blank

DWLR Based upon an Ignition Interlock Violation

Last month, the North Carolina court of appeals decided State v. Graves, No. COA09-595 (March 16, 2010), a case involving the defendant’s appeal from his convictions for felony speeding to elude, driving while license revoked (DWLR), reckless driving to endanger, and impaired driving.  The court vacated the defendant’s conviction for DWLR on the basis that … Read more

blank

.08 at Any Relevant Time after the Driving

Every state and the District of Columbia prohibits driving with an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more though state laws vary regarding whether to establish a violation of the per se impaired driving law an alcohol concentration of .08 or more must exist at the time of driving (see, for example, Ala Code § 32-5A-191; … Read more

blank

No Privilege for You

Among the most frequently asked motor vehicle law questions is whether a person convicted of impaired driving for an offense that occurred when the person was less than 21 years old is eligible for a limited driving privilege.  The answer is no.  The reason?  No statute confers authority for the granting of a limited driving … Read more

blank

The Need for (Evidence of) Speed

A civil case decided by the court of appeals last week, Blackwell v. Hatley, addresses when a witness may testify as to his or her opinion of how fast a vehicle was traveling.  In Blackwell, the court held that an accident report prepared by a town police officer estimating the defendant’s speed at the time … Read more

blank

Decriminalizing Certain Offenses to Reduce Appointed Counsel Costs

The Office of Indigent Defense Services (IDS) is studying data related to the disposition of seventeen types of misdemeanor charges during the 2009 fiscal year to determine whether decriminalization of these offenses might be an appropriate way to reduce the cost to the State of providing appointed counsel.  Section 15.17 of S.L. 2009-451 directed IDS … Read more

blank

Lee v. Gore and Checking the Box

In an implied consent case in which a defendant is asked to submit to a chemical analysis, the law enforcement officer and chemical analyst (who often are the same person) complete an affidavit averring that the implied consent testing procedures have been followed and stating the results of the test or that the person willfully … Read more

blank

State v. Mumford: A New Exception Affording Relief from Inconsistent Verdicts

Jeff Welty blogged here about inconsistent verdicts.  As he explained, a defendant generally isn’t entitled to relief from inconsistent verdicts, which may result from jury irrationality, a jury’s desire to cut the defendant a break, or some other unknown reason.  The defendant is protected by the court’s review of whether substantial evidence supports the charge … Read more

blank

Level 3, 4 and 5 Punishment in Impaired Driving Cases

I wrote here about grossly aggravating factors (GAFs) and Level One and Two punishment in impaired driving cases sentenced under G.S. 20-179, leaving discussion of Level Three, Four, and Five punishment for another day. That day is upon us. If the judge or jury in the sentencing hearing determine that there are no GAFs, the … Read more

blank

Nothing Much Shocking about Shockley

The court of appeals ruled this week in State v. Shockley that alcohol concentration readings from two of four attempted breath samples collected within 18 minutes of one another met the “consecutively administered tests” requirement for admissibility of a chemical analysis pursuant to former G.S. 20-139.1(b3).  (As amended in 2006, the provision now requires “at … Read more