I write stuff and put it on this page. Frankly, it is more for my office (or ME) than anyone esle. Well, that is what I thought anyway.

The other day, a client came by to discuss his case with me.  Kind of an update thing.  While we were talking, he told me that he had read EVERYTHING on this blog and was very impressed. Everything?  Wow.  I was impressed. I - like I said - didn’t know anyone read these except me. (Well, not exactly true: David Prater, the District Attorney of Oklahoma County, told me once that he had some program which searched the web for anything that had his name within it and once saw a post I put up regarding how his office would treat an arrested peace officer no differently for a DUI than anyone else.  So, Hi, David!).

SO, if you are reading these posts, here is a couple of new ones. Things that I think should be “blogged”.

Charles

People were arrested for DUI this weekend. A bunch of them, I have no doubt. The weather was WAY too pretty. And, it will change the lives of hundreds of people, from the arrested party to everyone close to them. One of them might have been you. Now, what should be done?

Most will think the right thought: “I have got to get a lawyer.” Good thinking, but who?

Some of these folks will ask friends or family and recommendations will be made. Hopefully, the trust they place in those lawyer(s) will be deserved. Regrettably, in far too many cases, it won’t be.

Some folks will go for the least expensive they can find. Part of this will be driven by limited funds. Part of it will be caused by VERY bad advice from some of these friends and family - and in SOME cases, BONDMEN - that “any lawyer can do the same thing for you” and it “doesn’t really matter”, etc. Bad counsel. Really bad counsel. On this topic - JUST LIKE EACH AND EVERY OTHER ONE - you pay for what you get . . . . . . , period.

Others will be directed to certain lawyers by bonsdmen with “this is the guy” type suggestions. Sometimes that is right, but - ALL TOO OFTEN - this is NOT right. It is just another lawyer who handles every kind of criminal case and knows little to nothing about this specialized area of law known as DUI Defense.

Others research the question and will be influenced by advertisements by lawyers who have claimed “self appointed greatness”. Nothing else need be said about these guys.

So, back to the original question, who?

For starters, approach this question like you would if you were looking for a doctor to treat you or your loved one for a specific disease. It goes without saying that you would want the very best at this disease that you could find ANYWHERE. The cheapest one is almost NEVER the best one. Price of the doctor would not be a topic you would likely even think of. And, did you ever think about where DOCTORS or NURSES or OTHER medical professionals go when THEY have that specific disease? Now, THAT’S the doctor to go do, huh? If you could discover that, it would greatly influence your search for that doctor to treat you or your loved one.

In this DUI arrest, it is not a lot different. Who do those Lawyers OR Policemen OR Prosecutors OR Judges OR others in the legal field go when THEY or their loved ones get arrested for DUI? Man, it would be nice to know who THEY think is the best for this, huh? You can ask these folks, if you know any. If you don’t, let me share something with you.

Our office has represented lawyers, a prosecutor (yes, they get arrested too), law enforcement people (we have several children of policemen on our case load right now), and Judges’ children. In fact, if one of these type of folks gets arrested, I expect the call from them. The only reason that I would NOT see them coming to our office is that they are too embarrassed to call us. A mistake, I might add, on their part.

So, who to call? Ask a Cop, a Judge, a prosecutor, etc who they would go to if they were in your position. Then, call that lawyer. You will find that many of the responses - a WHOLE lot of them - will be “to call the Sifers law office”. If they suggest someone else, call them.

Charles

Charles L. Sifers
Oklahoma’s First Attorney Board Certified
in DUI Defense by National College for DUI Defense
(NCDD) under American Bar Association (ABA) Guidelines

AND

Oklahoma’s First & ONLY
Regent (retired) for the National College for DUI Defense

Sifers & Sifers, Attorneys at Law
Court Plaza Building, Suite 950
228 Robert S. Kerr
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
office - 405-232-3388
fax - 405-232-5144
email - charles@siferslaw.com
web(s) - www.oklahomaduilaw.com
www.okla-dui.com
www.dui-help-oklahoma.com
www.oklahoma-dui.com

“The People should NOT be afraid of the Government. The Government should be afraid of the People”.

Lights. Cameras. Action. DUI arrests on video. Why aren’t ALL of them videoed?

From time to time, a story like the one HERE comes up. In this story, a video (one from a security camera NOT the police car or the jail) showed a story SIGNIFICANTLY different than that which the officers told. There have been multiple other stories like it over the years. People arrested for DUI that were NOT even close to impaired, but the cop was going to have his arrest, by god.

A few years ago, a Highway Patrolman was brutally murdered on a lonely rural road by a piece of sh__t that the patrolman had stopped for a minor traffic offense. The patrolman had a video system in his car and that murder was caught entirely on tape. As a result, the guy was caught VERY soon thereafter because the car and it’s tag were clearly visible on the tape. It was NO TIME and all OHP vehicles had video systems. But you know what? To get these tapes for DUI arrests, you must SUBPOENA them. Even if you are the arrested person’s lawyer, you can not request them (like you USED TO) and get them. No, you must spend the time, effort, and money to subpoena them. You know what else?  Most prosecutors don’t ever get them and put them in the State’s file, much less actually review them before bringing or pushing a charge.  And, that is wrong.

What is there to lose by having all traffic stops videoed? Nothing. Everybody wins. Those cops that do it right and play by the rules will have it there for all to see. If a client claims a cop did something he should not have, it will be there or it won’t. I had that case a few years ago and everything that the client claimed occurred was false. A video avoided a trial and a VERY likely jail sentence for that client. If a cop DOESN’T play by the rules and arrests someone that SHOULD NOT have been arrested, that will be there too. And, those cops need to be exposed as badly as any DUI offender. I have had PLENTY of those cases, too. A cop claimed something happened OR that he did everything by the rules OR that my client looked and sounded skunk drunk, and the video showed a COMPLETELY different story. Take a look HERE to see what I mean.

And, why not put it all on the tape? I represented another lawyer (our office represents MANY of those fellow members of the Bar that find themselves in this predicament) one time that was arrested in Edmond. The cop had a camera and an audio link. Everything was recorded by audio. However, the cop took my client OUT OF THE CAMERA’S VIEW to do the field tests! Why in the world did he do that? The truth is, my client did NOT do as poorly as the cop claimed. We were able to discedrn that from the AUDIO portion of that tape. The tape would have shown the VIDEO of these field tests, too. Although that case came out JUST AS IT SHOULD HAVE, any such evidence could have - AND SHOULD HAVE - been on that video.

Videos of ALL DUI arrests, field test administration, and the breath tests that follow should be a requirement. NO, it should be the law of this State, like it is in South Carolina now. This is NOT new technology. It is NOT that expensive anymore. The excuses of the past just don’t cut it anymore. It should be in EVERY cop car. No evidence should be admissible unless it can be confirmed on that video. It would clean up alot of bad cases. It would eliminate alot of bad cops. It would strengthen the public’s perception of fairness in all traffic stops, too.

Like I said, nobody loses.

Charles

Charles L. Sifers
Oklahoma’s First Attorney Board Certified
in DUI Defense by National College for DUI Defense
(NCDD) under American Bar Association (ABA) Guidelines

AND

Oklahoma’s First & ONLY
Regent (retired) for the National College for DUI Defense

Sifers & Sifers, Attorneys at Law
Court Plaza Building, Suite 950
228 Robert S. Kerr
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
office - 405-232-3388
fax - 405-232-5144
email - charles@siferslaw.com
web(s) - www.oklahomaduilaw.com
www.okla-dui.com
www.dui-help-oklahoma.com
www.oklahoma-dui.com

“The People should NOT be afraid of the Government. The Government should be afraid of the People”.

Well, there is a “new sheriff” in town. 

In an article in the Sunday Oklahoma, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers announced it has a NEW executive director.  His name is Virgil Green and his last job was the chief of police of the metropolis of Boley, Oklahoma.  He is calling for STRICTER laws and wants the legislature to “crack down” on drunk drivers.  He “believes breath test requirements should be stricter and punishment harsher for all drunken drivers.”  He stated that the problem won’t go away until the laws are harder.

This is the saw that MADD has played for 30 years.  And, the laws DO get tougher each and every time the legislature meets.  A lawyer cannot keep up with the laws simply by having copies of the law books.  The legislature will change them before the next edition is printed.  Has the problem gone away?  No.  And, getting even MORE tough will still not “make it go away.  It hasn’t so far and it is doubtful it will.  But it will cause a couple of things to occur.

One is that more NOT GUILTY people will be punished unduly and unfairly.  Oh, yes.  There are arrests daily of people who have caused NO problems to anyone and who are NOT guilty of this crime.  Well, you say, they WERE drinking while driving, weren’t they?  Some of them might have been, BUT remember:  that act is not a crime.  Drinking and then driving is NOT illegal in this - or any other that I know of - State.   While drunk drfiving is a crime, drinking and driving is NOT.  Innocent people are arrested and made to face these tougher laws.  I have represented MANY of them.

Tougher laws make people take the crime more serious, yes.   It will cost those accused more; no doubt.  They will do so by seeking out more than a general pracitioner lawyer.  They will look for those who specialize in that area of law and pay the fee for them.  So, another thing that this “toughen the laws” will produce is that the GOOD - quality - DUI Defense lawyer will make more money.  There will be more trials and - make no mistake - more acquittals.  SO, toughen up the laws?  Go ahead.   But the more the government pushes, the more the defense will push back, as long as the words on the Consitution can still be read.  Count on it.

There is an expression that lawyers and judges use to express how things are appearing to be moving in a direction that is likely unintended and, if left unattended & not stopped, will be impossible to avoid the harm caused.  That expression is “slippery slope”.  For example, “If the court rules this way, it will create a slippery slope to _________ (fill in the blank with a bad thing).”  Etc.  A real life example of a slippery slope was the Red Scare of the 1940’s and 1950’s.  Passing the laws at the U.S. legislature which were to, ostensibly, protect from the Communism problem and letting Joseph Raymond McCarthy run wild in “chasing” communists at the Senate created a slippery slope which destroyed many good people and almost destroyed the rights we can all claim under the Constitution. This was called “McCarthyism”.  And it pretty much was thought to have DIED at the end of the ’50’s when people began to push back to demand those rights before they were GONE.  Note the quote from Senator(s) Susan Collins and Carl Levin in the preface of their report on the unsealing of McCarthy’s secret hearings held during this time:

Senator McCarthy’’s zeal to uncover subversion and espionage led to disturbing excesses. His browbeating tactics destroyed careers of people who were not involved in the infiltration of our government. His freewheeling style caused both the Senate and the Subcommittee to revise the rules governing future investigations, and prompted the courts to act to protect the Constitutional rights of witnesses at Congressional hearings… These hearings are a part of our national past that we can neither afford to forget nor permit to reoccur.    

Well, in Oklahoma, the slippery slope being caused by the “zeal” of certain persons - particularly certain legislators - is turning into a 90 degree angle.  It is not a “slope” at all. We are falling off a cliff.

How can I say that? Well, click on this Associated Press story from MSNBC. Click HERE and read this story. Then, hit the back button. I’ll wait . . . . . .

Back?  I don’t know whether you agree with me or not.  But, this is a BAD LAW.  What’s next?  Will we ALL be hearing the following statement soon when we are walking or driving down the street?

“Papiere, bitte”

Which, by the way, means “Papers, please” in German. Remember? That was the national language of Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

It appears to me that we need to add ANOTHER exception to the Constitution of the United States  - which now has SEVERAL with DUI at the top of the list - of “driving while looking like you don’t belong here”. 

I defend people who are accused of violating the law.  I do everything I can to assert the rights of ALL OF US to keep the government from taking those rights away from the accused.  In DUI, license law, or this “McCarthyism of Immigration”, I am AGAIN reminded of a line from the movie, V for Vendetta:  

 “The people should not be afraid of the government.  The government should be afraid of the people.”

 Well, here’s a tidbit:  I just saw that where Raymond Ledford, the Chief of Police of the Town of Luther, Oklahoma, was arrested by a Oklahoma County Deputy Sheriff for the crime of Actual Physical Control of a Motor Vehicle while Under the Influence of Alcohol (”APC”).  Apparently, he did not read my post of on how to avoid this kind of arrest (How to Avoid a DUI this Holiday Season) and the news story done on this by KFOR.  But, before you assume that he will be treated differently by the District Attorneys in David Prater’s Office, think again.  You can be assured that Prater’s Office will handle this matter as fairly and even-handedly as it does every other DUI case.  The Police Chief will not see any special treatment, I feel confident.

But, it does tell us something:  DUI and APC happens to people in ALL walks of life, huh?

Yesterday, I had a long telephone conversation with Bruce Kapsack, a DUI Lawyer (and a true master at DUI Defense) and good friend, in the Oakland/San Francisco area.  During that conversation, he commented on the post below about Will Rogers and our stupid new Immigration Law that resulted from HB 1804.  He pointed out something that even FURTHER confirms why this bill has GOT to be repealed or modified.  He made the observation that, under this new law, Will Rogers- OUR Will Rogers! - could not prove he was either an Oklahoma OR U.S. citizen.  And,  - as it is required to operate under this stupid bill - our government would not only DENY any driver’s license to him here AND would deny him any bond and consider him a flight risk, it would basically NOT want him here because he had no birth certificate he could show anyone.

WOW.

This MUST be changed . . . . . . . !

Our office does not do Immigration Law. While I know that DUI Defense has been declared an area of “specialization” by the ABA, I would not be the least surprised that Immigration Law has reached that same point. However, in properly representing the DUI person, we have had to keep up with those “overlaps” within Immigration Law. Prior to the recent changes in our STATE’S Immigration Law (which is the topic of this entry), this has been relatively simple to do. Further, this has really not been that big-of-a-deal since this whole topic of Immigration Law became so hot as most of our clients have NOT been foreign nationals, but good old Oklahoma and/or U.S. citizens. And, their status as such was of little question. However, with HB 1804 going into effect on November 1, 2007, Immigration Law has now bled over into my area of law in indelible ink in a couple of ways. One might be understandable. The other is not. It is ridiculous.

I have represented 1,000’s of DUI’s in my legal career. Most of them took some form of test - usually breath, but many times blood - during the arrest. And, our office has seen some respectfully HIGH results, too. We have seen MANY .30’s. We have seen our share of tests in the .40’s, too. The highest that I can remember right now is a .47% BAC, and that is damn high. But, the lady in THIS STORY has them ALL beat. Her’s is considered to be the “world” record.

Just before the last New Year, a woman was arrested in Oregon passed out in her car (this would have earned her an Actual Physical Control or “APC” charge here in Oklahoma - click HERE (look at the right hand side of this page about half-way down) for more about APC in our State). The cops had to take her to the hospital. Blood was withdrawn and it was analyzed. The result was a .72% blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Death is considered a near certainty at .50%. This girl had that much plus about 50% more.

Wow.

What the story does NOT tell us is whether this was a whole blood test (like that required for admissibility under Oklahoma Law for this type of this test) OR a hospital-type test. Considering that the story suggested that the cops had the test results AT the hospital, I’d bet it was the latter. A hospital test takes a MUCH shorter time to get a result. The cops could have known the result of that type of test prior to booking her in jail. A whole blood test would have not been available that quickly.

A blood test for alcohol done at a hospital is NOT as accurate as a WHOLE blood test. A hospital test is a serum test AND a result for those tests is ALWAYS higher than a whole blood test of a sample of the same blood done by gas chromatography. A hospital test will be - on the average - 15% to 20% higher than a whole blood test. Therefore, if this was a hospital test and not a whole blood test, the TRUE blood alcohol level for this woman was closer to .57% to 61%. Still, certainly, off the chart, even with this adjustment.

It makes better press, though, when it is reported at the .72% BAC level, does it?