Governor Perry Vetoes Texting While Driving Ban

June 19, 2011

By Dallas and Collin Count Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

The Texas legislature recently passed House Bill 242 which made texting while driving illegal in Texas.  It would have made violations a Class C misdemeanor, which is the lowest offense level – equivalent to speeding.

On June 17, 2011, Governor Perry vetoed the bill saying the bill was “a government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults.”  He did state texting while driving was “reckless and irresponsible.”

Study after study has shown texting while driving to be as or more dangerous than drunk driving.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For legal advice about any specific situation you should contact an attorney directly.

 


Getting a Deep Lung Device Off Your Car

April 28, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 369-0577

texasdefensefirm.com

The most common complaint I get about the deep lung device (also known as an ignition interlock device) is not the hassle, not the cost, but is that is a very cruel and degrading mark of shame.

Whether it’s increased legislative requirements or increased pressure from mothers against drunk driving, these devices are becoming more and more popular with judges.

If you’re reading this, chances are you want to know how to get the thing OFF your car with the Judge’ permission.

The first question is whether the Judge has discretion to order the device removed.  Discretion is just a legal term meaning that the law allows the Judge to decide one way or the other.  For example, in a situation where it is a second DWI arrest, the accused must legally have the deep lung device installed on the car pursuant to Tex.Code.Crim.P. 17.441.  But, under Texas.Code.Crim.P. 42.12 Section 13(i), the Judge may allow a probationer to have the interlock device removed after 50% of the probation is complete.

If the judge has the legal discretion to remove the device, the next step is to convince him or her that this is appropriate in your case.  Here’s the key in Texas — private companies monitor the ignition interlock devices and they keep a detailed log of whether there have been any violations or if the car is under-utilized which indicates the driver may be driving another vehicle and avoiding blowing into the apparatus.  Virtually any judge that I know would ask to see the records from the log.  This means that to have a good chance of getting the deep lung device off your car — you have to have as clean a record as possible.  Also keep in mind that probation officers and the personnel that monitor these devices are highly cynical.  Some will take any failure – regardless of the cause – as proof that the driver has been drinking.

Even with a clean record, it’s no guarantee that your judge will allow the apparatus to be removed, but you’re not giving yourself a chance to get rid of the humiliating device with a dicey record.

You should consult with your attorney as to when it is appropriate to ask the Judge to have a deep lung device removed from a car.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article should be considered legal advice.  For legal advice about any specific situation, you should contact an attorney directly.


Should I Take the Field Sobriety Tests?

February 5, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

No.

I’ve put a lot of time and thought into the answer and here’s why I’ve ultimately come to that conclusion:  because experience tells me most of the time the officer has already made his decision to arrest you by the time he asks you to take the field sobriety tests.  So no matter how well you do, you’re not being graded by a fair judge.  You’re being graded by someone who already decided you’re going to jail.

If you’re reading this because you were arrested for DWI and you took the field sobriety tests — don’t feel bad at all about your decision.  It’s a common one and there are plenty of decent reasons to submit to them.  I just feel that in totality — the bad outweighs the good — and I’ve had a lot more time and experience with these cases than you had before you were asked to take the tests!

Most people who submit to field sobriety tests do so for two main reasons.  First, is that they don’t know they have the right to refuse.  In Texas, a person absolutely has the right to refuse.  Second, the person thinks they’ll somehow show the officer that they’re okay to drive (again, what they don’t know is changing the officer’s mind is an impossible task).

Police play into the second reason very heavily.  Remember, deception is a legitimate tool of law enforcement.  Police officers have extremely honed skills at manipulating people to comply with their requests — even though the citizen has no obligation to do so.  Field sobriety tests are a classic example.  Here’s another example — ever been asked by a police officer that just pulled you over if you know why he pulled you over?  It’s a game of “gotcha” and now you can’t fight the ticket if you answered!  When an officer asks you to take the tests to see if “you’re okay to drive,” it may sound like he’s thinking of letting you go — but odds are that it just sounds that way!  Only the officer really knows — and you have no way of knowing if he’s already called the tow truck for your car.

There are some down sides to refusing field sobriety tests too.

First is that you’re basically daring the officer to take you to jail.  Most will take you up on it.  You’re basically gambling that even if he takes you to jail that you’ll be able to beat the DWI in court by not providing any evidence knowing the State has the burden of proof.

Second is that you’re possibly making yourself the” bad guy” in front of the jury by not complying with the police.  Most jurors ask themselves whether they would take the tests or not and even though most don’t have well informed opinions, most would take the tests… but ultimately, being the “bad-guy” can be overcome.

Third is that there’s always the chance that you’ve run into a policeman that hasn’t made up their mind.  It’s probably the exception and not the rule — but it does happen.

Finally is that jurors put more stock in how you look generally on the video than how the officer testifies you did on the field sobriety tests.  If you look good taking the tests but the officer says you still failed — jurors will doubt the officer’s testimony.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For specific legal advice about any situation, you should consult an attorney directly.


DWI Surcharge Amnesty Program — Deadline, April 17 2011

January 26, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 562-7549

texasdefensefirm.com

The Dallas Morning News reports that the Department of Public Safety is offering an amnesty program for those in arrears on surcharges they owe on their driver’s license from DWI convictions and/or other violations such as no insurance.  You can read about the amnesty program here.

Unlike a sale at your local department store — there is no guarantee that after the deadline (April 17, 2011), people will have a second chance to save money on paying back fees.  If you’re in arrears on surcharges on your Texas Driver’s license, you should seriously look in to applying immediately.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For legal advice about any specific situation you should contact an attorney directly.


Texas Legislature to Consider Deferred Adjudication for DWIs

December 27, 2010

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

texasdefensefirm.com

(972) 562-7549

The Texas legislature is likely to discuss legalizing deferred adjudication for first-time DWI arrestees during the 2011 legislative session according to this Houston Chronicle Article.

In Collin County, people accused of a DWI currently have two options;

(1) plead guilty and usually be placed on probation (or in jail) and in doing so accept a final conviction accompanied by surcharges to keep a driver’s license to name just a few punishment measures.  This final conviction would be enhanceable for any subsequent DWI arrest.

(2) plead not-guilty with two possible outcomes; (a) an acquittal entitling them to an expunction; or (b) a conviction along with all the headaches discussed in the paragraph above.

If deferred adjudication is added as an option, it could play-out in a number of different ways.  Though it would technically result in a “dismissal” at the end of the deferred period, it is only an actual “dismissal” in a technical sense.  The person would likely only be eligible for a non-disclosure, not an expunction.  This means it would be on the persons permanent record with the person being allowed to say that even though they plead guilty, it was not a final conviction.

Also another common trap-door the legislature likes to use is by making deferred adjudication a conviction for enhancement purposes.  This means that a subsequent DWI arrest would be a DWI 2nd and so on.  So basically the first one counts against you deferred or not.

Keep in mind that if Mothers Against Drunk Driver’s is for a plan to go ‘easier’ on people accused of DWI — you can be assured it’s for their gain and not the accused.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article is intended to be legal advice.  For specific legal advice about any legal issue you should consult an attorney directly.