dwi Austin
The Last Thing You Need When You're In Trial
…is to check your iPhone during a break and realize that one of your so-called friends has snapped an unfavorable picture of you crossing a deputy and sent it out via email to everyone you know.
I’m blond, so sometimes my hair looks see-though, right? I’m not balding yet, am I?
DWI Dismissal Could Lead To Removal Of Ignition Interlock Device
Proving that the Wichita Falls Times Record News Online is just a little behind what most people would consider news, a few days ago they ran a story titled “First Offense May Require DWI Device”:
Repeat drinking and driving offenders in Texas know the hassle that comes with the advanced charges, but soon, first-time offenders, too, could face a tougher crack down.
Texas state legislation mandates that repeat offenders be ordered to have an ignition interlock installed on their vehicle as a condition of their bond.
However, that could change soon, as legislators are looking at amending the law, making the interlock a requirement on the first offense.
Actually, the legislative session is over, and I’m pretty sure House Bill 1110, which would have done just that, was left pending in committee, which is fancy legi-speak for “went nowhere”. I say “pretty sure” because Texas has some funky procedures regarding the Governor’s ability to call special sessions for certain issues, but I haven’t heard of one for this… yet. Not saying it couldn’t happen.
At any rate, I found this tidbit from the article amusing. Sometimes journalists like to rile their readers up, let ‘em know what sorts of outrageous consequences there could be if a bill doesn’t pass:
For some, the device is only a temporary inconvenience.
Being a condition of bond, the suspect could be allowed to have the device removed if the case is dismissed, or the terms of the conviction or probation don’t mandate its use.
That’s right folks! You get arrested, not convicted but just accused of DWI second in Texas, and you’re going to be required to put an interlock on your car. But as the law stands now… if the state dismisses your case (or, and the article doesn’t mention this, but hey, this is bad law too) if you are acquitted…
Under current law, you are no longer required to have the IID on your car. Imagine that. The horror. Better call your legislator and, well, tell them what? Rewind time and get this bill out of committee?
Do Prosecutors Trust The Intoxiliar 5000?
Well, Eric Dexheimer, on the Statesman’s Focal Point blog, actually asks the question “Do prosecutors walk the walk with DWI breath tests?”. The answer, of course, is usually a resounding “Hell No!” but a more interesting question is – if you believe me that the answer is “No”- then “Why Not?”
Could it be that as lawyers intimately involved in the criminal justice system, that they know their rights, and when to exercise them?
If the Death Penalty Capital of the World Can Do It...
Harris County DA Pat Lykos has announced that she will allow first time DWI offenders to apply for Pretrial Diversion and/or be eligible for a Deferred Prosecution:
Harris County District Attorney Pat Lykos announced plans Friday for a program that allows first-time DWI and drug offenders to avoid conviction, an idea she acknowledged could be a hard sell to the public.
The plan, referred to as pretrial diversion and scheduled to begin in August, was heartily endorsed by the county’s defense attorneys, supported by the sheriff deputies’ and the Houston police officers’ unions, but strongly opposed by the local chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.
“What we’re trying to do is prevent recidivism. So, it’s a carrot-stick approach,” Lykos said. “With respect to DWI, that’s an absolute plague in Harris County. If we can get first offenders, get them into treatment … and divert them so they don’t become repeat offenders, that’s going to have enormous dividends. And the same thing for first-time drug possession.”
This move was, and I know I’m repeating myself here, “supported by the sheriff deputies’ and the Houston police officers’ unions”. For all you law and order folks out there, doesn’t that endorsement convince you that it can’t be an all-bad idea, can it?
Heck, even Williamson County, not known for its soft-on-crime reputation allows DWI defendants with no prior criminal history to apply for what they call Pretrial Intervention – the same thing as Travis County’s Pretrial Diversion.
Isn’t it about time the progressive folks in charge of our Travis County Attorney’s Office here in Austin do the same thing?
Missed It By That Much
I should know better than to get my hopes up.
Yesterday morning, my client’s DWI was set for a pretrial conference. That’s the last setting before a contested pretrial motions hearing in Travis County. But it doesn’t get set for pretrial motions until the complaint and information (official charging instrument in a misdemeanor) have been filed at the county clerk’s office.
This was – hang on, let me go check my calendar – the 27th time my client’s case was set on the docket. Which is a lot – but, no complaint and information, it just keeps getting reset about once every 3 or 4 weeks for another status check.
Today was 732 days after my client’s arrest. Two years and two days after. The statute of limitations for a misdemeanor DWI in Texas – which applies to the filing of the charging instrument only – expired two days ago. But this morning when I looked in the clerk’s file, the C&I was there. It had been filed in between the last two settings, just under the two year deadline.
Sigh.
That’s OK. Now I’ll just have to earn my fee the regular way.
