blank

State v. Davis: Rule 404(b) and Remote Convictions

I wrote here about the court of appeals’ recent ruling in State v. Davis that expert testimony calculating the defendant’s alcohol concentration based on odor alone was improperly admitted at defendant’s trial on second-degree murder, impaired driving, and other charges arising from a fatal hit-and-run accident. This post addresses the court’s ruling in Davis as … Read more

blank

Second Installment: Suppression of Chemical Analyses in Implied Consent Cases for Statutory Violations

Stan Speedy is charged with impaired driving. He has filed a motion to suppress evidence of blood test results based on a violation of his Fourth Amendment and his statutory rights under Chapter 20. At the suppression hearing, a sheriff’s deputy testifies to the following facts:   At 10 p.m. on the evening of May … Read more

blank

Can I Get a Remedy? Suppression of Chemical Analyses in Implied Consent Cases for Statutory Violations

Dan Defendant is charged with and arrested for driving while impaired. He is taken to a law enforcement center for administration of a chemical analysis. At 2:00 a.m., the chemical analyst informs Dan of his implied consent rights, as set forth in G.S. 20-16.2. Dan indicates that he wishes to call a witness. Dan calls … Read more

blank

The Theory of Implied Consent

A few weeks ago, I blogged about the offense of operating while impaired.  One of the issues I raised in the post was whether telling a defendant that his or her refusal to submit to a breath test in such a case was admissible at trial amounted to coercion that rendered the consent involuntary.  A … Read more

blank

Proving That Blood Was Drawn by a Qualified Person

Earlier posts (here, here, and here) discuss the statutory and constitutional requirements for obtaining a sample of a defendant’s blood for analysis in an implied-consent case.  This post likewise addresses blood draws in such cases but addresses two narrower issues.  First, must the State establish that the blood was drawn by a qualified person before … Read more

blank

Lee v. Gore: Round Two

I blogged here about the North Carolina Court of Appeals’ initial opinion in Lee v. Gore, ___ N.C. App. ___ (January 19, 2010), holding that DMV lacked authority to revoke the petitioner’s driving privileges for refusing a chemical analysis upon receipt of an affidavit that failed to allege a willful refusal.  DMV filed a petition … Read more

blank

State v. Simmons: New Trial Granted on DWI Charges Based on State’s Improper Reference to State v. Narron

The court of appeals in State v. Simmons, ___ N.C. App. ___ (July 20, 2010), decided this week, awarded a new trial to a defendant convicted of impaired driving, finding that the prosecutor made improper and prejudicial remarks in his closing argument.  The court found a substantial likelihood that these comments led the jury to … 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

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