Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Dallas / North Texas Criminal Defense Attorney

Fighting For Your Rights...
"Board Certified Criminal Lawyer"
&
"Former Assistant District Attorney"
AGGRESSIVE & EXPERIENCEDDWI
Drunk Driving Arrest
DUI Driving Under The Influence
White Collar Crimes
Homicides / Assault
Computer Crimes
Misdemeanors
Felonies
Well known among members of the Dallas Bar and Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyers Associations, Mr. Maedgen has devoted his practice to representing individuals accused of crimes. His practice includes defending against felony and misdemeanor charges such DWI, DUI, drug possession, assault, child abuse, sex offenses, credit card abuse and Expunction of Criminal Records after Dismissal or Acquittal. His successful defense of criminal charges has been featured on television and the print media.
Below are examples of criminal offenses contained in the Texas Penal Code. Additional criminal offensesare listed in other Texas and Federal statutes.
ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO
Alcohol Beverage Code Violations
Assembling or Operating an Amusement Ride While Intoxicated
Boating While Intoxicated
Driving While Intoxicated
Flying While Intoxicated
Intoxication Assault
Intoxication Manslaughter
Possession of Alcoholic Beverage in Motor Vehicle
Prohibition of the Purchase and Sale of Human Organs
Public Intoxication
Smoking Tobacco
ANIMAL CRUELTY
Cruelty to Animals
Dog Fighting
Interference With Police Service Animals
ASSAULT
Abandoning or Endangering Child
Aggravated Assault
Aggravated Robbery
AssaultDeadly Conduct
Injury to a Child, Elderly Individual, or Disabled Individual
Leaving a Child in a Vehicle
Robbery
CONSPIRACY AND ENGAGING IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES
Criminal Conspiracy
Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity
DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY
Arson
Criminal Mischief
Graffiti
Interference With Railroad PropertyReckless Damage or Destruction
DISTURBING THE PEACE
Criminal Trespass
Destruction of Flag
Disorderly Conduct
Disrupting Meeting or Procession
Obstructing Highway or Other Passageway
RiotViolation of Protective Order
FRAUD
Acceptance of Honorarium
Breach of Computer Security
Bribery
Coercion of Public Servant or Voter
Commercial Bribery
Credit Card or Debit Card Abuse
Criminal Simulation
Deceptive Business Practices
False Statement to Obtain Property or Credit
Forgery
Fraudulent Destruction, Removal, or Concealment of Writing
Fraudulent Transfer of a Motor Vehicle
Fraudulent Use or Possession of Identifying Information
Improper Influence
Insurance Fraud
Issuance of Bad Check
Manufacture, Possession, or Delivery of Unlawful Telecommunications Device
Misapplication of Fiduciary Property or Property of Financial Institution
Money Laundering
Obstruction or Retaliation
Offering Gift to Public Servant
Publication of Telecommunications Access Device
Refusal to Execute Release of Fraudulent Lien or Claim
Rigging Publicly Exhibited ContestSecuring Execution of Document by Deception
Simulating Legal Process
Stealing or Receiving Stolen Check or Similar Sight Order
Tampering With WitnessTheft of Telecommunications Service
Trademark Counterfeiting
Unauthorized Use of Telecommunications Service

Felony Murder Applied to DWI...What's Next?


Posted on July 24, 2007 by Jamie Spencer

Randy England has an excellent post that illustrates the dangers of applying “worst case scenario” thinking to every situation. But before we get to the article, let me put on my Modest Proposal hat to see whether I can rile you up and get your Tough-On-Crime legislative juices running…
#1) Misdemeanors are ‘just’ misdemeanors, but if someone keeps committing misdemeanors we ought to elevate the offense to a felony. After all, if you haven’t learned your lesson, you need harsher and harsher punishment. In some (perhaps all?) cases, the second time you commit a misdemeanor, it should be a felony.

#2) If someone dies during the commission of a felony, the charge should be elevated to murder. Yes, murder usually requires intent, but it should be foreseeable to all that committing a felony automatically puts everyone in jeopardy, so… felony + death = murder.

I don’t need to tell you that we already have these rules separately, and some of you can guess what will happen when we combine them.
I’ve blogged before about the (il)logical dangers of imprisoning people for life without proving any intent, and we see more and more stories in the news of Texans prosecuted for Felony Murder based on DWI. The state gets there by proving DWI + 2 prior convictions for DWI = felony, and felony + dead body = murder.
Yes, there’s already a more specific statute for Intoxication Manslaughter, whereby a defendant convicted of DWI that causes death can be punished up to 20 years in prison. But that’s not enough for the Life in Prison crowd. So, we came up with the legal fiction of misdemeanor DWI elevated to felony with priors + dead body = murder.
And, because no one has sympathy for defendants convicted of DWI, there is no general outcry about over punishment in these cases. So that leads to murder convictions in DWI cases, without any intent to kill.

But wait, couldn’t the same reasoning be applied to non-DWIs? Let’s get back to Randy’s post “Should driving while license suspended result in a felony-murder charge?” [ read more ]

Texas Administrative License Suspension Laws

Texas Administrative License Suspension Laws
DWI / Administrative License Revocation
Many Texas drivers who are arrested for driving while intoxicated do not realize that a DWI arrest creates two cases.

Specifically, a DWI arrest results in both a criminal charge, and also initiates a civil proceeding against the arrested motorist's driving privileges called an Administrative License Revocation, or ALR.

An ALR suspension is initiated against an arrested driver when he either refuses to submit to breath or blood testing, or alternatively, fails a breath or blood test. The legal authority to impose an ALR suspension against a driver lies in the Texas implied consent statute.
This law states that each person who operates a motor vehicle on Texas roadways has given his implied consent to provide a specimen of breath or blood if arrested for DWI and provided with the applicable consequences of refusing to submit to testing (Texas Transportation Code ß724).

The implied consent statute also applies to operators of watercraft in Texas. In Boating While Intoxicated (BWI) cases, a drivers license may be suspended for refusing - but not for failing - to submit to the taking of a specimen a breath or blood test if a person is arrested for an offense involving the operation of a watercraft powered with an engine having a manufacturer's rating of 50 horsepower or above.

Further, in all intoxication-related offenses, Texas courts have decided that an individual does not have the right to consult with an attorney before making the decision to refuse or provide a requested specimen. Indeed, in cases where an accident which produced serious life-threatening injury or the possibility of death has occurred, a citizen can be forced to provide a sample of blood.

Notice of ALR Suspension

Many police officers, after arresting a citizen, will tell the arrested driver that if he does not agree to take a breath or blood test that his license will be automatically and immediately suspended.

This is incorrect. When making an arrest for DWI, peace officers are required to take possession of any Texas license issued by this state and held by the person arrested and issue the person a temporary driving permit that expires on the 41st day after the date of issuance. Further, a request for a hearing to challenge the proposed suspension will delay any ALR sanctions until a hearing takes place.


ALR Suspension Hearing Request Provisions

WARNING !!! An ALR suspension is AUTOMATIC...UNLESS you request a hearing to challenge the suspension, in writing, WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS after receiving notice of suspension from the arresting agency on a Department of Public Safety approved form (generally received on the day of arrest).

If a hearing is not timely requested, the suspension will automatically begin on the forty-first (41st) day after notice was received. If a hearing is requested, no action will be taken regarding suspension until after the hearing has taken place, even if the hearing takes place more than forty days after the arrest.

The ALR Hearing

The burden of proof at an ALR hearing is on the Department of Public Safety. Once a driver or his attorney has made a timely request for an ALR hearing, no suspension may be imposed against the driver until the Department of Public Safety proves the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence at the hearing:
  1. That there was reasonable suspicion to stop or probable cause to arrest the driver,
  2. That probable cause existed that the driver was driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle in a public place while intoxicated,
  3. That the driver was placed under arrest and was offered an opportunity to give a specimen of breath or blood after being notified both orally and in writing of the consequences of either refusing or failing a breath or blood test, AND
  4. That the driver refused to give a specimen on request of the officer, OR, that the driver failed a breath or blood test by registering an alcohol concentration of .08 or greater per 100ml of blood or 210 liters of breath.
NOTE: If the person who refuses is a resident without a license, an order will be issued denying the issuance of a license to the person for 180 days.

NOTE: the term "prior alcohol or drug contact" as used to lengthen the period of suspensions stated above has been defined as "a driver's license suspension, disqualification, or prohibition order under the laws of this state or any other state resulting from a conviction for driving while intoxicated", "a refusal to provide a requested specimen", or "providing a specimen showing an alcohol concentration of a level specified in §49.01 Texas Penal Code" (an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or greater).

ALR Suspension Reinstatement of Drivers License After Suspension

If no suspension is imposed at the hearing, DPS is obligated to return the Texas license to the person arrested. If a suspension is ordered either automatically or after hearing, a driver must submit a reinstatement fee of $125.00 to TDPS before the license will be reinstated. I advise my clients to send their fee to TDPS as soon as they learn that a suspension has been ordered. Again, because of the huge bureaucracy that has been created under the new law, waiting until the 60th or 90th day to submit your reinstatement fee will prolong reinstatement of your license until the fee has been both received and entered on the TDPS computer system.There is a special TDPS form that must be submitted to reinstate your driving privileges. This form together with the reinstatement fee must be paid by money order, cashier's check or personal check and sent by certified mail, return receipt requested for proper documentation of payment and receipt to: Driver Improvement and Control Texas Department of Public Safety P.O. Box 15999 Austin, Texas 78761-5999

ALR Suspension One Final Note

In addition to protecting your driving privileges, there is an equally important reason to request an ALR hearing, and that is to better defend you against the DWI charge. Unfortunately, most drivers, and many lawyers who are unfamiliar with DWI defense, do not realize the "discovery" importance of an ALR proceeding. In this regard, the importance of having a hearing to challenge your ALR case is twofold. First, with the assistance of a knowledgeable and skilled defense attorney, many drivers are able to avoid a suspension of their driving privileges. Second, by challenging your license suspension, you are providing your attorney with an opportunity to use the ALR hearing to learn more about how to best defend your DWI charge. In this regard, the "discovery" information obtained through the ALR process can be invaluable to your defense, and is often the deciding factor in determining whether the related DWI charges can be successfully defended against.

DWI Criminal Defense Trial Lawyer


Fighting For Your Rights.......
Texas state DWI laws are both political and complex. Moreover, since the DWI laws change so often and the consequences of even a first conviction are so severe, finding a lawyer who is experienced at handling Texas DWI, Drunk Driving, Driving While Intoxicated cases should be your top priority.
If you've never been through this before you probably don't know where to begin in your search for an attorney. Further, not knowing what to look for in a Texas DWI defense lawyer makes the challenge of finding the right lawyer even more difficult. Clearly, you do not want to fall into the trap of handing your case over to just a volume DWI firm that moves its cases like a traffic ticket lawyer. You'll need to find an experienced, competent defense lawyer who can explore factual and legal defenses, review your case for defects, move to suppress evidence, compel discovery of such things as calibration and maintenance records of the breath machine, negotiate for a reduction in charges, obtain expert witnesses for trial, protect your driving privileges and safeguard your constitutional rights.
Above all else you should consider retaining an attorney who is very familiar with the courtroom and the practice of DWI defense and DWI cases. Further, your should consider seeking a lawyer who is both a Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist and one who has been recognized by his peers as a Texas Super Lawyer. Therefore, you increase your chances of hiring an experienced, tested and trusted attorney.
If you do not have a sense of comfort and confidence after meeting with an attorney about your case you should look further.
Questions you should ask to find the best DWI Defense Lawyer for your case:
Is the lawyer Board Certified in Criminal Law?
Has the lawyer been recognized by his peers in Texas Monthly as a Texas Super Lawyer or in D Magazine as one of Best Lawyers in Dallas?
Ward Maedgen is board certified in criminal law. Further, he has been recognized both as "One of the Best Lawyers in Dallas 2007" by D Magazine and as a "Super Lawyer" in Texas Monthly Magazine in 2004.
Does the lawyer have extensive experience in DWI pretrial investigation and litigation?
Does the lawyer have a reputation for going to trial or for simply pleading cases guilty?
During the course of his career, Ward Maedgen has tried well over a hundred cases, in various counties throughout the State. His experience as a lead trial lawyer in criminal cases has provided Mr. Maedgen with valuable insight into jury trial strategy, cross-examination, and expert testimony.
His extensive trial background both as a former prosecutor and as a criminal defense lawyer has taught Mr. Maedgen how the other side builds a case, therefore he knows how to tear it apart from the inside. His cases have been featured in the media, both television and print, including on: Dallas Morning News, Fort Worth Star Telegram, WFAA - Channel 8, KTVT - Channel 11, KXAS - Channel 5, FDFW - Fox 4 News, and Fox News.
Do you feel a strong sense of confidence in the lawyer’s ability to professionally handle your case, and do you feel comfortable with the manner in which the lawyer communicates with you? Does the lawyer seem genuinely interested in you and your case?
Is the financial arrangement clearly defined?
Will the lawyer handle your license suspension case in addition to the DWI arrest charge or will the lawyer send an associate, if at all?
Will the lawyer you hire be the lawyer who actually handles the case? In other words, does the lawyer go to court, or will one of his employees handle my case.
Upon your call, you will be scheduled to meet personally with Ward Maedgen. At that meeting the facts of your case will be discussed, Texas DWI laws will be clearly explained, and an ALR hearing will be sought at your request.
Fighting to save his clients’ driving privileges and to prepare for trial and evidence suppression motions, Mr. Maedgen routinely handles his clients’ ALR hearings. Further, the costs of hiring an attorney as well as the expenses of DWI litigation will be carefully explained so that you will be comfortable knowing the cost to you. Always be cautious of attorneys that promise a certain result or suggest that they have special influence with the courts or the prosecution.

Texas DWI Facts & Information


A breath test or field sobriety test doesnot automatically prove you guilty.According to the federal government, accuracyof field sobriety tests are as follows:

HGN test......................77%

Walk and turn.............68%

One leg stand.............65%
on Texas DWI Law
Evaluating A Texas Drunk Driving DWI Case and the Deciding Factors.
Police Reports:
The police report is only the officer's interpretation.
Were you properly read your Miranda warnings?
Did the police officer stop you for a valid reason?
Were any statements made by you coerced, taken out of context, or misinterpreted?
Important:
The Intoxilyzer 5000 assumes that everyone has the same blood breath partition ratio, hematocrit ratio and assumes that all samples are at an air temperature of 93.2 F. Texas DWI Law does not utilize any methods which would allow for a retest of samples given. The computer software is proprietary and is not available to scientific peer review. There are many things which have been shown to affect a breath test score. Texas does not allow for non-law enforcement or government personnel to become certified as breath test technical operators. Much of the Texas breath program remains limited to outsiders despite a generally assumed belief that these machines have undergone and passed wide general scientific review.
Field Sobriety Tests:
Police make arrests on the basis of probable cause. This is not the same thing as "beyond reasonable doubt." It is not a police officer's job to determine if someone is guilty. Many police offers choose to arrest on the basis of caution.
There is much technical training for a police officer in the field of Texas DWI Law. There is no law in Texas which states they must keep up their training on a yearly or any other type of basis with respect to standardized field sobriety training. Many police officers do not make any form of notes on the side of the road with respect to numerous details. Most police officers do not include mitigating or exculpatory information in their reports, mainly negative observations.
Where there distractions during the testing? Were you nervous or tired during the testing?
If there was a video taping of the event, does it accurately depict your true state of sobriety at the time, or was it unfairly effected by perhaps traffic, poor lighting, noise, or lack of sound.
What is your true balance and coordination?
Do you have any physical disabilities that can cause false results?
It is important to note that the law provides for intoxication by the introduction of any intoxicating substance into the body. This is designed to make our roadways safe from dangerous drivers. Typically, proof at trial is restricted to alcohol unless some statements or other indications suggest that the driver has become impaired by some other substance. It is important to note that being on prescription drugs is not a defense to a DWI criminal prosecution. If the label suggests that ingestion will impair ones ability to operate a motor vehicle or machinery, taking such medicine and driving may subject you to DWI arrest and conviction. At trial, the State therefore may prove intoxication in three (3) different ways:
- not having the normal use of physical faculties OR
- not having the normal use of mental faculties OR
- having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.
The jury does not have to be unanimous on the manner and means of intoxication, only that the person was intoxicated. It is also important to note that intoxication must occur and be proven to occur while driving.
Many other States provide for prosecution of a "lesser included" offense other than Texas DWI (i.e. reckless driving, impaired driving, driving under the influence, etc.). Texas however has no lesser included offense of DWI. Some counties offer plea bargain agreements to other charges than Texas DWI, but they are the exception and not the rule. The Law office of Ward Maedgen will aggressively fight for the best result inside and outside the courtroom.... [ read more ]

Karate Kid Actor Hit with California DUI

Sean Kanan is second 'General Hospital' star nabbed for drunk driving

It has been learned that former 'General Hospital' soap opera actor Sean Kanan was arrested in Los Angeles for California DUI. The 40-year old actor was stopped last month around 3:45 in the morning. Kanan received two misdemeanor charges of driving under the influence and having a blood alcohol content above the legal limit of .08%. This is his second DUI offense, as he was convicted of drunk driving in 1998.

This news comes on the heels of an announcement that current 'General Hospital' star Kirsten Storms was booked for DUI last week.

Kanan was a member of 'General Hospital' in the 1990’s. He also performed on 'The Bold and the Beautiful' and played Ralph Macchio's nemesis in 'Karate Kid III'.

Study Shows Strict DUI Laws Seldom Work

Florida paper suggests jail time does not keep drunks off road.

A study conducted at the University of Florida in Gainesville suggests the threat of jail time does not deter drunk drivers. That stems primarily from the fact that most people who drive after drinking do not think they will be stopped for suspicion of DUI.

Researchers, led by Professor Alexander Wagenaar, looked at changes in DUI laws and jail penalties for drunk driving offenses from a 17 year period and compared them against the number of DUI arrests and alcohol related vehicular deaths. They found that stricter laws and harsher penalties do not deter people from drinking and driving. Nor did they reduce the number of alcohol related accidents.

Wagenaar said, “There are many in the general public who continue to drive after drinking because they don’t really believe that they’re going to be detected, pulled over, caught and go through the process to be convicted before a jail term would come into play.”
The study has been published in the Accident Analysis and Prevention section of sciencedirect.com.

Woman Benefits from New Nevada DUI Law

Entering substance abuse program helps her avoid a prison term

Lisa Beth Thomas of South Lake Tahoe recently pleaded guilty to Nevada DUI. As it was her third drunk driving conviction she would have been sentenced to a minimum of one year in prison. Due to a new law passed in July, however, Thomas was given the option of seeking help with her alcohol dependence instead of being incarcerated.

Under the new legislation Thomas, 45, had her sentence deferred for five years while she demonstrates compliance with conditions for her probation. She agreed to enter substance abuse treatment for five years and six months of house arrest. She is also subject to random searches for drugs and alcohol and she must install an ignition interlock device in all vehicles she operates. Thomas is responsible for paying for the probation conditions and any violation could land her in prison.

The law allows prosecutors to question a defendant’s entrance to the special program. In Thomas’ case the district attorney's office agreed to the treatment. Thomas has said she is grateful for the opportunity.