person and within the same person over time. For example, many breath-testing machines assume a 2,100-to-1 ratio in converting alcohol in the breath to estimates of alcohol in the blood. However, this ratio varies from 1,900 to 2,400 among people and also within a person over time. Some breath analysis machines assume a hematocrit (blood cells as a percent of blood volume) of 47%. By comparison, Lance Armstrong may have a hemocrit level of 47-49%, but anything over 50% is considering blood doping and would result in a two year ban from professional cycling llike the Tour de France or Tour de Georgia. However, hematocrit values range from 42 to 49% in men and from 37 to 47% in women. These machines appear to discriminate against female suspects. These machines assume a body mass of an average male and do not account for individuals with higher body fat. The machines assume an average body temperature. Can you say junk science?
|
|
|
From the moment we are born we have micro-organisms including several types of yeasts and bacteria in our intestines which are helpful and others that are harmless. When our immune system is weakened though stress or illness, these microorganisms and yeasts (Candida albicans) can grow out of control and can inhibit and interfere with digestion and create a build up of toxins. .
Yeast produce waste just like humans. The primary waste product of yeast is acetaldehyde. Since Candida multiplies so rapidly, the build-up of acetaldehyde toxins can overwhelm your body. This acetaldehyde can be transformed into ethanol and converted by the liver into alcohol. In addition the excess alcohol of a Candida outbreak can produce symptoms of being drunk, mentally confused, dizzy and disoriented as if one had overindulged in alcohol consumption.
C. Orian Truss MD has found that the metabolic and toxic potential of Candida albicans includes the capacity to produce multiple toxins. Many yeast organisms can metabolize sugars to pyruvate and this in turn is anaerobically converted to acetaldehyde and carbon dioxide. Chronic CO2 production may account for the persistent bloating and gas noted clinically by many patients with chronic candidiasis. Some strains of Candida can reduce acetaldehyde to ethanol. This would be rapidly absorbed and contribute to a raised blood alcohol level. This was printed in The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, Volume 13 # 2.
|
|
|
Augusta Georgia State Representative Ben Harbin was recently charged with a DUI and refusal to take an alcohol test after an allegedly Atlanta DUI related accident involving a telephone pole. Augusta TV stations recently reported that he did not lose his license because the police officer did not show up at the driver's license court at the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The Police officer claims he thought the hearing had been cancelled. This case is a good lesson for DUI defendants. A DUI arrestee can refuse to take a state administered chemical test of their blood breath or urine. However, if they do they face a one year license suspension. First, to avoid a one year license suspension, they have to request a hearing within ten days of arrest. Second, they have to show up at a driver license court held at the Office of State Administrative hearings. This hearing is triggered by the ten day letter and notice is sent to the driver and the sender of the letter. At the driver's license court, three things can happen. First, the officer may not show up and the one year suspension is rescinded. This is quite common and what happen in the Harbin case. Atlanta police with a few notable exceptions rarely show up for these hearings. Second, a withdrawal of the one year license suspension can be negotiated with the officer. This is also quite common, but usually results in a plea of guilty of some form. Third, a hearing can be conducted. This may result in the beginning of a one year license suspension but only if you plea or lose a DUI trial for less safe DUi. The reality is that Officer's are trained to arrest people with such low blood alcohol that they are rarely actually "less safe" from alcohol, so the majority of attorney conducted jury trials in these cases result in not guilty verdicts for less safe DUI especially if there is a video. Further, the hearing at the driver's license hearing is free discovery and usually results in a transcript of the officer's testimony for a DUI jury trial and inconsistent officer testimony for a DUI jury trial. Many police realize that showing up for a license hearing will just result in a forced DUI jury trial to save the driver's license that the police will lose and be made to look bad in the process because they are enforcing illogical and unreasonable DUI law. So who is covering the police officer or the politician? .
|
|
|
The State of Minnesota is suing CMI maker of the Intox 5000 which is the breath testing machine used in Georgia DUIs. Minnesota is claiming that CMI is illegally withholding the computer source code which tells how the machine works. Read the cmi_complaint
|
|
|
Despite the State of Minnesota's contract with CMI, Inc. manufacturer
of the Intox 5000 which requires disclosure of the computer source code
in the Intoxilyzer 5000 and assurances of protection of its proprietary
computer code, CMI refuses to give it up. So Minnesota is going
to Federal court in Kentucky to get the code. One has to wonder
what is the manufacturer of the Intoxilyzer got to hide?
Meanwhile DUIs are being thrown out by the dozens.
|
|
|
A Washington man settled a lawsuit against law enforcement authorities
for $15,000.00 after he was forcefully catheterized during a DUI arrest
to obtain urine after authorities forcefully obtained a blood
sample. Apparently law enforcment authorities forcefully inserted
a tube up the man's urethera into his bladder to obtain a urine sample
after the man refused a voluntary urine and blood test. Vampire
police and catheter cops is this how you really want to protect your
community. Just another example of DUI laws gone too far.
|
|
|
On February 17, 2008, the
AJC published a letter to the Editor of the Gwinnett County Section of
the paper from Rodger Chapman, which stated "I thought if someone
refused a breath test or field sobriety test, it's an admission of
guilt, even if he told troopers he was a Gwinnett County police
officer. " This is a huge but common misperception of Georgia DUI
law. Georgia DUI law only permits an inference in the refusal of a state administered chemical tests that a chemical
test of either blood, breath or urine would indicate the presence of
the prohibited substance if refused. In other words, if you
refuse an alcohol breath test, the only legal inference is that you
have alcohol in your system. Practically speaking, many jurors
will consider a test refusal as an admission of guilt or that the
Defendant is hiding something but this is an illegal inference under
Georgia law. Remember, all Defendants are innocent until proven
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law and in a refusal DUI the State must
still provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that alcohol affected the driver's ability to drive to
the extent that he was less safe than if he did not drink or incapable
of driving safely. Ultimately, common sense is the final
arbiter. If you look and act drunk, you are guilty. If you
don't, you are innocent.
|
|
|
A Kentucky man has filed a civil suit for damages alleging that the
Intoxylzer 5000 used in his DUI arrest was inaccurate. The man's
attorney alleges that the machine is inaccurate and its software is
flawed and contains 'bugs" or programming glitches. Click here to
see the story.
|
|
|
The Seattle Times reported on January 31, 2008 that a three judge panel rule that the state's toxicology lab engaged in
"fraudulent and scientifically unacceptable" practices that have
compromised breath-test readings used to prosecute suspected DUI drivers.
In a 29-page order, the three
judge panel stated that the Washington State Toxicology Lab created a "culture of
compromise" with so many "ethical lapses, systemic inaccuracy,
negligence and violations of scientific principles" that the DUI breath
tests can not be used as reliable evidence in a court of law. A
"multiplicity of errors" were found such as how breath-test results are
analyzed and DUI breath tests are verified at the lab
Lab personnel had been accused of signing sworn statements saying they had
personally checked that breath-test machines were working properly,
when other toxicologists had in fact conducted the checks. This
is a common practice in the Georgia Crime Lab where toxologist sign
conclusory reports regarding testing which was actually performed by
lab assistants not present in court. Machine-calibration errors were found to have affected other cases.
The three judge panel also criticized the software used to analyze data. Georgia
courts have not even allowed Georgia DUI attorney's access to such
software despite a explicit "full information" provision in the Georgia
DUI Statute. At least 150 errors were identified in
the lab. Declarations were signed indicating that a solution had
been tested
before the testing took place; listing incorrect dates for testing; and
entering incorrect data.
One can only hope that the legislative or executive branch will
review the Division of Forensic Services of the Georgia Bureau of
Investigation but right now the foxes have the key to the hen house
since there is currently no legal mechanism to perform an audit in the
judicial system.
|
|
Law Students beware the Constitution has left the
Building! DUI charges even if reduced to reckless driving (i.e., not
guilty of DUI) will result in delayed admission to the Georgia Bar and
the legal ability to practice law in the State of Georgia. In the
words of Willie Nelson, Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be
lawyers, let'em be doctors, commercial real estate developers,
financial planners and such.
Policy Statement of the Board to Determine Fitness of
Bar Applicants
Regarding DUI and Other Alcohol-Related Offenses
(Adopted March 12, 2007)
Any applicant who receives a Driving
Under the Influence (DUI ) conviction or its equivalent in any jurisdiction is
ineligible for fitness certification during the mandatory twelve-month sentence
mandated by the Georgia DUI statute (Ga. Code Ann. §40-6-391), whether or
not the sentence was probated.
In the case of an applicant who was
charged with DUI in Georgia (or its equivalent in any jurisdiction) but for
whom the charge was reduced, resulting in a sentence for reckless driving,
failure to maintain proper lane, and/or lesser offense(s), the Board is
concerned about disregard for the law as well as possible patterns of problems
related to abuse of alcohol and/or other substances and the impact of these
problems on the applicant’s fitness to practice law. Therefore, any
applicant who receives a conviction for an offense reduced from an original
charge of DUI, regardless of the terms of probation, is ineligible for fitness
certification for the period extending from the date of conviction to the
completion of the sentence, including any probation, or for a period of six
months from the conviction, whichever is longer. Following the expiration of
the period during which the applicant is ineligible for certification, the
applicant may be eligible to take the succeeding examination or for the release
of grades from a previous examination. Such eligibility will be decided by the
Board on a case-by-case basis following its standard policies.
It should be understood that this is a
procedural bar only. Following the expiration of the period during which the
applicant is ineligible for certification, the Board will review the
applicant’s file on the merits for a determination of whether to certify
the applicant for fitness. The Board may have substantive concerns about the
applicant’s conduct that may lead the Board to make further investigation,
to require that the applicant be evaluated for drug or alcohol dependency,
and/or to require that the applicant appear before the Board for an informal
conference, prior to the Board’s acting upon certification of the
applicant.
|
|
|
Your Georgia DUI or Atlanta DUI is finally over. You won or
lost. The Judge entered some disposition on the record.
What does it mean? Guilty, Not Guilty. Those are the easy
ones that mean you lost or you won. What is a Nolle Pros, a Dead
Docket, Nolo Contendre, or First Offender? A "Nolle Pros" or
nolle prosequi is just latin for "no prosecution." This is
basically a dismissal with leave to refile an accusation or an
indictment on the criminal charge at any time within the statute of
limitations which is two years for misdemeanors or DUI
cases. A Dead Docket is a legal fiction where a case is
basically dismissed and put on a case docket that is dead or is never
called for trial. It is neither a conviction nor an
acquittal.
Georgia Courts have described it as follows: "Dead-docketing has been characterized as a
case is still pending which can be called for trial at the
judge'sprocedural device by which "the prosecution is postponed
indefinitely but may be reinstated any time at the pleasure of the
court." [Cit.]"Placing a case upon the dead docket certainly
constitutes neither a dismissal nor a termination of the prosecution in
the accused's favor. A pleasure, or upon which the accused can make a
demand for trial." State v. Creel, 216 Ga. App. 394, 395 (454 S.E.2d 804) (1995). See also
Freeman v. State, 264 Ga. 27 (440 S.E.2d 181) (1994) (where a murder charge
wasplaced on the dead docket in return for a statement and
testimonyagainst another defendant); and State v. Marcus, 206 Ga. App. 385
(425S.E.2d 351) (1992) (where a case was removed from the dead docket
andreturned to active status)."
Georgia
Courts have also held that a Dead Docket over objection by the
Defendant or accused is prohibited. The United States Supreme Court has
declared entry of the nolle prosequi "with leave" over defendant's
objection to be unconstitutional ( Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S.213 (87 SC 988, 18 LE2d
1)). Georgia Courts have followed this decision and found that a trial
court here abused its discretion when it placed the case on the dead
docket over defendant's objection. Beam v. State, 265 Ga. 853, 855 (1995).
"Nolo"
or nolo contendre is just latin for no prosecution. It means that
you are neither pleading guilty nor innocent but merely not contesting
the charge and accepting the punishment. It is the same as a
guilty plea except it can not be used against you as an admission in a
subsequent civil suit. Prior to 1997, a "nolo" would prevent a
license suspension but the legislature rewrote the statute to make a
"nolo" a conviction for driver's license suspension purposes.
First
Offender is a resolution allowed by law wherein a Defendant
pleads guilty but the charge is held in abeyance and if probation is
sucessfully completed the charge is dismissed at the end of
probation. It is not a conviction. However, if you violate
probation the Court can bring you back and sentence you to the maximum
sentence allowed by law as if you had never completed any portion of
the probation period. This is known as the bad side to first
offender probation.
|
|
|
In the City Court of Atlanta, there was an changing of Judges regarding DUI cases. Before January 1st, 2008, all DUI cases were to be heard before Judge Sloan in Courtroom 5C. The torch has been passed to Judge Green as of January 1, 2008. Now all DUIs are heard in Room 6A. Judge Green as opposed to Judge Sloan begins promptly at 8:00 A.M. Additionally, Judge Green does not call the calendar but immediately sends cases to pretrial which should produce increased efficiencies The Municipal Court of Atlanta handles all DUI cases with Atlanta Police Officers and Georgia State Patrol Troopers who make arrest within the City limits of Atlanta.
|
|
Kansas Law enforcement officers ready for Intoxilyzer upgrades
 |
| The new Intoxilyzer 8000 machine. |
The Leavenworth Times reported that Kansas police agencies will be switching from the problem ridden Intox 5000 to the Intox 8000. Lt. Greg Ruff, Leavenworth Police Department, said the Intoxilyzer 5000 has been around about 20 years. He listed several improvements including the new model is much smaller; the Intoxilyzer 8000’s dry gas test standard, which is used to check calibration, will last for 250 tests before having to be replaced (Georgia uses ambient air?); the dry gas standard for the Intox 5000 model could be used only for 14 tests; while the old machine has to be sent in anytime it malfunctions, the Intox 8000 can be connected to the Internet and diagnostics can be performed remotely; If the Intox 8000 has a computer programming error, it can be corrected over the Internet; the Intox 8000 will have card readers to read bar codes of modern drivers licenses; the programming for the new machines have higher security levels to prevent people from manipulating data (How long have they known test results could be manipulated?); t he new machines use multiple tones so officers can identify specific problems by the tone; for the Intoxilyzer 5000, officers have been required to re-certify themselves on the machine every six monthsm but for the Intoxilyzer 8000, officers will have to re-certify every two years (Georgia only requires recertification every four years-no wonder Georgia is 48th in education of 50 states). Which begs the question, how many shortcuts can one state take before it comprimises testing and incarcerates the innocent.
|
|
|
Safe Ride America is raising a buzz in Atlanta. For $20.00 bucks, they will give you a ride home with passengers and bring your car. They will also wait for $60.00 an hour. They have both flexible and firm reservations. Safe Ride American is a non-profit organization dedicated to doing something about Drunk Driving. They have given over 40,000 safe rides so far and counting. You would think that the government would have figured out that it is cheaper to give rides home than lock up "drinking non-impaired drivers." So now in Fulton, DeKalb, Cobb and Gwinnett, you have no excuse not to not drink and drive. Avoid the DUI tax and call 404-888-0887 or make a reservation online at www.saferideamerica.org
|
|
|
Anthony "Tony" D. Palacios of the Georgia Police Academy Traffic Section DRE/SFST at the Georgia Public Safety Training Center in Forsyth, Georgia has resigned to consult privately on DUI standardized field sobriety evaluations and on drug recognition techniques. Tony began his career in the Lumpkin and Towns County Sheriff's Department and spent five years as a DUI Task Force Officer and Training Coordinator at the Forsyth County Sheriff's Office. He then became an instructor at the Georgia Public Safety Training Center in Forsyth known as the "Mecca" for DUI field sobriety evaluations training in Georgia under the National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration (NHTSA). He rose to state coordinator of field sobriety evaluations in Georgia. Tony's can be found at his website: www.impaireddrivingspecialists.com
|
|
|
The Dawson Times reported on December 21, 2007 that the Governor's Office of Highway Safety is increasing DUI prosecutions by coordinated DUI patrols and roadblocks through out the holiday season. State officials claims that the DUI Surge is for to save lives and not write tickets. However, their own statistics undermine their claims. Last year during the Christmas "traffic period," there were 22 fatalities on Georgia Highways and 6 were alcohol related. First, "alcohol related" means alcohol on the breath of the driver and could mean alcohol was found in the vehicle and no one was drinking! But even accepting this logical, roughly 25% of fatalities were related to alcohol. This means that 75% of fatalities were related to speeding and other forms of unsafe driving. However, there is no mention of increased patrols for speeders and other dangerous drivers. This begs the question: Why are we focusing so much money and resources on 25% of the problem. The Answer seems to be that DUI arrests produce more revenue and political capital than cracking down on speeders. A day on Atlanta Freeways and Georgia country roads can be like a lap at the Indy 500. You are unsafe if you travel under 70. Lets get back to basics and arrest speeders and reckless drivers instead of taking traffic enforcement officers off the road for 2 and 3 hours to process unimpaired drivers who have had two or three beers based on some randomly chosen blood limit which doesn't take into account the fact that alcohol effects different people differently. The people of Georgia need help on the highways not hypocrisy in the headlines. Read the article
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE WARNING!!!!
PILOT WARNING!!!!
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION WARNING!!!!
Metro Atlanta DUI Lawyer Recent DUI success stories: The only unwinnable DUI is the untried DUI! Stay tuned for more victories. The wins just keep on coming! Past success does not guarantee future results only a dedication to winning your DUI, hard work and our clients.
1) DUI Fulton County, College Park, Georgia: October 3, 2007. Client involved in rear end accident without serious injuries and with little or no property damage with another driver on exit ramp to freeway in December of 2005. Recommendation prior to trial was 30 days in jail with probability of 12 months in jail after a loss at trial. Similar transactions were excluded based on lack of proper notice. Client refused all field test and breath tests and allegedly cursed officer. Client claimed that he did not curse officer and requested a blood test. Accident victims and 2 police officers testified that Defendant was drunk, had slurred speech, threw bottles from vehicle, but their testimony was inconsistent. Evidence existed that victims met with Officer prior to trial and discussed case. Evidence existed that victims were trying to bring a civil suit to collect damages. Police officers did not produce video tape and testified that they never looked for video tape and police report was lost. Jury found the inconsistencies in Officer testimony and victim testimony too great to overcome reasonable doubt. Client found NOT GUILTY on all DUI Alcohol and Drug counts.
2) DUI Atlanta (Virginia Highlands) , Fulton County, Georgia: May 3, 2007. Client put on jury trial for DUI after his car was stuck in an abandoned field on an old railroad track bed. Client was being driven by a friend who fled the scene. The friend testified at trial that he actually drove. The Police said no way another person drove the vehicle. A neighbor testified that there was only one person at the scene although it was dark and he could not identify client. The Friend's girlfriend testified that she received a call from client stated that her boyfriend abandoned him when the car got stuck even before the police arrived. Jury believed that another person drove and the State had accused that the act occurred on a local street when the act occurred in a vacant lot. Client found NOT GUILTY on all charges.
3) DUI Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia: February 8th, 2007. Client put on jury trial for DUI per se (.126), DUI less safe. Client was sleeping in a parking lot of a Fire Station keys in ignition, engine running at 5:00 am. Police respond to 911 call from the Fire Department of a suspicious vehicle. Police assumed client drove. Police exaggerated client's statement of driving and later added he was paraphrasing and concluding. Officer admited that he never asked client if he drove and client never used the work driving in response to questioning. Client was pulled from car and given field evaluations. He showed 6/6 clues on HGN but did not follow training, missed heel to toe on walk and turn, and client passed the one leg stand. Client was arrested and taken to jail and blew 0.126 on the Intoxilyzer 5000. Officers did not follow their training in the breath test procedures. The jury came back NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS based on a lack of proof of driving beyond a reasonable doubt.
4) DUI, Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia: Nov. 2, 2006. Client put on jury trial for DUI breath test/less safe, reckless and open container. Client pulled over for drinking a beer while driving and weaving everytime he took a drink. Client admitted two beers previuosly. Client had been tickted an hour and half earlier with no indication of alcohol by another officer for a simple traffic violation. Client had normal speech, eyes, walk, and face. Client show clues of impairment according to Officer on HGN, walk and turn and one leg stand. Video showed client appearing sober but not performing fields perfectly. After arrest officer told client that he might let him go if he blew under legal limit, so Court excluded breath test as Officer negated arrest necessary for Implied Consent. Jury found client NOT GUILTY on DUI and guilty on reckless driving which client had offered to plea to before trial.
5) DUI, City of College Park, Fulton County, Georgia: Sept. 26, 2006. Client put on jury trial for DUI, Failure to Maintain Lane and Open Container. Client was stopped after he was observed weaving and pulled into a parking lot. Officer proceeded with field evaluations which Officer alleged client failed. Video showed sobriety. Client submitted to a Intox 5000 breath test with the results of .145. Client requested a blood test but was denied. Officer did not wait twenty minutes prior to Intox breath tests as required by GBI procedures. Judge denied motions to exclude breath tests. Jury found client NOT GUILTY on all charges. Open container was thrown out by judge for lack of evidence.
6) ARMED ROBBERY PARTY TO A CRIME, City of Atlanta/Buckhead, Fulton County, Georgia: March 23, 2007. Client put on jury trial for being in a car with person identified in a pedestrian armed robbery. After a five day trial driver was found guilty and client was found not guilty of party to a crime armed robbery along with 3 other co-defendants, despite identification of client in a car near the incident soon after the robbery. Victim described his assailant as 5'9" and not 6'3", wearing a red shirt , baggie pants and braids, described a green chrysler sebring as opposed to a silver chevrolet impala found, did not mention a carribean accent, not wallet or credit cards found in car twenty minutes after incident, guns in car did not match gun in incident. The only link to the victim was a cell phone allegedly found in the co-defendant driver's pocket which was not cataloged or photographed unlike every other piece of evidence in incident. Client found NOT GUILTY by jury of party to a crime armed robbery.
-
October 2006: ten DUIs reduced to Reckless Driving without trial; two cases DISMISSED without a hearing.
-
November 2006: four DUI charges reduced to Reckless without trial; one DUI case DISMISSED without a hearing. one DUI charges offered Pretrial Intervention or dismissal with DUI/alcohol classes.
-
December 2006: seven DUI charges reduced to Reckless Driving without trial. one suspended license dismissed just by filing a motion to suppress with no hearing!
-
January 2007: three DUI charges reduced to Reckless Driving without hearing. One Clients offered Pretrial Intervention (dismissal) without hearing.
-
February 2007: two DUI charges reduced to Reckless Driving without hearing. Two Clients offered Pretrial Intervention (dismissal) without hearing.
-
March 2007: four DUI charges reduced to Reckless Driving without hearing.
-
April 2007: three DUI charges reduced to Reckless Driving without hearing. One DUI dismissed by prosecutor at hearing based on illegal stop.
-
May 2007: one DUI reduced to Failure to Exercise Due Care; one DUI dismissed for failure to prosecute; two Possession Marijuana with intent to distribute reduced.
- June 2007: two DUI charges dismissed: One for failure to prosecute at jury trial and one dismissed for lack of probable cause to arrest; one traffic case dismissed for failure to prosecute; one DUI reduced to reckless driving.
- July 2007: four DUI charges reduced to reckless driving. One Driving on a Suspended License to no License on person
- August 2007: four DUI charges reduced to reckless driving. Three DUI charges dismissed. Marijuana Possession reduced to disorderly conduct.
- September 2007: four DUI charges reduced to reckless driving. One DUI dismissed after a motion to suppress. one DUI reduced to failure to exercise due care. A Felony Criminal Damage reduced to Misd. Criminal Trespass
- November 2007: four DUI charges reduced to reckless driving.
- December 2007: seven DUI charges reduced to reckless driving.
- January 2008: five DUI charges reduced to reckless driving. One drinking and driving charge dismissed.
- February 2008: seven DUI charges reduced to reckless driving.
- March 2008: two DUI charges reduced to reckless driving. One public intoxication dismissed.
- April 2008: one DUI dismissed at Jury Trial; one DUI reduced reckless driving; one drug possession dismissed on an illegal search; Aggravated Assault reduced to Reckless Conduct.
|
|
 |
|
|