Test results: Johnson's blood alcohol level was .072

iceberg

rock music matters
Messages
34,404
Reaction score
7,932
AdamJT13;1544194 said:
That's correct, and "not knowing you're over the limit" or just driving "to the wawa less than a mile to get some cigareetes" or "not starting to feel the effects" are no excuses for violating the law and putting lives at risk.

who said it was? but you're coming across as if someone stops by the bar for a single beer won't be able to stop and will come staggering out at 2am.

who said there was an excuse for violating the law? go argue with them cause *i* never said it. i said know your limits and be responsible.
 

stealth

Benched
Messages
4,882
Reaction score
0
Doomsday101;1543995 said:
That is so, you have a better chance of proving the test was faulty than not taking it at all. I have been told this by both county attorneys and judges that I work with.


and them being on that side of the fence surely doesn't make them at all biased?

call a lawyer and ask them, I have been told by at least practicing attorneys in dallas that no matter what refuse the test.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
stealth;1544198 said:
and them being on that side of the fence surely doesn't make them at all biased?

call a lawyer and ask them, I have been told by at least practicing attorneys in dallas that no matter what refuse the test.

County attorneys office does not hear these type of cases that is the DA department so the lawyers telling me this say this from an unbiased stand point. Lets just hope you don't put yourself in this situation because I'm afraid you may be very disappointed in this advice. Don't worry though I'm sure they will be willing to represent you after all win or lose they still get paid. :laugh2:
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
burmafrd;1544143 said:
according to abersonce its not a problem as long as you are under the limit.

That's the law. But you go ahead with the high and mighty act.
 

AdamJT13

Salary Cap Analyst
Messages
16,583
Reaction score
4,529
abersonc;1544203 said:
That's the law.

Not everywhere. In some places, such as Arizona, you can be under the limit and still be charged with DUI if you're impaired.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
AdamJT13;1544208 said:
Not everywhere. In some places, such as Arizona, you can be under the limit and still be charged with DUI if you're impaired.

But the "limit" is there for a reason. I believe it is actually a different charge if you are "impaired"
 

AdamJT13

Salary Cap Analyst
Messages
16,583
Reaction score
4,529
iceberg;1544197 said:
who said it was? but you're coming across as if someone stops by the bar for a single beer won't be able to stop and will come staggering out at 2am.

I never said that. I said people who "stop by for a few drinks" don't always have the ability to know whether they're impaired because they've been drinking and their judgement already is impaired.

who said there was an excuse for violating the law? go argue with them

I already am.

i said know your limits and be responsible.

Like I said, people who have been drinking enough to have to make that judgement often aren't able to make a correct judgement because they're already impaired.
 

AdamJT13

Salary Cap Analyst
Messages
16,583
Reaction score
4,529
abersonc;1544215 said:
But the "limit" is there for a reason. I believe it is actually a different charge if you are "impaired"

Not in Arizona. It's a DUI if you're impaired even "to the slightest degree."
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,684
Reaction score
12,394
AdamJT13;1544220 said:
Not in Arizona. It's a DUI if you're impaired even "to the slightest degree."

and that's a very tough charge to make stick -- I'd guess that can be used only if someone is falling down during the field test or driving crazy. I'd love to know how many people have actually been charged (and it stuck) under the law -- sounds like it is simply a piece of leverage for the prosecutors.
 

Concord

Mr. Buckeye
Messages
12,825
Reaction score
119
stealth;1544198 said:
and them being on that side of the fence surely doesn't make them at all biased?

call a lawyer and ask them, I have been told by at least practicing attorneys in dallas that no matter what refuse the test.

Don't know Texas' law but in Ohio...You can refuse all you want...

You actually get a Worse suspension if you refuse.


Ohio's D.U.I. Laws
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IF YOU DRINK AND DRIVE, YOU ARE COMMITTING A SERIOUS CRIME WHICH HAS SWIFT AND SURE CONSEQUENCES THAT ARE HARD TO IGNORE.

Administrative License Suspension (ALS)

If you are stopped for drunk driving and you refuse to take the sobriety test, or if your test results exceed the legal limit of Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC), the officer can take your driver's license on the spot, and the suspension begins immediately.

Depending on previous offenses or refusals, you can have your license automatically suspended for a period of 90 days to five years.

The administrative suspension is independent of any jail term, fine or other criminal penalty imposed in court for a DUI offense.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1st Offense

Administrative License Suspension (ALS) for a prohibited BAC;

ALS for test refusal = one year license suspension;

Jail - Minimum of three consecutive days or 3-day driver intervention program;


If you get caught the first time you get a 6 month license suspension.

Fine - Minimum $200 and not more than $1,000;

Court License Suspension - 6 months to 3 years.

The vast majority get a 6 months license suspension for the first time...NOT one year that you will get if you refuse the test.
 

Vintage

The Cult of Jib
Messages
16,714
Reaction score
4,888
There is a reason that the law allows .08 and doesn't say .00

Bottom line.
 

Concord

Mr. Buckeye
Messages
12,825
Reaction score
119
I've Driven drunk before as have most of you.

It's obviously not right...But glass houses?

A lot of people say they haven't done it...But I have my doubts.
 

Verdict

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,230
Reaction score
20,501
ConcordCowboy;1544230 said:
Don't know Texas' law but in Ohio...You can refuse all you want...

You actually get a Worse suspension if you refuse.


Ohio's D.U.I. Laws
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IF YOU DRINK AND DRIVE, YOU ARE COMMITTING A SERIOUS CRIME WHICH HAS SWIFT AND SURE CONSEQUENCES THAT ARE HARD TO IGNORE.

Administrative License Suspension (ALS)

If you are stopped for drunk driving and you refuse to take the sobriety test, or if your test results exceed the legal limit of Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC), the officer can take your driver's license on the spot, and the suspension begins immediately.

Depending on previous offenses or refusals, you can have your license automatically suspended for a period of 90 days to five years.

The administrative suspension is independent of any jail term, fine or other criminal penalty imposed in court for a DUI offense.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1st Offense

Administrative License Suspension (ALS) for a prohibited BAC;

ALS for test refusal = one year license suspension;

Jail - Minimum of three consecutive days or 3-day driver intervention program;


If you get caught the first time you get a 6 month license suspension.

Fine - Minimum $200 and not more than $1,000;

Court License Suspension - 6 months to 3 years.

The vast majority get a 6 months license suspension for the first time...NOT one year that you will get if you refuse the test.

The suspension of your license is separate and distinct from the criminal prosecution. It would probably be constitutionally suspect if the SENTENCE IMPOSED FOR THE DUI WAS GREATER DUE TO A BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT TEST REFUSAL.

In this case the SUSPENSION PERIOD for the REVOCATION OF LICENSE (CIVIL) is greater. They are intertwined, but separate matters entirely.
 

Concord

Mr. Buckeye
Messages
12,825
Reaction score
119
Verdict;1544248 said:
The suspension of your license is separate and distinct from the criminal prosecution. It would probably be constitutionally suspect if the SENTENCE IMPOSED FOR THE DUI WAS GREATER DUE TO A BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT TEST REFUSAL.

In this case the SUSPENSION PERIOD for the REVOCATION OF LICENSE (CIVIL) is greater. They are intertwined, but separate matters entirely.


OOps...Sorry I agree.

I read your post wrong.
 

BrassCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,808
Reaction score
3,401
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
<Quote>:
Originally Posted by abersonc View Post
.08 is the legal limit -- and a relatively low one at that. If below that is dangerous then the limit should be lower.

Some folks here crack me up with the loosey-goosey legal applications -- a guy has a drug test that comes up for something that doesn't relate to performance (marijuana) and it is all "it is illegal!" but here a guy, by the letter of the law isn't guilty of driving under the influence and it is all "but he was close!"</quote>

I do not believe anyone here is contesting the fact that he will probably only get charged with speeding, so I fail to see what your point is....

If you are asking if we think it was fair of the Bears to release him then hell yeah!!!! I am so tired of these athletes who think the whole world is below them and that they can do whatever they want, go out and find trouble and then expect the NFL to roll oer for them. Screw them, I absolutely think Goodell's idea for cracking down on these thugs and guys who somehow find ways to get in trouble a great idea.

If Tank got himself in trouble before, got several games suspension, then you would think he would avoid trouble and yes that does mean drinking and driving. But lets not forget speeding. It was great to see the Bears stand up and dare the unthinkable like actually cut a football player for irresponsible behavior.
 

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
And how many are killed by drivers still "legal" but impaired?
As if all that matters is what is legal.
 

burmafrd

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,820
Reaction score
3,379
It was once legal to own slaves.
It was once legal to send someone to prison for 20 years for stealing a loaf of bread.
It was once legal for a man to beat his wife or kids.
Sorry, but the "legal" excuse stinks.
 

iceberg

rock music matters
Messages
34,404
Reaction score
7,932
burmafrd;1544288 said:
It was once legal to own slaves.
It was once legal to send someone to prison for 20 years for stealing a loaf of bread.
It was once legal for a man to beat his wife or kids.
Sorry, but the "legal" excuse stinks.

then get up off your whiney little tail and figure out a more fair and just way.

many laws change over time - pretty pointless excuse. there's nothing wrong iwth grabbing *a beer* on the way home but some tend to act like that's a precursor to some drunk-fest.

they're not the same thing. get off it.
 

Bob Sacamano

Benched
Messages
57,084
Reaction score
3
FuzzyLumpkins;1543708 said:
If you go nolo which is what you apprently did or if you are found guilty then your given the absolute worst risk segmentation and you also end up with a criminal record.

What the court didnt tell you when you plead out like that is that while a conviction was not placed on your record you did receive a mark as a deferrment or whatever your disposition was on your record and that is something that NEVER goes away.

actually, if I complete my PBJ, which ends this coming November, noone would know that I was charged w/ a DUI, it goes off my record, and right now, only the cops, and the judicial system know that I was charged w/ DUI

FuzzyLumpkins said:
While your worried about a license suspension you just granted a permanent black mark on your record.

again, once my PBJ ends, I'm a clean man
 

Bob Sacamano

Benched
Messages
57,084
Reaction score
3
peplaw06;1543771 said:
It would be like me telling Summer it's best not to consent to a search of his vehicle when he has a dead body in the trunk. He has the right to refuse the search. I'm not condoning him hauling a corpse around.

but I most likely will be held at the scene of my stop until the cops procure a warrant to search my vehicle :)
 
Top