In a drunk driving trial or other criminal case, expert witnesses may testify for the prosecution or for the defense. For example, you may present expert witnesses who will testify about problems with the sobriety tests, while prosecutors may present expert testimony about levels of impairment or accident reconstruction.

Unfortunately, as a recent article from the National College of DUI Defense (NCDD) made clear, these “expert” witnesses may not actually be experts after all. Furthermore, there may be situations where experts cannot be sued by people whose lives they ruin even if they provide false or inaccurate testimony.

When you are charged with a crime, your fate may hinge on these experts. You need a criminal defense lawyer to help you put together a strong case and to raise any necessary questions about the qualifications of prosecutor’s witnesses.

Problems with Rules for Expert Witnesses

The NCDD reported multiple situations where expert witnesses may have provided incorrect or inaccurate information in trial. These included an expert witness from the O.J. Simpson trial; a state toxicologist who was convicted of perjury and who may have falsified lab reports leading to as many as 134 wrongful convictions; and a toxicologist who ran more than 34,000 labs in Massachusetts and who pleaded guilty to crimes related to falsifying reports.

These stories were described as being only the “recent ones,” and “only the tip of the iceberg.” Unfortunately, when a toxicologist is caught falsifying lab reports or lying to obtain a conviction, nothing bad generally happens to the person. In fact, just recently, a Court of Appeals in Ohio ruled that a state toxicologist could not be sued or found liable for false testimony in a murder case even though the judge relied on his testimony for the conviction and even though he had been convicted of perjury.

The Court of Appeals opinion states that the witness “deserves absolute immunity in the case because all testimony, even if perjured, is protected to ensure witnesses will be candid without fearing lawsuit.” The absolute immunity, even for dishonest testimony, applies to government witnesses.

The NCDD believes that problems with expert witnesses start well before a potential perjury conviction. Often, no one cares enough to check whether the witness has the qualifications that are claimed. For example, the witness who was recently given immunity for his false testimony had claimed to be a doctor but he really did not even have a master’s degree and it is unclear whether he even had an undergraduate degree. University records showing how he may have been able to obtain the degree are missing.

Problems like this undermine faith in the criminal justice system, as they should, and thus are whitewashed. Prosecutors care about their conviction record and may not have a lot of incentive to look too deeply into the expert witnesses on their side.

All of this points to serious problems in the criminal justice system that make it hard for defendants to get the fair trial they deserve.

Call Joseph LaBella & Associates today at 800-395-5951 or visit http://www.texas-dwi-lawyers.com/ to speak with a Houston DUI defense lawyer.

More than 1.2 million people were arrested for driving under the influence in 2011, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The rate of drunk driving is the highest among 21 to 25 year olds, but young teenagers are also commonly cited for driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs.

When a teenager is arrested for drunk driving when he is still in high school, it can significantly interfere with his chances for a college education. A vigorous drunk driving defense is necessary to hopefully avoid conviction and a criminal record in order to maintain the best chance at getting into a college. Joseph Labella & Associates should be consulted after a teen is arrested for drunk driving or student accident for help achieving the best outcome after an arrest.

Many Colleges Consider Criminal Records in the Admissions Process

Avoiding conviction and a criminal record for drunk driving is essential for high school students because the majority colleges consider criminal records when determining whether to admit a student.

The Center for Community Alternatives believes the use of criminal records is troubling, especially as administrators are often not trained in how to effectively consider an arrest history. Further, many young people who have a history of arrest are not given an opportunity to explain themselves to the college admissions committee. One youthful mistake could shape the course of a young teens life if the college fails to give him a fair chance.

Unfortunately, this occurs far too often. A total of 273 institutions that are part of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers were surveyed by the Center for Community Alternatives. The administrators were asked 59 questions about the impact of criminal records on the college admissions process.

In total, 66 percent of the academic institutions indicated that they collected criminal justice data on potential candidates. Most of the schools that collect data on candidates’ criminal histories use the information on arrests and convictions when determining whether to admit a student to the school. Just 38 percent of responding institutions said that a criminal history did not play a role in their decision-making process when considering a candidate. The schools that did not consider a student’s criminal history were not any less safe in terms of crime statistics than schools that did take criminal records into account.

Unfortunately, many of the schools do not have written policies in place regarding how they will actually use the information obtained from criminal records. In addition, only 40 percent of the schools trained staff members about how to interpret information on arrest records or reports. Because of this, students could be disqualified from opportunities even for minor offenses.

A drunk driving arrest should not disrupt your child’s whole life. An experienced defense lawyer should be consulted as soon as possible to help respond to the charges and hopefully avoid a conviction and get an arrest record cleared.

Call Joseph Labella & Associates today at 800-395-5951 or visit http://www.texas-dwi-lawyers.com to speak with a Houston DUI defense lawyer.

A Texas resident was recently pulled over for a traffic violation, with some reports indicating he ran a red light and other reports indicating he had run a stop sign. When the driver was pulled over, field sobriety tests were administered to determine if he was impaired. The Austin Police Department indicates that the Texas man “swayed,” and “needed his arms for balance,” which were signs of potential impairment caused by either alcohol or drugs.

Despite the man’s insistence that he had only had one drink, he was arrested for driving while impaired. He agreed to give a blood sample and submitted to a breath test. The Breathalyzer showed that he had a blood-alcohol content (BAC) of 0.00. The blood test would also later come back 100 percent negative, indicating he was sober. Despite the breath test results and the fact that he said he wasn’t drunk, Yahoo News reports that the Texas man spent the night in jail because of his alleged drunk driving crime.

The case is a terrible example of what can happen when police and prosecutors are overzealous in trying to identify intoxicated drivers. It is also an illustration of the importance of having a Houston DUI defense lawyer representing you.

Take-No Chances Policy Can Have Unfortunate Consequences

The Austin Police Department defended the arrest of the sober man for drunk driving, indicating that the department has a “take no chances” policy. This policy ends up having very undesirable consequences for motorists in Texas. Travis County has reportedly “dismissed a higher percentage of drunken driving cases than other major Texas counties – in part because prosecutors said police filed weak charges or prosecutors allowed suspects to plead to other crimes.”

Zero tolerance and the “take no chances” rule are a response to the political pressures to ensure that as few drunk people as possible are on the road and Travis County is far from the only place where overzealous legal action occurs.

USA Today reports that April is Alcohol Awareness Month, and there are frequently both state and national campaigns where police are encouraged to step up enforcement and crack down on impaired motorists. The result is that police may sometimes feel a lot of pressure to make arrests and innocent people are caught in this effort. The Texas man who was unjustly arrested, for example, will now spend the next few months fighting to get his record cleared.

Those who are arrested have to deal with the consequences. Innocent people could end up pleading guilty to drunk driving charges even if there is not sufficient evidence to convict them.   If you don’t have a lawyer to advise you on whether the charges against you are likely to hold up in court or you don’t have a lawyer to defend you from weak charges, you could actually face a drunk driving conviction even if you were not impaired.

It is up to you to protect your rights.  You need an attorney who can help you.

Contact Joseph LaBella & Associates today at 800-395-5951 to speak with a criminal defense lawyer in Houston. 

In January 2012, police arrested a man for aggravated trafficking of scheduled drugs. The defendant was convicted and sentenced to seven years of incarceration. This conviction has now been overturned. The reason a judge overturned it: the man did not actually have any scheduled drugs in his possession.

The case is an important one because it shows that prosecutors sometimes stretch to make a case even when the drug law does not clearly make a certain behavior criminal. Because the consequences of a conviction for drug crimes are so severe, it is essential that defendants are represented by an experienced criminal defense attorney in Houston to protect against prosecutorial overreach and unjust convictions.

Drug Crime Case With No Drugs

The incident began when a neighbor made a call to police about suspicious activity upstairs. Police arrived at the scene to find a man with glass containers omitting fumes. Evacuation of the home was ordered and an investigation began.

The investigation revealed an illegal cookbook called “Uncle Fester’s Synthetic Manual,” which contains recipes for creating narcotic substances such as methamphetamine. Also found were the majority of ingredients necessary to produce meth.

Based on the fact that the evidence showed the defendant was in the process of creating methamphetamine, prosecutors charged the defendant with drug trafficking. This was instead of a more suitable criminal charge: attempted trafficking in scheduled drugs. The man may have been trying to make meth but he had not succeeded and thus had no controlled substance in his possession

Although the defendant’s argument was not initially successful, a judge overturned the man’s conviction because the judge believed a person could not prepare, process or traffic a scheduled drug unless that narcotic was ultimately present. Since no methamphetamine was actually produced, there could be no trafficking.

With the defendant’s conviction set aside, he was released from incarceration and is currently free to move on with life. However, prosecutors may now pursue a claim for “attempted trafficking in scheduled drugs.” This is a less serious crime but could still result in incarceration. There is no guarantee the prosecutor would win even on charges of attempted trafficking, since the man had some but not all of the ingredients that are necessary to produce meth. Without all of the ingredients, it could be argued that there was no serious attempt to produce the drug.

Drugs produced at home tend to complicate enforcement of drug laws since it may not be clear exactly what point basic ingredients actually cross the line and becomes illegal.  The new development of the drug culture has led to many grey areas. In addition to the issue of meth, for example, the federal government has also been having difficulty creating an effective bans on drugs like synthetic marijuana and bath salts where just one ingredient can be changed to make the product legal again without affecting the mind-altering impact of the substance.

Contact Joseph LaBella & Associates today at 800-395-5951 to speak with a criminal defense lawyer in Houston. 

The Texas appellate court recently reviewed trial court proceedings that had resulted in the conviction of an alleged drunk driver.  The defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor offense and was given a suspended sentence of 180 days in jail and a $500 fine.  The defendant appealed and argued that the trial court judge was biased yet refused a request for recusal. The appeal also argued that the trial court abused its discretion by denying challenges for cause against several jury members.

The appellate court found that the verdict was proper, despite the issues the defendant raised on appeal.  The case shows some of the challenges of going to trial with a DWI and illustrates the importance of having an experienced Houston DWI defense lawyer protecting your interests in court.  Joseph LaBella & Associates can help defendants accused of driving drunk to have the best chance at a fair trial.

Claims of Bias Couldn’t Overturn Jury Verdict

The defendant convicted of drunk driving raised several issues on appeal that suggested the trial was biased. Issues included:

• One potential juror indicated he was good friends with a law enforcement officer and that he believed police officers tended to be more credible witnesses. The potential juror also expressed the opinion that the training police officers undergo causes their testimony to carry more weight.
• Another potential juror said that if he was not certain who to believe after listening to conflicting evidence, he would believe the police officer because the officer’s position gave him more credibility.
• The trial court judge had a MADD plaque on his bench and had made comments in an anti-drunk driving video that had previously been loaded onto YouTube.  Despite these signs of potential bias, the judge declined to recuse himself.

The appellate court considered these issues but let the verdict stand. The reasoning was based on past cases where the Court of Criminal Appeals refused to require complete impartiality on the part of jury members. The jurors were asked whether they could be fair and impartial and wait until hearing the evidence, or whether they would let their preconceived opinions color their judgment. As long as the jurors said they could be impartial, which they did in this case, they did not have to be removed for cause.

The decision of the appellate court that there was no improper bias on the part of the judge or the jury does not necessarily come as a surprise based on past case law in Texas.  However, it does point to the fact that getting a truly fair trial can be a challenge for a drunk driving offender, especially with the level of social stigma that has become attached to drunk driving.

The best way for defendants to protect themselves when charged with drunk driving is to have an experienced attorney begin handling the case as soon after arrest as possible.   Defendants may also consider entering into a diversion program or negotiating a plea deal with the help of their lawyer, depending upon the circumstances of their arrest and the evidence against them.

Call Joseph LaBella & Associates today at 800-395-5951 or visit www.texas-dwi-lawyers.com to speak with a Houston DWI defense lawyer. 

Certain drug crimes are illegal under both state and federal law and if you break the laws on controlled substances, you could find yourself in federal court. Many federal drug offenses carry minimum sentences as a result of a wave of “tough-on-crime” laws passed during the 1980’s and these minimum sentences can result in lengthy terms of incarceration.

Unfortunately, a new report from Human Rights Watch indicates that federal prosecutors may be using the threat of charging defendants with crimes carrying lengthy minimum sentences in order to coerce defendants into pleading guilty to their offenses.

An experienced criminal defense lawyer in Houston knows that every defendant has the right to a trial and should not face harsher punishment simply for choosing to exercise that right. Behavior on the part of prosecutors who try to coerce plea bargains serves as one more reminder to those accused of criminal acts that they need their own legal advocate looking out for them and protecting their constitutional rights.

Defendants May be Pressured to Plead Guilty

The mandatory minimum sentences related to drug crimes that were passed in the 1980s were ostensibly intended to keep big drug dealers and drug king pins behind bars for a long period of time. Unfortunately, instead of specifically addressing the nature of the crime that would result in these lengthy sentences, the drug laws instead focused on the amount of drug that a person had in his or her possession.

The result of this has been that street dealers and drug couriers, who have a relatively low-level role in the business of selling drugs, could face the same mandatory minimum sentences as the leaders of drug dealing enterprises. A courier or street dealer would likely have large quantities of a drug in his possession and thus could be charged with a very serious crime based on the quantity alone.

Prosecutors, of course, have discretion with what crimes to charge defendants. Instead of using that discretion to shield defendants from the harsh effects of mandatory minimum sentencing, Human Rights Watch suggests that many are doing the opposite. Prosecutors are bringing the charges against people who commit low level drug crimes but offering plea deals that carry far less harsher consequences. The natural effect of this is that people become afraid not to take the plea, and thus give up the right to defend themselves in court.

The Human Rights Watch data shows that as many as 97 percent of defendants now plead guilty to drug crimes charged at the federal level. For those that don’t, the risk is tremendous. For example, while the average criminal sentence for a federal drug offender who accepted a guilty plea was five years and four months, the average sentence for someone who was convicted and who was sentenced after trial was 16 years of incarceration.

The huge discrepancy in prison time underscores the importance of making wise choices when deciding how to handle your drug charges.

Call Joseph LaBella & Associates 1-800-989-6839 today for your free consultation. Serving the Houston, TX area. 

The end of December through to New Years Day is always a time when police crack down on drunk drivers, because this is a time when traditionally there are many intoxicated motorists on the road. Each year on New Years Eve, many drunk driving accidents, and many drunk driving arrests, are made by police working overtime. Police increase patrol activities and set up checkpoints in order to try to catch impaired drivers. While Texas law prohibits these DUI roadblocks, there will be no shortage of officers picking up overtime pay on roving patrols in search of drunk drivers. 

If you are going out for any festive occasion this holiday season, it is important to remember that police will be on the lookout for any signs of intoxication and that there are going to be more police on the roads watching for drunk drivers. For those who are pulled over and arrested for being intoxicated behind the wheel, it is important to speak to a Houston DUI defense attorney for help. Police can sometimes be overzealous or use overly aggressive tactics to try to find drunk drivers during this time of high enforcement, and you could become just another arrest statistic.

Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over Campaign

One of the big reasons why there are more police on the road around the holidays is because of the Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over Campaign. This is a national campaign that occurs in states throughout the U.S. and that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) promotes. The Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over Campaign runs from December 13, 2013 to January 1, 2014 of this year.

The campaign involves law enforcement agencies in Houston and throughout the United States getting grants to help put more officers on the road and to help facilitate the creation of drunk driving checkpoints on New Years Eve. The money makes it possible for local law enforcement agencies to cover larger areas and to have more manpower dedicated to finding motorists who may be intoxicated.

Starting off the New Year with a drunk driving arrest could be disastrous if you are caught up in aggressive police efforts that are part of the Drive Sober campaign. While it is always a good idea to have a designated driver before having any drinks, it is especially important at a time when you know that there is a major risk of arrest.

For those who are arrested, it will be important to determine if your Constitutional rights were violated by police eager to make an arrest. Even with the Drive Sober campaign, police cannot just pull you over and require you to submit to a test of your blood-alcohol content unless they have probable cause to believe that you are breaking the law. Without probable cause, any evidence that law enforcement collects against you showing that you were intoxicated will not be able to be used against you since it was illegally obtained. An attorney can review the facts of your arrest to determine if you can keep evidence from being used to secure a conviction.

You need an experienced, aggressive Houston DUI lawyer.  Call 1-800-989-6839 today for your free consultation. More than 20 years experience.

Any Houston DUI defense attorney knows that the best outcome when you are charged with drunk driving is to get the charges dropped or to be found not guilty by a jury. In some cases, however, there may be another alternative available for first time offenders who don’t have a good defense against the charges. This alternative is to participate in a pre-trial diversion or pre-trial intervention program that makes it possible to avoid jail time and a criminal record.

In Harris County, the pre-trial intervention program that clients could participate in was called the DIVERT program for a long time. However, this year a new program took the place of DIVERT that, while it works in a similar way to prevent criminal conviction for drunk drivers, is much harder to qualify for. First-time drunk driving offenders interested in qualifying for the program should speak with a lawyer as soon as possible for help.

The Harris County Pre-Trial Intervention program

The new Harris County program for DUI offenders is called the Pre-Trial Intervention Program or PTIP for short. To be eligible to participate in PTIP, you must:

• Not have ever been arrested for any crime as an adult, even cases that were dismissed.
• Be charged with driving while intoxicated (DWI) in Houston or elsewhere in Harris County, Texas.
• Be a legal resident of Harris County or have lawful legal status.
• Not have been involved in a fatal accident while driving impaired.

Even if you meet the criteria and have no past criminal record at all, judges do not necessarily have to allow you to participate in the PTIP program. Certain other factors that could potentially result in you being rejected from taking part in the program include:

• A blood alcohol content (BAC) of .15 or higher as demonstrated by a blood test, breathalyzer or other test of intoxication.
• Being involved in any type of traffic accident while driving impaired.
• Not having a valid driver’s license at the time when you were driving impaired.
• Not having auto insurance at the time when you were impaired.

If you are approved to become a part of the program, you will need to pay for a Substance Abuse Life Circumstance Evaluation, which costs over $200. You will need to meet all requirements associated with the PTIP program.

Fox Houston describes the PTI program as a “zero tolerance” program that lasts for a full year and that is very intense. Over the course of the program, you must undergo drug abuse classes and you must submit to routine urine analysis or other drug/alcohol testing. Electronic monitoring and outpatient services may be required and you may need to attend mandated counseling. The total cost for the program is around $3,000, and if you make any mistakes while you are participating in the program, you lose eligibility and will end up with the original DWI on your record.

While the program is a difficult one to get into and complete, it can be one more way an experienced DUI defense attorney can help a client avoid the consequences of a conviction.

You need an experienced, aggressive Houston DUI lawyer.  Call 1-800-989-6839 today for your free consultation. More than 20 years experience.

Three drivers who caused fatal accidents while intoxicated are currently pursuing a novel defense in an effort to have their second-degree murder convictions overturned. According to the New York Times, these drivers are claiming that they were too drunk to form intent to commit the crime.

Any DUI defense lawyer in Houston knows that a conviction for manslaughter or second-degree murder carries much more serious penalties than a conviction for drunk driving. Past cases have given rise to the possibility that clients could use intoxication as a defense against certain criminal charges that require intent, but the viability of this defense for intoxicated motorists throughout the United States remains unclear.

Can a Driver Be Too Drunk to Commit a Crime?

The three defendants who argue they were too intoxicated to commit second-degree murder have all brought their cases to the highest court in New York.  All three were severely impaired when they became involved in an accident, as one had been drinking for 10 hours, another was high on ecstasy and another was described as drinking himself “into a stupor” before driving.

The three were convicted of second degree murder based on a jury’s decision that they’d showed a depraved indifference for human life. However, the opinion in a 2006 case, People v. Feingold, said that depraved indifference was a state of mind, which means that the prosecutor in New York needs to show that the defendant consciously and willingly expressed an “utter disregard for the value of human life,” in order for a defendant to be guilty of second-degree murder.

If the defendant was too drunk to be aware that he was putting others at risk with his actions, the defendant did not intentionally or knowingly show this disregard. The drunk driver didn’t make the choice to endanger other people’s lives because he didn’t realize he was doing it. The court in People v. Feingold established a precedent to potentially support this argument since the appeals court upheld the lower court decision that the driver was so drunk he was oblivious to the danger when entered a highway going the wrong way. If this reasoning is extended, this could potentially make extreme drinking a defense in cases arising from vehicular homicide, at least in New York.

While judges in Texas and other states do not have to follow the rulings of other state courts, a decision that the drivers could be too drunk to commit second-degree murder could be used as persuasive evidence in other courts to perhaps convince a judge or a jury to apply the same reasoning.  If the defendants in these cases are able to get their convictions overturned, the decision could potentially give rise to such debate and other state courts.

Drivers who have been charged with any criminal offenses for causing injury or death while intoxicated should consult with an attorney to explore all possible options for defending against these serious charges. A criminal defense firm that stays abreast of significant legal developments in other states will be best prepared to defend clients facing serious traffic charges.

You need an experienced, aggressive Houston DUI lawyer.  Call 1-800-989-6839 today for your free consultation. More than 20 years experience.

In early September, a three-minute video was posted on YouTube in which a 22-year-old young man confessed to driving drunk and killing a man. The video quickly went viral and has been viewed more than 1.9 million times according to NBC News. The NBC report on the video indicates that the man who posted it said he was aware it provided the prosecution with what it needs to convict and to put him in jail for “a long time.”

This story is an unusual one because the video was a confession to the world and the driver allegedly made and posted it intentionally to apologize for his actions and to try to deter others from driving drunk. However, there are many other drunk driving cases where social media evidence unintentionally provides help to the prosecution. Because of the risk that social media evidence could be used against you in a drunk driving case, it is important to be careful about what you put online and to speak with your Houston DUI lawyer if you are charged with drunk driving and there are any potentially incriminating pictures or videos online.

Social Media Evidence in Drunk Driving Cases

Information posted on social media is rarely private, even if you believe that the pictures or comments being posted are only being shared with friends. Pictures that you or someone else you know posts may reveal a great deal about you, some of which can potentially incriminate you or be used as evidence to bolster a drunk driving case.

For example, if you were arrested for driving under the influence and there are pictures of you earlier that night drinking a beer or smoking a joint that your friend posts on Facebook, these pictures could potentially be used to show that you had consumed drugs or alcohol earlier in the evening before the accident.

Likewise, pictures can reveal that you were at a specific location at a given time if there are questions about your actions leading up to the DUI, and any comments that you make about the evening of your drunk driving charge or about the charges pending against you could also potentially be used by the prosecution in your case.

The drunk driver who posted the viral video confession of drunk driving has explained exactly what he did on the evening when he killed his victim, and his story provides the prosecutor with invaluable information that can be used to secure a conviction. Yet, NBC reports that, despite the video confession, he has currently entered a plea of not guilty to the charges.

The young man has indicated he plans to change his plea to guilty once the case has been assigned to a judge. A CBS News story reveals that some believe he may have made the confession to try to garner sympathy and thus get a lesser sentence when he goes to court. If this was his intention it was a risky gamble, so it is not surprising that it was reported he made the decision to post the video against the advice of his attorney.

You need an experienced, aggressive Houston DUI lawyer.  Call 1-800-989-6839 today for your free consultation. More than 20 years experience.