A Missouri state legislator is accused of driving while intoxicated after being arrested on two separate occasions in Jefferson City. Court documents released on April 7 show that the man, Rep. Steve Hodges, is facing drunk driving charges in connection with an event that occurred in early April, along with allegations stemming from a February traffic stop. The 65-year-old legislator was first elected in 2006, but he will be required to step down in the near future because of term limits.

The defendant was arrested for DWI offenses on April 2 after officers received reports of a driver sleeping behind the wheel near a church. The man drove onto a nearby grassy area when a Cole County sheriff’s deputy approached. He was taken into custody and given a breath test, which showed that his blood alcohol content level measured at 0.17 percent. That is more than twice the legal limit of 0.08 percent.

This man could have considered refusing a breath test, which may have had implications for his criminal case. A Missouri attorney may be able to educate clients about best practices during a traffic stop for DWI offenses. Refusing a breath test can be a valid strategy for some criminal defendants. In fact, the legislator employed that strategy during his first DWI traffic stop this year.

In addition to the April incident, the man is facing charges in connection with a February arrest. In that case, the man chose to refuse a blood alcohol test, and he was given a summons for alleged DWI. A court hearing in late April will determine whether the man’s license should be revoked in connection with the February incident; court proceedings have yet to begin in the April case.

Source: The Kansas City Star, “Missouri state Rep. Steve Hodges charged with two DWIs” Jordan Shapiro, Apr. 07, 2014

A drunk driver who allegedly caused a fatal accident in 2012 may still be waiting for his day in court after sentencing was delayed yet again in his case. The Missouri man pleaded guilty to drunk driving charges in October 2013, one year after causing the deadly wreck. He was released on bond immediately after that criminal proceeding, and he has been free ever since. The man could be facing three to 14 years’ prison time in connection with the accident.

Sentencing delays in the case have been caused by a series of unforeseen circumstances. The defendant was supposed to have been sentenced in late January, but his attorney was ill and could not attend. A rescheduled hearing was scheduled on Feb. 20, but the judge was sick and did not come to work. Now, family members say they are tired of the legal system unfairly postponing the sentencing. The next hearing is slated to occur in early March.

Authorities report that the relatives of the 62-year-old female victim are livid about the fact that the man has not yet spent as much as a night in jail. They argue that the man should be in custody still, since the victim was “brutally murdered” because of the man’s DWI offenses. The victim died when her vehicle was rear-ended by the drunk driver.

The defendant could receive a relatively light sentence after pleading guilty to charges of aggravated driving while under the influence. Although the defendant in this case chose to enter a guilty plea, this strategy is not appropriate for all Missouri DWI offenses. A DWI attorney may be able to provide more information about the advantages and drawbacks of entering a guilty plea after a drunk driving wreck.

Source: KMOV.com, “Drunk driving victim’s family angered as sentencing was postponed for third time” Elizabeth Eisele, Feb. 21, 2014

In a matter of hours, children here in St. Louis and across the state of Missouri will be donning their capes, masks and makeup, and heading out for a night of trick-or-treating. However, children won’t be the only ones out enjoying the evening, as countless adults will also be putting on costumes and heading to parties at the homes of friends or area hotspots.

Of course, one of the predominant fixtures at many of these adult-themed Halloween celebrations will not be candy but rather alcohol. In recognition of this fact, law enforcement officials are likely going to be out in full force tonight, conducting sobriety checkpoints and saturation patrols.

For those unfamiliar with saturation patrols, it essentially means a larger number of officers will be present in smaller geographic areas, such as those districts that are home to a larger percentage of bars, clubs or restaurants.

In keeping with the theme of Halloween and drunk driving prevention, it is worth noting that the Utah Highway Patrol has been running a very unique drunk driving prevention campaign in the weeks leading up to Halloween that capitalizes on a very popular horror genre.

Specifically, the law enforcement agency has joined forces with a real local group calling themselves Zombies Against Drunk Driving to raise awareness.

Over the last few weeks, troopers and actors dressed in full zombie makeup have been making appearances everywhere from bars to movie theaters throughout Salt Lake City, scaring “the bajeebees” out of patrons — in a humorous way — about the dangers of drunk driving.

While no such zombies have been spotted here St. Louis, those planning to consume alcoholic beverages this evening should take the time to arrange alternate transportation — designated driver, taxi, etc. — ahead of time, or at least remember to secure a safe ride at the end of the evening.

If you have been charged with underage drinking or drunk driving, you should strongly consider speaking with an experienced attorney who will explain your options, and fight to protect your future.

Source: The Salt Lake Tribune, “Zombies to scare you out of drinking and driving,” Michael McFall, Oct. 23, 2013

One of the unfortunate realities of alcohol consumption is that it can surreptitiously affect a person’s ability to make sound judgments. For instance, many people who have consumed only a few drinks mistakenly believe that they are okay to drive home, only to find themselves in the back of a squad car a short time later after a police officer measures their breath alcohol concentration as being well over the legal limit.

Interestingly, researchers at the University of Missouri recently conducted a study in which they sought to examine the impact that alcohol can have on a person’s judgments about drunk driving.

The researchers gathered 82 people in their early 20s — 39 women and 43 men — and asked them about their views on drunk driving and their willingness to get behind the wheel after drinking. However, they made these inquiries in two decidedly different situations, including once when the subjects were sober and once when they’d consumed a moderate amount of alcohol.

What did they discover?

The study, published in the online edition of Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, found that the majority of the subjects changed their views on drunk driving after consuming the alcohol.

Specifically, they discovered that the biggest difference in perceptions about drunk driving were found when the test subjects were coming down from their peak breath alcohol concentration, meaning they thought it was far safer to drive in that particular circumstance than they did while sober.

According to the study authors, the study results should serve as a valuable reminder to people of all ages not to overestimate their ability to drive safely after consuming even a small amount of alcohol.

“We showed that there are bigger effects on the descending limb of the (breath alcohol concentration) curve, which is important because that’s when people are typically driving home,” said the primary author of the study. “People on the way down (the breath alcohol concentration curve) later in the evening are worse judges of how impaired they are, and they’re more impaired than they think.”

If you have been arrested on suspicion of driving while intoxicated, you should strongly consider speaking with an experienced attorney who will explain your options, and fight to protect your future and your freedom.

Source: U.S. News & World Report, “People’s beliefs on drunk driving may change when they’re drunk,” Maureen Salamon, September 12, 2013

The most recent drunk driving statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigation reveal that men comprised 75 percent of all DUI arrests in 2011 and that roughly 40 percent of all males killed in motor vehicle accidents during this timeframe were under the influence of alcohol.

While this would seem to point to a growing problem of impaired driving among men, researchers say it’s actually the exact opposite. The number of women arrested for DWI has increased significantly, while the number of men arrested for DWI has declined gradually since the mid 90s.

Consider the FBI figures detailed above, which show that women comprised 25 percent of all DUI arrests made in 2011. At first glance, this may seem like a relatively low number. However, consider that this number stood at a mere 10 percent in the early 80s.

Interestingly, a study released by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation earlier this week offers a fascinating explanation as to why more women are being arrested for driving while intoxicated.

According to the study authors, DWI numbers among women are on the rise due to the simple fact that social norms, social control mechanisms and society as a whole have all undergone dramatic transformations over the last several decades.

The researchers arrived at this determination after carefully examining earlier research, speaking with various legal experts and substance abuse specialists, and interviewing roughly 200 women who had previously been arrested for drunk driving in California, Michigan, New York and Missouri.

The study also discovered the following trends among the women arrested for impaired driving:

• The majority had children and were single, separated or divorced
• The majority indicated that they experienced a “major life stressor” just prior to their DUI arrest
• The majority acted as primary caregivers for their children, and were more likely to have physical and mental health needs than their male counterparts

“The results of this study clearly demonstrate the importance of focusing efforts to begin to better understand this problem and to develop more effective strategies both to prevent and manage it,” reads the report.
Indeed, the study authors recommend the creation of specially tailored treatment and alcohol education programs for women.

What are your thoughts on this issue? Is driving while intoxicated becoming a bigger problem for women?

Given the potentially steep consequences of a DWI conviction — license suspension, fines, jail time, to name only a few — those facing drunk driving charges should strongly consider speaking with an experienced attorney to learn more about their rights and their options.

Source: The Chicago Tribune, “DUI demographics point to higher mix of women,” Ted Gregory, September 12, 2013

Earlier this spring the National Transportation Safety Board — the independent federal agency tasked with performing “special studies concerning transportation safety” — issued a rather interesting recommendation that would drastically alter the legal landscape as it relates to drunk driving charges.

The NTSB recommended that all 50 states lower their legal blood alcohol content limits from .08 to .05. The primary justification for such a move, said the agency, was that it would help reduce the number of alcohol-related fatalities on U.S. roads.

In support of their recommendation, the NTSB pointed out that over 100 countries currently have a .05 alcohol standard in place and almost all of them have seen an appreciable decline in their auto fatality rates.

Not surprisingly, the suggestion for a lower drunk driving threshold was not met with great enthusiasm by the 50 states — which would prefer to focus on prosecuting repeat DWI offenders or those with extreme BACs — or the hospitality industry — which saw it as overtly hostile to business interests.

In recent developments, it now appears that the NTSB’s recommendation is lacking the support of a key ally — the Department of Transportation.

At an event held yesterday to announce the DOT’s sponsorship of the annual Labor Day drunk driving crackdown, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx indicated in no uncertain terms that the crusade for a .05 alcohol standard won’t begin at the federal level.

“To the extent that states adopt measures to lower the limit, that would give us the basis to study the data and to understand the impacts nationwide,” he said.

Interestingly, safety advocacy groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving have not expressed overwhelming support for the NTSB recommendation either. This is more than likely attributable to the fact that the previous fight to lower the blood alcohol content to .08 spanned just over two decades.

It is worth noting that to date only South Carolina, Washington and New York have even broached the topic of lowering their blood alcohol limit to .05

What are your thoughts on lowering the legal alcohol threshold? Is it something Missouri should consider or should state law remain unchanged?

Source: Politico, “Anthony Foxx, MADD lukewarm about lower blood-alcohol limit,” Kevin Robillard, August 22, 2013; ABC News, ” Feds recommend tougher drunken driving threshold,” May 14, 2013

Nine NFL players were arrested for DWI or DUI related charges between the Superbowl in February and the start of training camps at the end of July. To put this into prospective, at the beginning of training camp NFL rosters are allowed to carry 90 players, which means there are a total of 2,880 players on NFL rosters through most of the offseason. Even though it seems like the news is filled with NFL players under arrest for DWI or DUI, only 0.3% of players on NFL rosters were arrested for drunk driving charges this offseason. This statistic is not meant to downplay the seriousness of these arrests, but to illustrate that perception may not be reality. By comparison, in 2012, 0.5% of the U.S. population over the age of 18 was arrested for a drunk driving charge. Here is a list of the players arrested for drunk driving charges this offseason.

Eric Wright – Tampa Bay Buccaneers – July 12, 2013 Misdemeanor DUI Arrest in Los Angeles. He had to post a $5,000 bond. Had a prior Felony DUI arrest in Los Angeles last offseason, but those charges were later dismissed.

Alfonzo Dennard – New England Patriots – July 11, 2013 Misdemeanor DUI Arrest in Lincoln, Nebraska. Charges include Refusing a Chemical Test.

Evan Rodriguez – Chicago Bears – May 31, 2013 Misdemeanor DUI Arrest on I-90 near Hubbard, Illinois. He was cut by the Bears on June 10, 2013.

Joe Morgan – New Orleans Saints – May 25, 2013 DUI Arrest in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. Also charged with Driving Without a License.

Quintin Saulsberry – Denver Broncos – May 19, 2013 DUI Arrest in Arapahoe County, Colorado.

Armonty Bryant – Cleveland Browns – May 3, 2013 DUI Arrest in Ada, Oklahoma.

Brandon Barden – Tennessee Titans – March 23, 2013 DUI Arrest after his car went off the road in Eastern Georgia. The case was later dismissed.

Trumaine Johnson – St. Louis Rams – March 22, 2013 Misdemeanor DUI Arrest in Missoula, Montana.

Al Netter – San Francisco 49ers – February 20, 2013 DUI Arrest in San Jose, California.

Click here to read about Missouri DWI laws and consequences.

Source: NFL Arrest Database – www.utsandiego.com

In April, actor Jeffrey Wright was arrested for driving while intoxicated during the early hours of the morning. The star, who will appear in an upcoming installment of the popular “Hunger Games” series, was brought into custody at a nearby police station. While there, a breath test showed no alcohol content. Readers in St. Louis may be relieved to hear that the drunk driving charges were recently dropped.

Reports indicate that Wright’s blood-alcohol concentration registered at 0.00 percent when he was tested after his arrest. As such, why did prosecutors attempt to bring this case to trial?

In the end, the criminal court ruled that the prosecution didn’t have enough evidence to move forward with the trial. Certainly, Wright has reason to be relieved, but being forced to appear in court took his time and could have an impact on his professional reputation, even though he wasn’t convicted.

No matter what criminal charges are being filed against a person, the burden of proof rests with the prosecution. If they cannot prove — beyond any reasonable doubt — that the defendant is guilty, then the charges aren’t likely to stick. In this case, the court couldn’t reasonably rule out the possibility that Wright wasn’t actually over the legal limit.

Examining the strength of evidence is important in every criminal case, and this is no different in drunk driving cases. In many instances, the accuracy of breath-testing devices has been called into question. In other cases, the results of field sobriety testing have come under fire. Above all, the prosecution didn’t have sufficient evidence, so justice was carried out.

Source: New York Daily News, “‘Hunger Games’ actor Jeffrey Wright’s drunk driving charges dropped due to lack of evidence,” Shayna Jacobs, June 25, 2013

Under Missouri law, there are a variety of serious consequences for being convicted on drunk driving charges. In addition to potential jail time and fines, a person could lose his or her driving priveleges. On a first drunk driving conviction, an individual typically faces at least 30 days of driver’s license suspension. However, if a person is arrested for driving while intoxicated multiple times, they could get their license revoked for quite some time.

This what might happen to a Missouri man who was recently arrested on DWI charges twice in a week’s time. According to reports from police, the man was first arrested in St. Louis and was also arrested for drunk driving in Fulton a few days later. Both times, he was charged as a “chronic offender,” which could seriously impact sentencing if he’s convicted.

When a person is convicted of drunk driving, authorities may pursue license revocation for specified length of time. Reports say that the man involved in this particular case already has to 10-year revocation periods on his license. The new charges could lead to additional license denial periods. At this point, law enforcement is saying that the man isn’t eligible to have his license reinstated until 2020.

Losing a driver’s license — for any length of time — can have a serious financial impact. If a person is unable to drive, they might not have a way to get to work. As such, it’s important to take repeat DWI offenses especially seriously. With trustworthy legal guidance, a person can determine what legal options they have to work through or minimize the potential consequences of drunk driving.

Source: ConnectMidMissouri.com, “Chronic DWI offender arrested twice in less than a week,” June 11, 2013

In March 2010, Missouri police pulled over a man in Franklin County for a traffic violation. Officers believed that the man was “following another vehicle too closely,” so they pulled him over and apparently had probable cause to conduct field sobriety tests. This eventually led to drunk driving charges and a conviction over two years later.

According to the police, the Missouri man blew a .095 on a Breathalyzer. This reading put the man just over the legal limit of .08 percent. In some cases, when a person’s blood-alcohol concentration is significantly over the legal limit, they will face more serious charges. In this case, the man was charged and convicted for misdemeanor driving while intoxicated.

The jury in this case came back with a guilty verdict. In response to the charges, the jury suggested that the man should pay fines for both the DWI charge and traffic violation. After receiving the jury’s decision, the judge set a sentencing date for July.

Generally speaking, people charged with DWI are tried in an expedient fashion. After all, the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees that criminal defendants will be granted a speedy trial before a jury of peers. If the trial is delayed too long, the defendant could be put at an unfair disadvantage.

Although it’s not clearly defined what is “speedy” or not in the Constitution, individuals charged with a crime should typically be tried within a year of being arrested. Of course, circumstances are different in every case, but taking two years between arrest and conviction seems a bit lengthy.

Knowing how long this case has been going on many may be asking: Why did it take so long for the prosecution to move forward with this case?

Source: The Missourian, “Jury Finds Man Guilty of DWI,” May 29, 2013