The Hawaii Supreme Court announced its decision today in State v. Won. The court held that where a suspect in a DUI case is told that it is a crime to refuse to submit to an alcohol test, that consent to submit to the test is coerced and invalid because it…
Articles Posted in Federal DUIs
The Court of Appeals takes a step forward with Norton
The Court of Appeals announced its decision in Norton v. State today. I was privileged to have been local counsel on the amicus brief filed by the Innocence Network in this case. The case was a win for Norton, but more importantly, it was a win for all defendants who…
Reflections on the Fourth (and Fifth) of July, thank you Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kennedy, and yes Justice Scalia
In this blog, I want to weave a couple of strands of thought together here on the Fourth and Fifth of July, as I complete the 2015 update for the 8th edition of my Maryland DUI Law. As defense lawyers, we are trained to look for the good facts…
Heien v. North Carolina – Ignorance of the law is no defense – unless you are a cop
Last week the Supreme Court decided the case of Heien v. North Carolina. In an 8-1 decision, the Court decided that even though an officer stopped a driver for conduct that was later decided NOT to be illegal, that the officer’s objectively reasonable belief that the conduct was illegal saved…
Stamm Goes On Al Jazeera News to Discuss Missouri v. McNeely
On last Thursday, June 5, 2014, Leonard Stamm went on Al Jazeera America to discuss last year’s Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely. He was interviewed by reporter John Henry Smith. JHS: Drivers stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence in Tennessee are sometimes forced to submit to…
Navarette v. California – The Court Giveth in McNeely and Taketh in Navarette
Just last term the United StatesSupreme Court held in McNeely v. Missouri, that a warrant is presumptively required before obtaining a blood sample from a drunk driving supsect. However this week, in Navarette v. California, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that a police officer does…
McNeely Continued – Warrantless Breath Tests Violate the Fourth Amendment
In Missouri v. McNeely, the Supreme Court held: “In those drunk-driving investigations where police officers can reasonably obtain a warrant before a blood sample can be drawn without significantly undermining the efficacy of the search, the Fourth Amendment mandates that they do so.” At first blush, it appeared the main…
Forensic chemist gets 3-5 years in prison for falsifying test results
Annie Dookhan, a former forensic chemist at a state forensic laboratory in Massachusetts, pleaded guilty to 27 counts of falsifying test results, misleading investigators, and tampering with evidence. She was sentenced this week to 3-5 years in prison. followed by 2 years of probation. In the course of her career…
U.S. District Court in Maryland Grants McNeely Suppression Motion
The United States District Court for the Southern Division of Maryland in Greenbelt issued its first ruling Friday granting a defense motion to suppress a warrantless blood test as a result of the Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely. Magistrate Judge Thomas M. DiGirolamo issued a 19 page written…
Supreme Court rules search warrant presumptively required before obtaining non-consensual blood draw – Missouri v. McNeely win!
The Supreme Court today announced its opinion in Missouri v. McNeely and ruled that police in DUI investigations may not automatically avoid seeking a search warrant to obtain a blood sample where the defendant does not consent to a blood test. This is the third win as amicus curiae for…