One of the best places to do this research is the Internet because it hosts a number of web sites that offer advice to tourists on the rules that they can expect to find in Arizona. Usually, these web sites are those of lawyers who specialize in DUI cases.
Some helpful advice
Usually, the web sites of some of these lawyers already provide some helpful advice with regard to DUI cases in Arizona. The most common advice that is given is that people should be aware that when they get arrested and convicted for DUI in Arizona, their license in their home state can also be suspended. In addition to this, tourists are also told that when they refuse to take a breath test, they will probably lose their license, and the government can require that you undergo a blood test. Additionally, a conviction for DUI can lead to up to four months in prison on top of the suspension of the license of the person. Lastly and more importantly, people are also told that a DUI conviction would go on their permanent criminal records, which can have a number of repercussions that includes being denied entry into some countries.
Arizona is one of the most popular tourist spots because of the numerous tourist attractions that can be found in the state. However, going to Arizona requires that tourists follow the rules and the laws of the state, including the driving laws that prohibit driving under the influence of alcohol. Fortunately, people who want to visit Arizona can have access to advice from attorneys that specialize in Arizona DUI cases from various web sites even before they go on the trip.
Wednesday, 21 January 2009
US Justice Department Links Alcohol and Violence
Although alcohol consumption and alcohol-related deaths are in decline, alcohol abuse is still linked to a large percentage of criminal offenses, according to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Almost four in 10 violent crimes involve alcohol, according to the crime victims, as do four in 10 fatal motor vehicle accidents. And about four in 10 criminal offenders report that they were using alcohol at the time of their offense.
About one in five victims of alcohol-related violence (about 500,000 victims annually) report financial losses totaling more than $400 million. When injured in alcohol-related violence, the average victim experienced a $1,500 out-of-pocket medical expense.
The rate of all alcohol-induced deaths fell 19 percent, noted the report on alcohol and crime, citing National Center for Health Statistics data. "We also have seen recent declines in violence between current and former spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends," commented BJS Director Jan M. Chaiken.
"This is the kind of violence most likely to involve alcohol abuse."
Two-thirds of the violent crime victims who were attacked by an intimate -- a current or former spouse or a boyfriend or girl friend--report that alcohol had been a factor.
Among spouse violence victims, three out of four incidents were reported to have involved alcohol use by the offender.
The arrest rate for driving under the influence of alcohol has fallen by 24 percent since 1990, and during the last decade the number of highway fatalities blamed
on alcohol has dropped by about 7,000 a year--from 24,000 such deaths in 1986 to 17,126 fatalities in 1996--a 29 percent decrease.
Local law enforcement agencies made an estimated 1,467,300 arrests nationwide for driving under the influence of alcohol, compared to 1.9 million such arrests during the peak year 1983, when 33 states had a minimum age for alcohol consumption less than 21 years old. Subsequently, all states changed the minimum legal drinking age to 21 years old, pursuant to federal highway funding legislation.
In 1980 men and women younger than 21 accounted for 10 percent of all licensed drivers, but 15 percent of those arrested for driving under the influence. In 1996 people younger than 21 accounted for 7 percent of the licensed drivers and 8 percent of those arrested for driving under the influence.
An estimated 80 percent of US residents 12 years old and older have used alcohol at least once, and 50 percent describe themselves as current drinkers.
National estimates of the annual per capita consumption of alcohol have declined 10 percent since 1990--from 40 gallons per person to 36 gallons.
The most commonly used definition of intoxication is 0.10 grams of alcohol per deciliter of blood, known as the blood alcohol concentration or BAC. Among state prisoners who reported drinking at the time of the offense for which they were incarcerated, the BAC was estimated to be 0.28 for inmates convicted of violent crime, 0.30 for those convicted of property crimes, 0.23 for those convicted of public order offenses and 0.19 for those convicted of drug offenses.
Almost four in 10 violent crimes involve alcohol, according to the crime victims, as do four in 10 fatal motor vehicle accidents. And about four in 10 criminal offenders report that they were using alcohol at the time of their offense.
About one in five victims of alcohol-related violence (about 500,000 victims annually) report financial losses totaling more than $400 million. When injured in alcohol-related violence, the average victim experienced a $1,500 out-of-pocket medical expense.
The rate of all alcohol-induced deaths fell 19 percent, noted the report on alcohol and crime, citing National Center for Health Statistics data. "We also have seen recent declines in violence between current and former spouses, boyfriends and girlfriends," commented BJS Director Jan M. Chaiken.
"This is the kind of violence most likely to involve alcohol abuse."
Two-thirds of the violent crime victims who were attacked by an intimate -- a current or former spouse or a boyfriend or girl friend--report that alcohol had been a factor.
Among spouse violence victims, three out of four incidents were reported to have involved alcohol use by the offender.
The arrest rate for driving under the influence of alcohol has fallen by 24 percent since 1990, and during the last decade the number of highway fatalities blamed
on alcohol has dropped by about 7,000 a year--from 24,000 such deaths in 1986 to 17,126 fatalities in 1996--a 29 percent decrease.
Local law enforcement agencies made an estimated 1,467,300 arrests nationwide for driving under the influence of alcohol, compared to 1.9 million such arrests during the peak year 1983, when 33 states had a minimum age for alcohol consumption less than 21 years old. Subsequently, all states changed the minimum legal drinking age to 21 years old, pursuant to federal highway funding legislation.
In 1980 men and women younger than 21 accounted for 10 percent of all licensed drivers, but 15 percent of those arrested for driving under the influence. In 1996 people younger than 21 accounted for 7 percent of the licensed drivers and 8 percent of those arrested for driving under the influence.
An estimated 80 percent of US residents 12 years old and older have used alcohol at least once, and 50 percent describe themselves as current drinkers.
National estimates of the annual per capita consumption of alcohol have declined 10 percent since 1990--from 40 gallons per person to 36 gallons.
The most commonly used definition of intoxication is 0.10 grams of alcohol per deciliter of blood, known as the blood alcohol concentration or BAC. Among state prisoners who reported drinking at the time of the offense for which they were incarcerated, the BAC was estimated to be 0.28 for inmates convicted of violent crime, 0.30 for those convicted of property crimes, 0.23 for those convicted of public order offenses and 0.19 for those convicted of drug offenses.
How To Find An Arizona DUI Lawyer
Exploring websites and going through the yellow pages will help a person learn the best way to find a DUI lawyer with good reputation. Asking other attorneys in the jurisdiction also proves to be effective. Other means of finding an Arizona DUI lawyer is by word of mouth. People can ask their friends, relatives and co-workers if they know a lawyer who is familiar with DUI law and has a good experience in dealing with the same. Services of a certified lawyer referral services may also be employed. This requires the person to call a local state bar-certified lawyer referral service. This type of service refers probable clients to lawyers. After interviewing the person, the referral service staff will match the client with a lawyer who is experienced in the appropriate area of the law. Usually there is a small fee for the initial consultation with a lawyer.
There is no single best way to find an efficient lawyer in Arizona. A person requiring legal assistance in a DUI charge may need to employ an appropriate mix of all the possible options available.
There is no single best way to find an efficient lawyer in Arizona. A person requiring legal assistance in a DUI charge may need to employ an appropriate mix of all the possible options available.
Tuesday, 20 January 2009
State v. Concepcion Bojorquez Rodriguez
On April 21, 2007, the defendant was going East on Broadway in his 1997 Nissan Minivan when he lost control. He went from the middle lane towards the curb, went on to the sidewalk and started to flip. He hit a 7 foot tall business sign. Given the location of the tire marks on the sign, he was likely airborne at the time. The minivan flipped an unknown number of times and came to rest on its roof. Nearly all the passengers were ejected, but witnesses saw the Defendant climb out of the car and flee. He was apprehended a short time later by police. He had an alcohol concentration of .190% two hours after the crash. Two passengers died as a result of the crash while a third passenger was not expected to survive. He is completely incapacitated and depends on the care of others. He is recently regained the ability to grasp someone's hand. He was just 12 years old at the time of this crash. All the other victims were seriously injured. The Defendant claimed a mechanical defect, a broken sway bar, contributed to the crash. The State's mechanical expert found there was no way the sway bar could have contributed to this crash. In fact, the damage was caused as a result of the crash and was not pre-existing.
[Driving/Actual Physical Control] While under the Influence
The crime of [driving/actual physical control] while under the influence requires proof that:
1. The defendant [drove/was in actual physical control of] a vehicle in this state; and
2. The defendant was under the influence of [intoxicating liquor/any drug/a vapor releasing substance containing a toxic substance/any combination of liquor, drugs or vapor releasing substances] at the time of [driving/being in actual physical control]; and
3. The defendant’s ability to drive a vehicle was impaired to the slightest degree by reason of being under the influence of [intoxicating liquor/any drug/a vapor releasing substance containing a toxic substance/any combination of liquor, drugs or vapor releasing substances].
1. The defendant [drove/was in actual physical control of] a vehicle in this state; and
2. The defendant was under the influence of [intoxicating liquor/any drug/a vapor releasing substance containing a toxic substance/any combination of liquor, drugs or vapor releasing substances] at the time of [driving/being in actual physical control]; and
3. The defendant’s ability to drive a vehicle was impaired to the slightest degree by reason of being under the influence of [intoxicating liquor/any drug/a vapor releasing substance containing a toxic substance/any combination of liquor, drugs or vapor releasing substances].
Presumptions of Intoxication
The amount of alcohol in a defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance] gives rise to the following presumptions:
1. If there was at that time 0.05 percent or less by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], it may be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
2. If there was at that time an excess of 0.05 percent but less than 0.10 percent by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], such fact may not give rise to any presumption that the defendant was or was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
3. If there was at that time 0.10 percent or more by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], it may be presumed that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.*
The statute further provides that the foregoing provisions shall not be construed as limiting the introduction and consideration of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question of whether or not the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
You are instructed to look at all the facts in the case. These are rebuttable presumptions; the jury is free to accept or reject these presumptions as triers of fact.
1. If there was at that time 0.05 percent or less by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], it may be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
2. If there was at that time an excess of 0.05 percent but less than 0.10 percent by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], such fact may not give rise to any presumption that the defendant was or was not under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
3. If there was at that time 0.10 percent or more by concentration of alcohol in the defendant’s [blood/breath/urine/bodily substance], it may be presumed that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.*
The statute further provides that the foregoing provisions shall not be construed as limiting the introduction and consideration of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question of whether or not the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.
You are instructed to look at all the facts in the case. These are rebuttable presumptions; the jury is free to accept or reject these presumptions as triers of fact.
Innovative State Uses of Byrne/JAG
If you find yourself arrested for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) in the State of Arizona, and you have submitted to a breath, blood, or urine test, and the results of the test reveal a blood/breath alcohol result of .08% or higher, or you have refused these tests, you can expect to be involved in two separate legal proceedings.
1. A criminal proceeding in court
2. A civil proceeding with the Department of Motor Vehicles (MVD) and the likely suspension of your driver license.
These two proceedings are mutually exclusive; the outcome of one will not affect the other. You could win both matters or lose both matters. How the MVD driver license hearing is handled is extremely important.
The Criminal Proceeding
Your DUI arrest begins your criminal proceeding. The consequences of this -- plea of guilty, or a verdict of guilty following a jury or bench trial -- could result in mandatory jail time, fines, fees and assessments, supervised or unsupervised probation, as well as a criminal record.
The Civil Proceeding
The civil proceeding is conducted before an administrative hearing officer at the MVD. This proceeding deals with a possible suspension of your driver's license, or if from out of state, your privilege to drive in Arizona.
The arresting police officer will serve you with a "Notice of Suspension." If you have been arrested in Arizona for DUI and you take a breath, blood or urine test, and the results measured a alcohol concentration of .08% or more within 2 hours of driving, or you refuse to take the blood, breath or other chemical test, the arresting police will serve you with a 90 day driver license suspension notice, or in the case of refusal, a 12 month driver license or driving privilege suspension. The police should give you two copies of this form.
1. A criminal proceeding in court
2. A civil proceeding with the Department of Motor Vehicles (MVD) and the likely suspension of your driver license.
These two proceedings are mutually exclusive; the outcome of one will not affect the other. You could win both matters or lose both matters. How the MVD driver license hearing is handled is extremely important.
The Criminal Proceeding
Your DUI arrest begins your criminal proceeding. The consequences of this -- plea of guilty, or a verdict of guilty following a jury or bench trial -- could result in mandatory jail time, fines, fees and assessments, supervised or unsupervised probation, as well as a criminal record.
The Civil Proceeding
The civil proceeding is conducted before an administrative hearing officer at the MVD. This proceeding deals with a possible suspension of your driver's license, or if from out of state, your privilege to drive in Arizona.
The arresting police officer will serve you with a "Notice of Suspension." If you have been arrested in Arizona for DUI and you take a breath, blood or urine test, and the results measured a alcohol concentration of .08% or more within 2 hours of driving, or you refuse to take the blood, breath or other chemical test, the arresting police will serve you with a 90 day driver license suspension notice, or in the case of refusal, a 12 month driver license or driving privilege suspension. The police should give you two copies of this form.
Ignition interlock devices - not just for DUI offenders
With some of the toughest DUI laws in the country in Arizona, a growing number of parents of teenaged drivers in the Valley have decided to take a drastic step in the name of safety. According to Smart Start Arizona, a company that installs and monitors ignition interlock devices, more parents are voluntarily installing the devices on their teens' vehicles.
An ignition interlock device measures a person's breath alcohol before allowing the vehicle to start. If the breath alcohol is above .05, the vehicle will not start, and a record of the failed test is stored in the unit's memory. Interlocks are mandatory for anyone convicted of a DUI in the state of Arizona. Smart Start manager, Frank Bobadilla says dozens of parents have had the device installed in their teens' cars in the last few months. "I guess a lot of them are remembering what they were doing when they were young," says Bobadilla. "And the way that the laws are now in the state of Arizona, they're not willing to take that chance."
Drivers blow into a handheld unit for six seconds before they are given a "pass" or "fail" message. That data is stored in a black box and downloaded once a month. The monthly reports are then emailed or faxed to the parent. A driver is given a number of points for failed tests before the device is either reset, or locks the car from being driven.
An ignition interlock device measures a person's breath alcohol before allowing the vehicle to start. If the breath alcohol is above .05, the vehicle will not start, and a record of the failed test is stored in the unit's memory. Interlocks are mandatory for anyone convicted of a DUI in the state of Arizona. Smart Start manager, Frank Bobadilla says dozens of parents have had the device installed in their teens' cars in the last few months. "I guess a lot of them are remembering what they were doing when they were young," says Bobadilla. "And the way that the laws are now in the state of Arizona, they're not willing to take that chance."
Drivers blow into a handheld unit for six seconds before they are given a "pass" or "fail" message. That data is stored in a black box and downloaded once a month. The monthly reports are then emailed or faxed to the parent. A driver is given a number of points for failed tests before the device is either reset, or locks the car from being driven.
Party season for teens, worries for parents
In this season of prom and graduation parties, parents are looking for ways to protect their kids from the risks of alcohol abuse. Fortunately, they have options.
Some parents think they're doing the right thing by making it possible for their teens to drink without driving, perhaps hosting a party in their home or facilitating one at another location. But safety advocates point out, there are legal penalties for hosting a party for underage drinkers or supplying their alcohol.
The public education effort called "Draw the Line" is aimed at curbing teen alcohol abuse. It involves the Arizona Department of Liquor License and Control, and several other state and grassroots organizations. Their website includes advice for parents during graduation season. It also has fact sheets on legal penalties for serving alcohol to young people and new research on how alcohol physically damages a young brain, in different ways than it affects an adult.
Some parents think they're doing the right thing by making it possible for their teens to drink without driving, perhaps hosting a party in their home or facilitating one at another location. But safety advocates point out, there are legal penalties for hosting a party for underage drinkers or supplying their alcohol.
The public education effort called "Draw the Line" is aimed at curbing teen alcohol abuse. It involves the Arizona Department of Liquor License and Control, and several other state and grassroots organizations. Their website includes advice for parents during graduation season. It also has fact sheets on legal penalties for serving alcohol to young people and new research on how alcohol physically damages a young brain, in different ways than it affects an adult.
Alcohol poisoning
Brenda Nguyen was a 13-year-old Phoenix girl who had dreams like many girls her age. She wanted to be a model, or maybe a doctor. She was described as a good student, someone who may have tried alcohol like others her age, but didn't have a lot of experience with alcohol.
But in February 2007, Brenda and a girlfriend left their homes for several days and ended up drinking with some young adults in an apartment. Police say an 18-year-old man kept pouring liquor for Brenda. It's estimated she drank a fifth of vodka in less than an hour.
Soon she was unconscious. The adults did CPR and revived her, but never called 9-1-1, allegedly because they were afraid they would get in trouble for giving alcohol to underage girls. Instead, they fell asleep. When they woke up hours later, Brenda was dead.
The medical examiner says she died of alcohol poisoning. Her blood alcohol level was .43. The legal limit for drivers is .08. Brenda, who weighed less than 100 pounds, had overloaded her body with alcohol.
The adults who were with Brenda when she died all did plea bargains on charges ranging up to manslaughter. Their sentences ranged from 1.6 years to seven years.
Brenda's mother, Thuy Nguyen, who emigrated from Vietnam, still has a hard time believing alcohol killed her oldest daughter. Thuy says she had never heard of alcohol poisoning. Neither have many other parents. But it's a very real risk for teenagers or college students who consume alcohol at parties or bars.
A coalition of agencies, including the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism gives a detailed explanation of alcohol poisoning. The Mayo Clinic also has helpful information for parents and teens.
But in February 2007, Brenda and a girlfriend left their homes for several days and ended up drinking with some young adults in an apartment. Police say an 18-year-old man kept pouring liquor for Brenda. It's estimated she drank a fifth of vodka in less than an hour.
Soon she was unconscious. The adults did CPR and revived her, but never called 9-1-1, allegedly because they were afraid they would get in trouble for giving alcohol to underage girls. Instead, they fell asleep. When they woke up hours later, Brenda was dead.
The medical examiner says she died of alcohol poisoning. Her blood alcohol level was .43. The legal limit for drivers is .08. Brenda, who weighed less than 100 pounds, had overloaded her body with alcohol.
The adults who were with Brenda when she died all did plea bargains on charges ranging up to manslaughter. Their sentences ranged from 1.6 years to seven years.
Brenda's mother, Thuy Nguyen, who emigrated from Vietnam, still has a hard time believing alcohol killed her oldest daughter. Thuy says she had never heard of alcohol poisoning. Neither have many other parents. But it's a very real risk for teenagers or college students who consume alcohol at parties or bars.
A coalition of agencies, including the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism gives a detailed explanation of alcohol poisoning. The Mayo Clinic also has helpful information for parents and teens.
Arizona DUI
Arizona Driving Under the Influence or Arizona DUI is a punishable offence. The driver is arrested by police officers and taken into custody. It is not necessary to handcuff or restrict the physical movements of the suspect. An arrest can be executed by merely informing the suspect of the process.
The police officer makes the decision to arrest the suspect based on certain facts and evidence indicating the individual’s involvement in the crime. The DUI arrests in Arizona can be affected based on two identified causes: an impaired driving ability as a result of intoxication due to the consumption of alcohol or drugs, or a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or more. Charges are serious if the blood alcohol level is detected to be more than 0.15%. If the driving ability is found to be impaired due to the influence of a drug, it results in conviction irrespective of the fact that it is a legally recommended medication.
In Arizona, DUI arrests are considered a misdemeanor if a person is accused two or more times in the span of five years prior to the current offence. However, a far more serious note is taken if the offence is during the suspension or cancellation of the driving rights or if a child below the age of fifteen is in the car. Punishments depend on the seriousness of charges and the defendant’s criminal record.
The police officer makes the decision to arrest the suspect based on certain facts and evidence indicating the individual’s involvement in the crime. The DUI arrests in Arizona can be affected based on two identified causes: an impaired driving ability as a result of intoxication due to the consumption of alcohol or drugs, or a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or more. Charges are serious if the blood alcohol level is detected to be more than 0.15%. If the driving ability is found to be impaired due to the influence of a drug, it results in conviction irrespective of the fact that it is a legally recommended medication.
In Arizona, DUI arrests are considered a misdemeanor if a person is accused two or more times in the span of five years prior to the current offence. However, a far more serious note is taken if the offence is during the suspension or cancellation of the driving rights or if a child below the age of fifteen is in the car. Punishments depend on the seriousness of charges and the defendant’s criminal record.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
