50 top notch lawyers.

its difficult to understand how people can be like this, is it IQ? Is it temperament? I can not imagine being similar to OP :)

What I meant is that you will still be deemed as IMPAIRED. That is my point. A human brain is NOT at full/proper attention after being awake for 3 days.. Simply FACT! Alcohol may be a different thing, but being impaired whether due to alcohol, drugs or lack or sleep is all the same shit basically.

Here is something stupid Kansas is doing now. If you take any controlled substance meds mostly narcatocis, but also say an adult on ADDHD meds, they are now charging you with DUI of a controlled substance. Even if it does not say not to drive. They are saying you are Impaired, and driving is a privilege not a right. So if you have to take say this ADDHD meds the rest of your life, No Driving. This is currently being challenged...

You are RIGHT. If you say you are to tired, then it is Impaired, as well as other charges.

The lesson here isn't to not be white and poor it is to not be a dumbfuck.

Had you not by driving 122 mph you would not have been pulled over and all of this would have never happened.

You could have asked them to do a blood test for your blood alcohol If it came back negative you would have a lot more to stand on than just the quality of the machine they used.

he is correct - a judge will rip HIM a new asshole. He will be disbarred if he does not continue to represent you, only a judge can remove him.

Things are out of your control because your life is out of control.

You have to look up to see rock bottom at this point and it seems like everyone but you knows this.

When they were cracking down on the pill mills here in Florida a question about this was brought to a prosecutors office. They said that as long as there was a legitimate prescription(s) and it did not seem like a case of abuse (doctor shopping, unusually high quantities that make no medical sense, etc.), even if it resulted in an accident, they would not bring charges against someone.

In other words, they use common sense...

I am not charged with being generally impaired. I'm charged with being under the influence of alcohol/drugs.

You're absolutely right, Kane.

Let's all hold hands and count on the government to make sense and not fuck up or abuse authority. Kum Bya Yaaaaaaa :Oh crap Pure genius

Ah
Everything will be okay
This fucking sucks but I'll be alright

Biggie didn't rap it. Its just some girl singing in the hook. Idiot.

Man, I love Biggie, but Robbie has a point. Everything these days IS stolen.

Plus. Robbie ain't an idiot. He's stubborn as fuck sometimes, but not an idiot.

in canada your lawyer needs a pretty good reason to resign or they are subject to sanctions from the bar

I'll be brief . . .


You do not know what you are talking about. :2 cents: In many states the bar association requires that attorneys donate time. You can get an amazing attorney as your public defender. Not often, but it happens.


Maxwell, take a wet reckless, you will not beat this. :2 cents:

You are definitely unfamiliar with the legal system; congratulations.

ehh, while I get your point, I have seen him and his brother in concert; they aren't that talented. At least IMHO.

You can take this with as many grains of salt as you desire, but I am willing to bet that I have spent more time in courtrooms than everyone in this thread combined; if that is your defense just go an hope the cop doesn't show up. If he does, offer to do a plea for a wet reckless. You will convict yourself the moment you start speaking in your defense. If you want to stand a chance, start off by writing a list of questions that you will ask the cop. You want the cop to tell your story, your questioning should make up your testimony. You testify after the prosecution rests; you will have the opportunity to cross-examine the cop, take advantage of it. They are not used to it.

When the cop testifies for the state, pay attention to if he answered one of you questions or not as you can't ask the same question more than once. If he says something you disagree with, write it down, and ask for clarification.


What was the vehicle code section(s) you were cited under?

How did you arrive at that conclusion? TV?

Perry Mason, where all armchair lawyers get their best info :thumbsup

;p

Pretty much. :1orglaugh

These days. That song is 15+ years old. What you quoted was a sample. Not part of the song. And sure, you're a great judge of characters. You are the next Mindwaste.

I don't care what the Judge does to HIM though.. it won't help ME :(

Many years ago, State Farm Insurance had me represent two of their clients because Defendants insurance were just being dicks, and they knew I could do things they couldn't.

There were multiple defendants and one was claiming Act of God and crap that would not fly in CA. At one point I told him that if he did not settle I would train my clients so they could take the insured to small claims court and that, "he will think he is going up against Perry Mason" and after he loses, I will approach your insured and offer to help him sue you for failure to represent.

They settled a couple days later.

Smartest post I've seen from you in a while.

I understand that it would probably be suicide to represent myself .. I'm just very frustrated :(

Questioning the officer is the key to any coherent defense- I am surprised that anyone here managed to know that.. I always did think you were pretty intelligent, there. Even if you ARE a beer snob :1orglaugh

Any coherent lawyer could help me with this case, I am sure of it. I have video of me parking smoothly and perfectly parallel to the shoulder line and audio of the officer admitting that I did well on the field test even though it was very very cold outside and trucks were passing us at 60+mph. I was freezing to death with noisy traffic behind me and shivering and I still passed his tests.

THEN- I asked if I was fucked if I refused to take the FST - and that is where it got real interesting. After he said a bit about what would be done to me for a refusal charge, I told him "I'll just take it" meaning I would take the refusal charge ... he went and got the machine as if I didn't have a choice. I didn't want to take the test because I know those machines are insane, but, I was pretty sure I was fucked if I didn't.

The officer was pretty friendly and didn't hate me, even on the way to the station, he seemed like he felt bad about taking me in. I believe that he knew I wasn't drunk. They ALWAYS show up though, here. Always.

Original Charge - Statute

KSA Number: 08.1567.e
KSA Text: Driving under influence of alcohol or drugs; 2nd conviction
Chapter: 08 Degree: MDA
Level Class: Misdemeanor Offense Class: Misdemeanor Class A
Attempted Conspiracy Solicitation:
Felony or Misdemeanor: M Drug or Non-Drug: Non Drug
Person or not: Undefined Reporting Group: CHAPTER 8
Statute Revision: 201107 Section: 1567
Sub-Section 1: e Sub-Section 2:
Sub-Section 3: Sub-Section 4:


PS: There is no wet reckless here.. there's also no hardship exemption for the admin / license side of it. They end you here.

I actually think you're really a something, and that means a-lot coming from me.
If you weren't millions of miles from here I would actually hire you.

driving 120 mph on public roads I believe is a felony.

If you check, we had that discussion earlier in the thread and it is not a felony.

.

So you are going to jail for driving drunk?

How rude is the penalty for doing that i your country?

Well, it's so rude that they end your life without proving that you actually did it.. Your freedom is gone in that you cannot drive while an automobile is an essential part of pretty much everything here, then they rape you for a fortune of money, then you possibly go to jail, then when you ever are allowed to drive again the insurance company rapes you to death with high prices

I always refer to it as "Freedom and Liberty, my BALLS"

Basically in the states if you don't have money and they decide to send you through the meat grinder, you're going to lose a lot of skin. If you're white and have a white checkbook, you can pretty much do whatever you want. I'm being punished far far more seriously than many many people I know who have hurt people pretty badly. In the states they're not SUPPOSED to convict you of victimless crimes, but they do it day in and day out. In the case of drunk driving, I don't mind that, because I hate drunk drivers myself. But I wish they would not use a SLOT machine to end my life because some other assholes drive drunk.

From the law - let's look at it, shall we? Here is a legal publication and what they say about it. Read carefully:

"A lawyer cannot quit in the middle of a trial unless the approval of a judge has been granted. For a lawyer to successfully quit a case in the middle of a trial they must show ?cause? to the court why representing you any further is not in your best interest. If a lawyer is having a difficult time with the case, they are not going to be granted a dismissal. Appropriate cause would be that the client is being uncooperative with their defense, a conflict of interest has arisen or been made clear by one or all of the parties or there is a threat to the well being of the attorney."

link? - I'd appreciate it if you two legal minds could cite any credible source that says otherwise? Thought not. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Can My Lawyer Quit In The Middle Of My Trial?

Anyway, for OPs question, which is important to him, your lawyer cannot simply quit, even if he is appointed. He must ask the judge and be granted permission.

They are not in the middle of a trial. States have different laws. :2 cents:

And you might want to read the entire page.

That whole statement is a crock of shit. In fact, your whole story is a crock of shit.

You blew 0.136? You were drunk. If you say otherwise, then any decent lawyer would request a calibration report on the machine they used to measure your BAC. In fact, most lawyers will request a calibration report by routine as it's an easy dismissal if it is deemed not accurate or said report cannot be produced. I'm talking about the one they used when you were processed, not the less accurate field units which are not used as evidence of your intoxication but merely to substantiate the officers probable cause to haul you in.

You were also driving 57 mph over, nearly twice, the posted limit. That's well in excess of careless and reckless which alone typically caries similar penalties to a DUI.

Not convict you for victimless crimes? Are you high right now? Speeding, public intoxication, etc. You jeopardized lives - should they let you slide until you actually kill someone?

As to not having all driving privileges revoked, most first time offenders can get provisional driving privileges for driving to and from work and going to get groceries. Their lives are not altogether ruined because of temporarily impaired judgement as you make it sound. Not knowing where this occurred and taken with the severity of your offenses, and it is possible you may lose your driving privileges altogether for a time. But then, driving is a privilege and not a right.

You initially posted about this a year ago - sounds like the lawyer thought that it would be handled while they were still licensed to practice in the state. If his license expires, he can't practice - that's pretty straight forward.

You make reference to having done jail time before, being a recidivist offender certainly isn't going to help your position any. Also, the "many many people I know who have hurt people pretty badly" suggests that not only do you make poor decisions, but commonly associate with unsavory characters as well.

You have two options: (1) Admit that you fucked up - again, accept the consequences like a grown up and maybe this time learn from it, or (2) keep telling yourself that you did nothing wrong and how you're being unjustly prosecuted because you are black, poor, stupid, etc, go to jail (again), and keep making the same stupid fucking decisions until they eventually lock you up for good.

Your call.

In reality if he is the attorney on the motion or complaint, or opposing counsel has been notified that he is the counsel, even if the trial proper has not begun he will need to have a good reason for the judge. Note that we are talking about a criminal trial, where the defendant is seen as having a right to representation. But even in civil cases an attorney cannot leave a case arbitrarily.

You don't think his excuse that his contract is over will be good enough?

I'm not refusing to admit that I fucked up. I put myself into a stupid position through my own ignorance. At 3am there wasn't a soul on the road and you can see everything for literally miles - this is a flat state. There was one car approaching an intersection out on the highway and I slowed down to 65mph in a 70mph zone well before I approached that intersection. There was ONE other car on the road which I passed- I slowed down and got way over away from him and then sped back up. Did I still endanger anyone by driving so fast? Probably. Does the court want to hear everything I just typed, probably not. All they see is that I was driving fast and failed the slot machine. I understand and accept that. But to say I had reckless disregard for others is not true either. I go out of my way to live my life in a way that does NOT affect others.

I never said I was not wrong or stupid for any of this
I am saying that this machine should not be able to do this to me when I have video evidence of me being perfectly capable of operating my vehicle safely. Audio evidence of the officer admitting that I passed his field tests.

PS: Yes, there is a calibration report. It is just a ****hair within spec. IF my partition ratio is "average" and IF me having extremely low blood sugar didn't affect the results and IF the machine wasn't reading alcohol stuck in my mouth and IF all of the stars aligned perfectly and IF the calibration was done correctly and IF 100 other things, the result was correct.

Should they be able to end your life with all of this IFs? I don't think so. They do end you here. There is no hardship or provisional license. It's been over a year and beginning next month I can drive if I blow into $100/mo machine they put on my car. The DMV was supposed to give me a hearing in the first place but never did and there is NO oversight- NONE- they call it implied consent. Don't get me started on that.

Did I fuck up, should I be punished? Yes. A year stranded is ENOUGH. Should I go through a meat grinder when I can prove I was not impaired? I don't believe so

I don't know man but the shit that happened in Florida made me miss my trial. I had already appeared four times and the county themselves decided to continue the case twice (not my fault at all) so that may help, I guess. The Judge I doubt will be in a mood to continue anything and I don't blame him. My new lawyer sent me a curt response saying they'd been trying to contact me with no response. My old one said "the new attorneys should have contacted you" - he knows I have been e-mailing him thinking he was still my attorney all along.

What I need to do is show that this machine whacks out on me. If I had access to one, I think that I could do that. But I don't.. I think I can appeal the result of the bench trial before the magistrate and then maybe the jury trial will be set for a long date... I hope

YOU need another roadtrip, cross country, with a stop in the middle of nowhere. Then you can be my unlicensed lawyer if they'd even allow that, and I will give you money :winkwink: To sweeten the pot I might even buy you some of that snob beer- I even know where to go for it. There is a place with 8000 kinds of weird beers. :winkwink:

The site doesn't look like much but they have a huge wall with a big list of crazy types of beer http://www.rivercitybrewingco.com/

Met with my new public lawyer and she says I will have to do 5 days in jail PLUS 85 days house arrest.. That sounds to me like the sentencing for a 3rd+ offense.. http://www.kansasduidefenseteam.com/..._in_Kansas.cfm

I'm looking at my actual case and it says

Original Charge - Statute

KSA Number: 08.1567.e
Felony or Misdemeanor: M Drug or Non-Drug: Non Drug
Person or not: Undefined Reporting Group: CHAPTER 8
Statute Revision: 201107 Section: 1567
Sub-Section 1: e Sub-Section 2:
Sub-Section 3: Sub-Section 4:

Then I look at the actual statute and it says

http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b201...08_015_0067_k/

(B) on a second conviction a class A, nonperson misdemeanor. The person convicted shall be sentenced to not less than 90 days nor more than one year's imprisonment and fined not less than $1,250 nor more than $1,750. The person convicted shall serve at least five consecutive days' imprisonment before the person is granted probation, suspension or reduction of sentence or parole or is otherwise released. The five days' imprisonment mandated by this subsection may be served in a work release program only after such person has served 48 consecutive hours' imprisonment, provided such work release program requires such person to return to confinement at the end of each day in the work release program. The person convicted, if placed into a work release program, shall serve a minimum of 120 hours of confinement. Such 120 hours of confinement shall be a period of at least 48 consecutive hours of imprisonment followed by confinement hours at the end of and continuing to the beginning of the offender's work day. The court may place the person convicted under a house arrest program pursuant to K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 21-6609, and amendments thereto, to serve the five days' imprisonment mandated by this subsection only after such person has served 48 consecutive hours' imprisonment. The person convicted, if placed under house arrest, shall be monitored by an electronic monitoring device, which verifies the offender's location. The offender shall serve a minimum of 120 hours of confinement within the boundaries of the offender's residence. Any exceptions to remaining within the boundaries of the offender's residence provided for in the house arrest agreement shall not be counted as part of the 120 hours;

(E) on a fourth or subsequent conviction a nonperson felony. The person convicted shall be sentenced to not less than 90 days nor more than one year's imprisonment and fined $2,500. The person convicted shall not be eligible for release on probation, suspension or reduction of sentence or parole until the person has served at least 90 days' imprisonment. The 90 days' imprisonment mandated by this subsection may be served in a work release program only after such person has served 72 consecutive hours' imprisonment, provided such work release program requires such person to return to confinement at the end of each day in the work release program. The person convicted, if placed into a work release program, shall serve a minimum of 2,160 hours of confinement. Such 2,160 hours of confinement shall be a period of at least 72 consecutive hours of imprisonment followed by confinement hours at the end of and continuing to the beginning of the offender's work day. The court may place the person convicted under a house arrest program pursuant to K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 21-6609, and amendments thereto, to serve the 90 days' imprisonment mandated by this subsection only after such person has served 72 consecutive hours' imprisonment. The person convicted, if placed under house arrest, shall be monitored by an electronic monitoring device, which verifies the offender's location. The offender shall serve a minimum of 2,160 hours of confinement within the boundaries of the offender's residence. Anyexceptions to remaining within the boundaries of the offender's residence provided for in the house arrest agreement shall not be counted as part of the 2,160 hours.



Does anyone know if they can do that? Am I reading this right, that they've charged me with the wrong offense? Can this be dismissed some way? This is pretty crazy - It sounds to me as if I am being charged with and will be sentenced for a fourth!!

you hadn't slept in 3 days, and you were driving at 120 mph?

it doesn't even matter if you were sober. it probably would have been better.

I pretty much wanted to get the hell to wherever a bed was, as fast as I could.
I've already said that driving that fast especially while tired was ignorant and stupid and that I would not be in this position if I hadn't done it. That said, I still don't think they should convict me based on a slot machine. ESPECIALLY if they've charged me with the wrong offense. If I had white money this would probably be dismissed altogether, I would think.

dude it doesn't fucking matter about the machine

you *shouldn't* be driving after a 24 hours without sleeping

72.. hours.. without sleep?

did you think you were riding on a magical dragon while you were swerving down that highway?

When you go to that site is says that a first offense can get you anywhere from 48 hours to 6 months in jail plus a fine and that after you have served 48 hours in prison you could do house arrest.

I would guess that she is telling you that this is what you can expect to get based on her experience.

What Florida shit?

Do not say that in court.