The ALS Appeal Is Important

Posted on October 1, 2020 by Robert Walton, Esq.

One of the primary concerns of a person who has been arrested for OVI is the administrative license suspension (ALS) imposed against the driver’s license for refusing or “failing” a chemical test. The ALS is authorized under R.C. 4511.191, Ohio’s “Implied Consent” statute. This post is meant to generate some ideas, through the use of advocacy and the law, for successfully appealing an ALS. Continue reading →

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> OVI | Comments Off on The ALS Appeal Is Important

Challenging Admissibility and Weight of BAC and SFST Results

Posted on September 9, 2020 by Robert Walton, Esq.

Challenging Admissibility and Weight of BAC and SFST Results

Just because the results of a breath or blood alcohol concentration test and/or the results of Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST’s) are determined to be in substantial compliance under their respective statutory exclusionary rules does not mean that the admissibility of such results cannot be challenged on other grounds, nor does it preclude an attack on the weight and credibility of that evidence if it is admitted. Continue reading →

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> General | Comments Off on Challenging Admissibility and Weight of BAC and SFST Results

Bond Reform and Crim. R. 46 Changes

Posted on August 27, 2020 by Judge Deborah J. Nicastro

By Magistrate Anne Keller of the Shaker Heights Municipal Court

On July 1, 2020 significant changes to Crim. R. 46 became effective. Even the title was changed. Now titled, “Pretrial Release and Detention,” some of the changes to the Rule are due to the need to remove the disparity caused by financial conditions of bond.  The amended Rule requires a court to consider pretrial release for a person on the least restrictive conditions that the court believes will reasonably assure the person’s appearance in court and protect the community. Although there was consideration of requiring the use of an objective risk assessment tool, ultimately the Supreme Court removed any requirement for use of such a tool. Continue reading →

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Criminal | Comments Off on Bond Reform and Crim. R. 46 Changes

What Happened to BMV Random Selection Suspension?

Posted on August 18, 2020 by Robert Walton, Esq.

The BMV used to mail out random letters to Ohio drivers requiring them to provide current proof of financial responsibility.  If the driver failed to respond or did not have proof of financial responsibility the first time, his license was suspended until he filed an SR-22 certificate and paid a $150.00 reinstatement fee.  By a third violation, the license suspension was 2 years and a $600.00 reinstatement fee.  To the driver with proof, the process was irksome.  To the economically disadvantaged driver without proof, the process was another financial burden that compounded rather than helped to reduce the number of uninsured drivers in Ohio. Fortunately, Ohio abolished the random selection suspension as of July 3, 2019.

 

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> License Reinstatement | Comments Off on What Happened to BMV Random Selection Suspension?

The Statutory Definition of “Operate” Applies to Operating Under the Influence and Operating Under a License Suspension

Posted on August 6, 2020 by Judge Deborah J. Nicastro

The First District Court of Appeals recently established that the same statutory definition of “operate” applies to both OVI and DUS.

R.C. Title 45 governs motor vehicles. The entire title contains only one definition of the word “operate”. That definition is found in R.C. 4511.01 (HHH). According to the introductory language to the definitions in that section, the terms defined apply in Chapters 4511 and 4513.  R.C. Chapter 4510 includes several offenses for operating motor vehicles under various types of suspension, but it does not define the term “operate”. For that reason, some courts have found that the term “operate” has a different meaning under Chapter 4510 than it does under Chapter 4511. Continue reading →

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> OVI | Comments Off on The Statutory Definition of “Operate” Applies to Operating Under the Influence and Operating Under a License Suspension