Month: May 2013
Woman facing DUI, assault charges in relation to Tennessee crash
Recently, a DUI case has arisen in Tennessee in connection to a car accident. The accident happened on May 16 in Montgomery County, Tennessee. That day, a 26-year-old woman was driving a pickup truck along Highway 13. According to authorities, the woman’s pickup truck then crossed onto the road’s opposing side and crashed head-on into
Inference of Tactical Decision Blocks Plain Error Review
As addressed in the previous post, “plain error” review may still occur on direct appeal for issues which were not properly preserved for appeal. The criteria for plain error review includes that the record must clearly establish what happened; a clear and unequivocal rule must be breached; a substantive right of the accused must be
Semi driver accused of driving drunk, causing fatal crash
Being accused of having been involved in a DUI accident can be a very serious matter. Major criminal charges can be brought against a person in connection to such an accusation. A person can face particularly serious charges if the alleged DUI accident resulted in a death. This can be seen in a DUI case
Admission of Recorded Accusations Not Plain Error
Appellate courts may occasionally conduct “plain error” review of issues which were not properly preserved for appeal at the trial court level. To review an issue for plain error, a set of criteria must be met, which include that the record must clearly establish what happened, a clear and unequivocal rule must be breached, a
NTSB recommends lowering legal limit to 0.05
In the U.S., laws regarding drunk driving are set by the states. However, this does not mean that the federal government plays no role when it comes to drunk driving laws. There are many different methods the federal government sometimes uses to try to influence state drunk driving laws. One of the more extreme methods the federal
Court Affirms Denial of Mitigation in Sex Abuse Case
In criminal sentencing, mitigation factors can generally be argued and considered in offsetting enhancement factors and arguing for a lower sentence within a statutory range of punishment. Trial courts have discretion in considering what mitigating factors to apply, and may even consider factors not specifically listed by statute. In the recent case of State v. Pantaleon, M2012-00575-CCA-R3-CD
Tennessee school bus driver admits to drunk driving
When someone is arrested and charged with drunk driving, the first thing that’s important is to challenge the evidence if you believe you have been wrongly accused. There are many ways that this can be done. But for many people, they make mistakes and get caught. It’s important to know how to handle what comes next.
Appellate Court Declines Judicial Notice of State Fair Date
Judicial notice allows a court to accept the truth of a fact without that fact having to be specifically proven by evidence presented in court. This usually pertains to facts so well known that they cannot reasonably be doubted. An often used example is that judicial notice may be taken of what day of the
Evidence Sufficient to Affirm Conviction for Rape of a Child
In a criminal trial with conflicting evidence, it is the role of the jury to resolve the evidentiary conflicts and arrive at a conclusion as to guilt or acquittal. On appeal, appellate courts do not consider whether they agree or disagree with the jury’s resolution of conflicting facts and evidence. Appellate courts review to determine
Supreme Court rules on warrantless blood tests
There are many different tools and methods police use in their enforcement efforts against drunk driving. One tool police sometimes use in such efforts are blood tests to determine an individual’s blood alcohol level. A question arose in connection to such tests: do police need a warrant to conduct such tests? In a recent decision,