Will Ohio lower DUI limit to .05? In March 2017, Utah’ legislature set up the state to become the first state to lower the legal threshold for drinking and driving to .05 blood alcohol concentration. While states are looking to get more aggressive with DUI laws, such efforts can result in problems in the actual application of the law. This articles examines the law and the impracticality of enforcing the law on the street and in the courtroom.
Proposed DUI Law Criticized
Critics have said the bill fails to address the real problem, which are the 77% of alcohol-related traffic deaths in Utah caused by drivers with a blood-alcohol content of 0.15 and above. The proponent of the law said the problem with the 0.08 BAC law is that “it send the message that you can drink up to a certain point and then drive.” The proponent then noted that several foreign countries have a 0.05 limit.
Proposed DUI Law Problems
The field sobriety tests were designed to determine if someone is at a 0.10 BAC or above. When states lowered the limit to 0.08, that already signaled a move away from criminalizing driving under the influence and towards outlawing drinking and driving. A 0.05 BAC limit is simply another step in that direction. Someone at 0.05 could very well pass the field sobriety tests. If the person is not under the influence of alcohol, can that person be arrested? If the person cannot be arrested, the request for a breathalyzer does not occur.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano. Experienced. Aggressive. Dedicated.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano was admitted to the practice of law in Illinois in 1993. He immediately began practicing as an assistant prosecutor working in a courtroom that focused on major traffic cases, such as DUI and driving under suspension, spending over one year focusing on the many issues in these cases. Attorney Daniel Gigiano then spent the next five years of his government practice working on misdemeanors, felonies, grand jury and preliminary hearings, juvenile delinquency cases, and abuse and neglect cases. In 1999, he was admitted to practice in Ohio. In 2000, he took his experience to a private practice in Wadsworth, Medina County, Ohio. Attorney Gigiano has maintained his private practice in Wadsworth since that time. Call now at 330-336-3330 if you need the services of an experienced Medina criminal defense attorney in Wadsworth.
When Ohio public school student searches occur, those Ohio students are protected by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects people in the United States from unreasonable searches and seizures. Students can be searched if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school.
In 2016, the Ninth District Court of Appeals decided that a person under legal guardianship can execute a valid will, ruling on Ohio will changing mental capacity. Even more notable are the reasons: he suffered from schizophrenia, post traumatic stress disorder, had a low IQ and was a frequent drug user. Using traditional analysis, the court determined that he had the capacity to execute a will.
Ohio felony sentencing laws place most Ohio crimes into five classes. These range from the lowest (fifth degree felony) to the highest (first degree felony). This article will focus on the basic sentencing scheme. This article will not discuss specialized Ohio felony sentencing laws, such as the death penalty, life imprisonment, and mandatory additional prison time. Rape and murder are crimes that fall into such specialized Ohio felony sentencing laws.
Many states, including Ohio, criminalize the refusal to submit to alcohol testing after being arrested for DUI. The United States Supreme Court, in ruling mandatory DUI blood tests unconstitutional, imposed severe limits on such state laws.
Individual Rights And Liberties Are More Important Than Getting Tough On Crime
This case sends a message to get tough on crime advocates: citizens' personal liberty cannot be infringed in the name of enforcing criminal laws. The United States was formed on the notion of individual rights and freedoms. The U.S. Supreme Court reminded us of this fact in its decision.
Ohio Supreme Court Declares Repeat OVI Offender Specifications Constitutional
In 2016, the Ohio Supreme Court found the repeat OVI offender specifications constitutional. The accused challenged the Ohio DUI sentencing laws as unconstitutional because they violated equal protection of the law. The Ohio Supreme Court did not agree with that argument.
The Ohio Medicaid Waiver Program funds the services necessary to allow the individual to stay in his or her own home. These programs “waive” Medicaid regulations so individuals can use community-based programs that cost far less than nursing homes and other institutional residential settings. This program addresses the high cost of nursing home care and people's desire to stay in their own homes.
Apple and the FBI have gotten a lot of attention lately on the government’s power to search cell phones. Apple refused to unlock its phones and FBI figured out how to do it by themselves. Long before this battle ensued, the Ohio Supreme Court issued the following decision: Ohio cell phone search requires search warrant.
In 2016, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a ruling that declared that the police cannot search legally parked cars without a warrant. The arrest of an occupant of the vehicle does not, by itself, give the police authority to search legally parked vehicles.