I want to give a big thank you to everyone who purchased our book – “A Cup Of Coffee With 10 Of The Top DUI Attorneys In The United States” last night during the launch.
The launch turned out to be an incredible success, and reached “Amazon Best Seller” list in three categories:
#1 in Court Rules
Well, there’s a new law in town, and the local police and District Attorneys are already pushing it hard. Its a DWI with a breath or blood alcohol level of .15 or more.
The amended text of Penal Code 49.04 reads:
(d) If it is shown on the trial of an offense under this section that an analysis of a specimen of the person’s blood, breath, or urine showed an alcohol concentration level of 0/15 or more at the time the analysis was performed, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor.
After being arrested for DWI, a police officer will read the citizen accused their "Statutory Warnings" before asking them to submit to a breath test.
This form, the DIC-24, goes through the warnings to a person discussing potential license suspension for refusal, failure, and hearing requests. It was originally created as a "dummy proof" form so that officers weren’t illegally coercing people into giving breath or blood samples.
The DIC-24 is often criticized by DWI attorneys as overly complicated, and in some cases, flat out deceiving.
About a month ago, I wrote an article Crime Victim Dies of Complications, detailing a certain tree planted in front of the courthouse to commemorate crime victims. I took a picture showing that the tree had apparently died and been cut down.
I also found it interesting that no one puts up wrongly accused / convicted trees around the courthouse — that might actually cause a jury to think twice about convicting someone.
.
It appears a local crime victim has dies of injuries. Reports are unclear as to whether the death is related to injuries sustained from the initial crime.
I snapped this photo recently of the "Crime Victim Tree" planted just outside of the new Collin County Courthouse.
As you can see, the tree has been removed and all that remains is a bit of the stump below.
From my college town of Gainesville, Florida, and their paper, the Gainesville Sun, comes this interesting piece.
Dare I say, “Go Gators!?!”
—-
I’m pleased to announce the release of the Texas DWI Guide App! This app is available free from iTunes
I created this app for the Public, Attorneys, and Peace Officers. The Texas DWI Guide is the premier guide on all things regarding DWI / DUI charges.
The most powerful Driving While Intoxicated app on the market, it provides:
It seems as if the Federal Government is now getting into the mix of deciding what the individual states should and should not be allowed to do to punish first time DWI / DUI offenders.
Today, an article in the USA today explained that the Federal Government has a pending bill that would tie in government funding for roads to the conditions of probation on a DWI first. According to the article, if States do not make Ignition Interlock devices a requirement as a condition of probation for DWI 1st.
I’ve always heard that this is how the Government got Louisiana to up their drinking age to 21 . . by tying road funding to it. But I don’t know if that is true.
A new bill proposed in the Senate by Senator Whitmire seems to be the same as that of HB 1906.
The bill deals with lowering the surcharge for someone who successfully completes the DWI/Drug Court program. As I stated before, this only helps someone that completes the course, which can be 2 years or more later. This means that the bill does not really save the person much. It would be a better bill if the savings were upon entering the DWI court program. I would even be in support if those savings were only temporary and became permanent after successful completion. I think that would be a better idea.
Below is the text of the entire bill:
A new House Bill proposed by Representative Coleman affects the surcharges assessed on those convicted of DWI. Right now, if you are convicted of DWI first, you owe the state $3,000 over 3 years just to keep your driving privledges.
The bill seems to say that the 3,000 is now a maximum surcharge, instead of it being the automatic surcharge. It would be based now on the "seriousness of the charge, the amount necessary to deter future violations, and an amount that maximizes collection."
I like the idea of this, except it doesnt seem to really say who determines how much the amount is, and why! Nor does it seem to give you any kind of due process, like a hearing to present to a judge or magistrate why you think your surcharge should be less. Basically it seems like a proposal with no teeth.
Frisco DWI Lawyer & Attorney Blog