Jacksonville Criminal Lawyer Blog

You may have seen commercials sponsored by police and other law enforcement agencies warning people that they will be arrested for DUI if they drive drunk. The slogan for the advertisement is, "Over the Limit, Under Arrest." Of course, in Florida the legal limit for DUI is 0.08.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently announced that they are beginning their annual drunk driving (DUI) arrest campaign. More than 11,000 police and law enforcement agencies all over the country will take part in the effort to make driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI) arrests. That means there will be more DUI checkpoints, and police officers will be more inclined to conduct DUI investigations and make DUI arrests after traffic stops. The NHTSA pointed to a survey which showed that approximately 8% of all drivers polled admitted to driving drunk when they thought they were over the legal DUI limit last year.

Obviously, we can all agree that preventing drunk driving is important. However, the issue arises as to who is considered a drunk driver. As criminal defense lawyers in Jacksonville, Florida who have handled many DUI cases, we know how subjective DUI arrests can be. Basically, if a police officer pulls a driver over and believes the driver is intoxicated, the officer can make an arrest. Ninety nine times out of a hundred, that arrest report will say the officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol, was slurring his/her speech, had bloodshot, watery eyes and was swaying. Once a police officer draws the conclusion that the driver is drunk, that assumption will cloud all of the police officer's observations during the DUI investigation. If the police choose not to have a video camera at the scene, the police officer's observations cannot be verified objectively. The arrest is completely subjective. And when there are quotas or specific campaigns to arrest drunk drivers for DUI like this one, the line between a drunk driver and a driver who may have just had a couple of drinks with dinner and feels fine is blurred.

Of course, there are many ways to defend against a DUI charge that is based on the subjective opinions and statements of the police officer. If you have questions about DUI law in Florida or have been arrested for DUI, feel free to contact the law office of Shorstein & Lasnetski for a free consultation 24/7.

Police received a call that a woman was driving under the influence of alcohol, located the vehicle and arrested the driver for DUI. Most DUI investigations occur after police claim to see a driver violate some traffic law such as speeding, swerving outside the lane or running a red light. The police officer stops the vehicle and claims to observe signs of alcohol use and impairment such as an odor of alcohol, bloodshot and watery eyes and slurred speech. Occasionally, police officers set up roadblocks or checkpoints where vehicles are stopped at certain intervals and the drivers are checked for possible DUI, driving with a suspended license or an outstanding warrant.

Less often, the police will get a call from a witness, perhaps another driver on the road, who reports that a driver is driving erratically and may be DUI. We have never heard of a situation where the call to police actually comes from someone in the same vehicle as the suspected DUI driver, and it is the driver's daughter, no less, as the article indicates.

When the police get a call from an anonymous caller that someone is committing a crime, whether it is a DUI, sale of drugs or any other crime, the police cannot just pull the car over or detain the person on the street when they find him/her. The police officer must identify the suspect and observe something concrete which supports the claim that the person is engaging in criminal activity. In the case of an anonymous DUI call, the police officer would have to at least observe some swerving or other traffic violation. When the call comes from an identified source and provides specific information about criminal activity, the police have more authority to make a stop based solely on the caller's information. In this case, if the daughter of the suspected DUI driver is calling and she is in the car, it is likely that the police had a legal right to stop the woman and initiate a DUI investigation.

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, the case was thrown out of court after it was determined that the police obtained incriminating medical records about the defendant in violation of the law. In this DUI case, the defendant was involved in an accident and ultimately went to the hospital for treatment. The police officer who responded to the accident noted some signs of impairment from alcohol about the defendant and then went to the hospital to continue his DUI investigation. By the time the police officer arrived at the hospital to observe and question the defendant, the defendant had left the hospital against the doctor's orders.

Prior to the defendant leaving the hospital, the hospital staff had discovered some incriminating DUI evidence against the defendant that was documented in his medical records. When the police officer arrived at the hospital, he obtained a copy of the defendant's medical records without the defendant's consent and without a subpoena signed by a judge. Those medical records were used against the defendant in the DUI case.

In Florida, everyone has a strong privacy right to keep his/her medical records confidential. The general rule is that hospitals and other medical personnel cannot disclose one's medical records to anyone without the patient's permission. One exception to that rule allows government or law enforcement officials in a criminal case (or the other party in a civil case) to obtain copies of a person's medical records if they are relevant to the issues in the case. However, those records can only be released upon service of a valid subpoena.

In this case, the police officer probably told the hospital staff that he was investigating a DUI with an accident and had a need and a right to obtain the defendant's medical records. However, because those records were obtained without a subpoena and in violation of the law, they could not be used against the defendant in the DUI case, and the DUI case was ultimately thrown out of court.

In Florida, a first time DUI, without an accident and injuries, is always a misdemeanor, but the penalties can still be quite severe. They range from possible jail time to a license suspension a fine and community service. The more DUI convictions a person gets, the more severe the penalties can be. In Florida, a third DUI charge can be charged as a felony which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. With a fourth DUI conviction, Florida law requires that the person's driver's license be suspended permanently.

However, a new proposed law in Florida would allow people with four DUI convictions and a permanent license revocation to possibly regain their driving privileges, according to an article on Firstcoastnews.com. With the proposed law, the person would have to go though educational courses and have an interlock device installed in his/her vehicle. An interlock device is a breathalyzer that the driver must blow into and pass before the car will start.

Interestingly, MADD supports the bill. Their reasoning is that there are a lot of people with permanently suspended licenses who are going to drive one way or another. With this law, those people would at least have the interlock device on their vehicles so they would not be able to drive their cars if they were under the influence of alcohol.

A man from Connecticut was charged with DUI manslaughter in St. Johns County, Florida after the victim, Jeanne Aramini, died from her injuries suffered in the crash, according to an article on News4Jax.com. In Florida, a DUI charge can be anything from a misdemeanor for a first offense that normally carries penalties such as probation, a license suspention, a fine and community service to a third degree felony whcih can carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison to a first degree felony which can carry significant prison time. Obviously, when there is a crash and someone dies as a result of the crash, the state can charge the highest level of DUI which is DUI mansalughter. This is a second degree felony which carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years in prison in most cases, but it can be a first degree felony which carries a maximum of thirty years in prison if the suspect leaves the scene of the accident without providing the required information.

In most DUI cases in Jacksonville and throughout Florida, the police officer allegedly observes the driver violate some traffic law and pulls him/her over. Once the police officer approaches and interacts with the driver, the officer observes some signs of impairment from alcohol and ultimately requests that the driver submit to a breathalyzer test where the driver blows into the machine which purportedly measures the driver's blood alcohol content.

However, in some cases, the police officer can force the driver to submit to a blood test to measure the driver's blood alcohol content. Most of the time, the forced blood draw cases involve accidents where the driver is seriously injured and unable to blow into the breathalyzer machine. However, an accident is not required for a forced blood draw in a DUI case. What the police and the state do need to establish is that, 1) the police officer had reason to believe the driver was driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs, 2) the driver appears at a hospital or other medical facility for treatment and 3) a breath or urine test is not feasible or the person cannot respond due to some physical or medical condition. If these factors are present, the police officer can request that a medical provider take the blood.

In some cases, the police get the blood, but the required elements are not met. For instance, maybe a person was involved in an accident that rendered him unconscious and the officer smelled alcohol on him. That alone is not sufficient to meet the first requirement that there is sufficient reason to believe the person was impaired by alcohol while driving. Another example would be a person who was injured but not seriously enough to make a breath or urine test impracticable.

Florida law does allow a police officer to force a blood test to measure a person's blood alcohol content in a DUI case. However, if the legal requirements are not met, the results of that blood test can be thrown out of court after the proper motion is filed by the criminal defense lawyer.

In Florida, when a person obtains a driver's license and is afforded the privilege to drive, he/she impliedly consents to a lawful breathalyzer test. This does not mean that the police can lawfully ask a person to take a breath test at any time. It also does not give the police the right to force anyone to submit to a breath test. What it means is that if the police have probable cause to believe that a person is driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his/her normal faculties are impaired (i.e. DUI), the law says that the police officer can request a breath test and a person can be punished under the law for refusing the breath test. This punishment typically takes the form of a suspended license, but can be a misdemeanor crime in Florida for a second refusal.

However, assuming the police officer has probable cause to believe you are impaired, he/she still must ensure that your agreement to submit to the breath test is free and voluntary. The police officer cannot give you false information to trick or otherwise encourage you to submit to the breath test.

For instance, many people have a right to a hardship license after having their license suspended pursuant to a DUI case. In a recent case, the police officer gave the defendant false information about his right to a hardship license. For instance, if, in order to get the defendant to submit to the breath test, the police officer told the defendant that he is entitled to a hardship license if he agrees to the breath test but would not be entitled to the hardship license if he refuses the breath test, that would be inaccurate. In that case, the defendant's criminal defense lawyer would make a motion with the court to throw out the results of the breath test because the defendant's agreement to submit to the breath test was not freely and voluntarily obtained, which should invalidate the test results.

A woman who was demanding a conjugal visit with an inmate in the Flagler County, Florida jail was arrested for DUI (driving under the influence of alcohol) according to an article on News4Jax.com. The article indicated that the woman drove up to the Flagler County jail twice demanding a visit and the police officers detected that she was drunk. Police ultimately found her sitting in her car and arrested her. A breathalyzer test revealed that her blood alcohol level was 0.256, which is more than three times the limit of 0.08.

For the few people who do not know, they have police and/or sheriff officers at the jail. It is not a good place to show up drunk demanding visits with inmates. This story falls into the category of stories about people who are trying to get arrested.

DUI cases made by police officers often have holes allowing for various defenses that criminal defense lawyers can exploit when defending DUI clients. However, there are certain things DUI defendants can do to impair their defenses. This is a unique and extreme example but generally, if the police have stopped you and are investigating you for a possible DUI, the best thing to do is to stay calm, be polite and ask for your criminal defense lawyer without providing any information about where you have been, what you have been doing and your current state of mind.

A Jacksonville man still in the hospital was arrested for DUI manslaughter and other charges after being involved in an accident that caused the death of a St. Johns County deputy. According to reports following the crash, the suspect was driving the wrong way on State Road 9A in Jacksonville and had been drinking prior to the crash. The reports indicate that the suspect submitted to a breathalyzer test that showed his blood alcohol level to be almost twice the legal limit of 0.08.

As most people know, if a person drives while under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his normal faculties (i.e. vision, judgment, coordination, balance, speech, etc) are impaired, he/she can be charged with DUI, which is a misdemeanor crime. Although a first or second DUI will always be a misdemeanor, that crime has reached the point where the penalties can be quite severe including jail, probation, community service, a large fine and a suspended license.

However, the charge of DUI can also be a felony charge in some situations and result in much more serious penalties such as significant prison time. If a person gets a third or fourth DUI, the State may have the option of charging the defendant with a third degree felony that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. However, the State in the Jacksonville, Florida area typically will still charge those cases as misdemeanors.

However, if a person is alleged to be intoxicated and involved in an accident that causes serious injury or death to another, that person will almost certainly be charged with a felony- either DUI with serious bodily injury or DUI manslaughter. These are very serious cases for which the State often recommends significant jail or prison time.

In Florida when a police officer stops a driver and suspects that he/she is driving under the influence of alcohol (aka DUI, DWI or drunk driving), the officer will normally ask the driver is he/she will submit to a field sobriety test or field sobriety examinations. The driver has every right to refuse to submit to the field sobriety tests, and we would suggest that a driver needs to seriously consider refusing such a request because whether a driver passes or fails the field sobriety tests is subjective and determined solely by a police officer who already suspects that the driver is drunk.

Additionally in Florida, a police officer conducting a DUI investigation will also ask the suspect driver to submit to a breath, blood or urine test to determine the driver's blood alcohol level. In Florida, the legal limit is 0.08. When a person in Florida accepts a driver's license and the privilege to drive, he/she impliedly consents to take the breathalyzer test, however, the request to take the breathalyzer, blood or urine test is often refused by people under investigation for DUI for various reasons. However, in some circumstances, the police can force a person to submit to a blood test.

Florida law provides that the police can compel a person to give blood for a DUI investigation to check blood alcohol content (BAC) if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs and that driver caused an accident resulting in serious bodily injury(ies) to someone. In other words, if a person is involved in an accident that seriously injured someone and the police officer finds evidence that the driver caused the accident and was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time (i.e. odor of alcohol, slurred speech, stumbling/swaying, admitting to drinking alcohol or using drugs, taking the field sobriety test and/or other factors), the police officer can force the suspect driver to give blood to be tested for alcohol content.

On the other hand, if the police officer forces a suspect to give blood and the police officer cannot later meet those elements in court because someone else was the cause of the accident or no one was seriously injured or there was insufficient evidence that the suspect was impaired by alcohol or drugs, then the resulting drug test may be thrown out after the criminal defense lawyer files a motion to suppress evidence of the blood test.

Star defensive player Carlos Dunlap was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) this week just days before the SEC championship game, according to an article on Gatorsports.com. The article indicates that Gainesville police received a call of a reckless driver and found Dunlap stopped at an intersection where the light was green. The police officer approached Dunlap in the vehicle and saw that he appeared to be sleeping at the wheel. The police officer indicated that Dunlap's breath smelled of alcohol and he had bloodshot, watery eyes. Once Dunlap exited the vehicle, the officer said he had difficulty maintaining his balance and did poorly on the field sobriety tests. Dunlap was then arrested for DUI.

There are a few issues that are raised by this kind of traffic stop and DUI. Police officers are not permitted to stop a driver based on an anonymous tip that the driver is violating the traffic laws. However, the police officer can investigate further and locate the suspect. If the police officer then corroborates the tip with his own observation of a traffic violation, he can make a traffic stop on the driver. Being stopped at a green light is not necessarily a traffic violation, however, if the driver remains stopped after the light turns red and green again a few times, the police officer may have a right to investigate further. Additionally, in this case, Dunlap was not driving when the police officer found him. However, the keys were apparently in the ignition and the car was on. Under these circumstances, the state could legally charge Dunlap with DUI even though the car was not actually moving.

We have read several articles on the Internet about police and Florida Highway Patrol officers stepping up efforts to stop people speeding and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (aka drunk driving, DUI and DWI) in the Jacksonville, Florida area this weekend. Keep in mind that police come out in force on such holiday weekends and make many more traffic stops and arrests than on an ordinary weekend.

Another thing to keep in mind is that when a police officer suspects you of driving under the influence, every question he/she asks and everything he/she does from that point forward will be designed to obtain evidence against you to support the DUI case. For some reason, a lot of people think it is a good idea to answer questions about whether he/she has had anything to drink that night and if so, how many drinks. Unless the answer is zero, answering this question will only serve to help the state prove the DUI case against you. The same goes for the field sobriety tests. A person fails the DUI field sobriety tests when the police officer says so. It is a subjective test. And this is the same police officer who already has it in his/her head that you are drunk or he/she would not have asked you to perform the field sobriety tests in the first place.

Obviously, the best plan is to either not drink or get a ride with a friend or a taxi if you have been drinking. But, if you have been pulled over and the police officer is asking questions relating to a DUI or any other crime, understand that you have a Constitutional right to remain silent. If you decide to waive that right and answer questions, your answers will be used against you.

If you are stopped for a DUI (aka driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, DWI or drunk driving) and the officer has detained you for a DUI investigation, arrested you or read the Miranda warnings to you, you have a right to remain silent and not answer questions. Keep in mind that once the police officer has it in his/her mind that you may be impaired by alcohol or drugs, everything he/she does from that point on is to gather evidence to be used against you in a DUI case.

After a traffic stop where the police officer suspects you of driving under the influence of alcohol, he/she will ask you questions about where you have been, whether you have been drinking, and if so, how much. These questions are obviously designed to collect evidence to arrest you and charge you with DUI. The officer will also ask you to submit to field sobriety tests or exams. These are very difficult balancing exercises that are hard to perform under any circumstances. More importantly, whether or not you pass or fail is a completely subjective decision made by a police officer who obviously already thinks you are impaired or he/she would not have asked you to do them in the first place.

As criminal defense lawyers in the Jacksonville, Florida area who handle a lot of DUI cases, we read a lot of police reports where a person has made statements that help the police and the state prosecute them for DUI. When the U.S. Constitution affords you the right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself, consider why you would want to make a statement to the police in such a situation that is only going to be used against you in a criminal case.

Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (aka DUI, DWI or drunk driving) is ordinarily a misdemeanor charge in Florida. A misdemeanor charge ordinarily means that a person convicted of the charge cannot serve more than 12 months in jail or on probation. However, for DUI's, a first conviction carries a six month maximum and a second conviction carries a 9 month maximum. There are other penalties associated with a DUI charge such as fines, community service, license suspensions, DUI classes and/or an interlock device, depending on if it is a first or repeat DUI conviction.

However, in some cases, a DUI in Florida can be a felony charge (a charge that can result in a sentence of more than a year in prison and/or on probation) which can carry much more serious penalties. The obvious example is when a person commits a DUI and causes an accident that results in the death of another person. This is called DUI manslaughter and was the charge for which the Jacksonville, Florida woman recently was sentenced to four years in prison. If a person commits a DUI, causes a crash that results in a death and then flees the scene, the DUI charge is a first degree felony, which is the most serious kind. And if a person commits a DUI and causes an accident that results in serious bodily injury to another person, the state will charge that person with felony DUI with serious bodily injury. In these cases, what constitutes serious bodily injury is unclear. If a person brakes a bone or has to have surgery, the serious bodily injury element is likely met. If the person has some back pain and has to see a chiropractor for a few visits, the serious bodily injury element may be a stretch.

Even a simple DUI with no accident or injuries can be charged as a felony. For instance, if a person is arrested for DUI after two prior convictions and the most recent prior conviction occurred within ten years of the recent arrest, the state can charge that person with felony DUI which comes with a maximum sentence of five years in prison. If a person is arrested for DUI and has three prior DUI convictions, even if the last conviction was decades ago, the state can charge that person with felony DUI. In these instances, the state does not always charge the more serious felony (they still have the discretion to charge a misdemeanor DUI), but they certainly can if they choose to.

If you have questions about DUI law or the various charges and penalties associated with different DUI scenarios, feel free to contact us for a free consultation.

It is no secret that police in Jacksonville, Florida, like in most other cities, focus their attention to certain areas and certain times of the year when investigating certain crimes like DUI (aka driving under the influence, DWI, drunk driving). One of those times is Georgia v. Florida weekend (or Florida v. Georgia weekend depending on your affiliation). And the areas the police seem to focus on when looking for DUI's are, among others, the streets downtown near restaurants and bars, and the streets at and coming to and from Jacksonville Beach and Ponte Vedra such as beach Boulevard, Atlantic Boulevard, A1A and J Turner Butler Boulevard (JTB). Police officers will hang out near bars and restaurants watching people go to their vehicles and also along the roads watching for any traffic violations.

Obviously, if you have been drinking, the best course of action is to get a ride with a friend or call a taxi. However, if you have been stopped by a police officer in Jacksonville or elsewhere and he/she starts asking DUI-related questions, it is important to know your rights. Keep in mind that field sobriety tests are very difficult tests of balance and coordination that are tough under any circumstances. Even worse, the results are completely subjective based on the opinion of a police officer who already thinks you are drunk. Otherwise, he/she would not have asked you to do them in the first place.

Once the first DUI-related question comes out, you should know that any follow up question is designed to gather evidence to be used against you after the DUI arrest he/she is going to make. So, under those circumstances, you need to decide whether you want to answer incriminating questions and perform difficult, subjective tests or politely refuse to incriminate yourself and request to speak with a lawyer. In other words, you have a right to remain silent and not help the police make the DUI case against you.

If you have been stopped pursuant to a DUI investigation, feel free to contact us during the DUI stop or after the stop for a free consultation so you will know your rights.

Every now and then, a driver in Jacksonville, Florida and other areas of Florida will come across a DUI roadblock and get stopped by the police who are randomly looking for people driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. We all should know that normally the police cannot stop a person in his/her vehicle (or otherwise) without specific facts indicating he/she is committing a crime or traffic violation. If a DUI roadblock randomly stops people without any prior facts indicating a crime or traffic violation, how can this be legal in Florida?

The highest court in Florida decided that DUI roadblocks are legal if they meet certain criteria. The main criteria of a proper DUI roadblock is that the police must establish a written plan in advance detailing how the DUI roadblock will operate and when and how vehicles will be stopped. This plan must take as much discretion away from the police officers as possible regarding the decision as to who will be stopped. In other words, if the police officers at a DUI roadblock are allowed to decide at the scene who gets stopped based on their own subjective observations or the police officers develop their own plan for stopping vehicles at the DUI roadblock, this is not a legal DUI roadblock. The police officers are required to plan in advance how the vehicles will be stopped that does not leave the decision up to the discretion of the police officers. If the plan dictated that the police officers can stop every vehicle or every 5th vehicle, that would be legal. But if the police officers were permitted to stop every vehicle that looked a certain way or every vehicle with a certain kind of driver, that DUI roadblock would likely be considered illegal. If the DUI roadblock is considered illegal, the DUI charge should be thrown out of court.

Other factors relating to a valid DUI roadblock are whether the DUI roadblock is well marked and warning signs are provided so it is as safe as possible for motorists. The police officers must also be in uniform and easily identifiable as police officers. While police officers are permitted to stop drivers at a valid DUI roadblock, that stop must be as brief as necessary to investigate DUI's, and the encounter with the driver must not be more intrusive than necessary.

If you have been stopped at a DUI roadblock and arrested for DUI or any other charge in Jacksonville, Florida or the North Florida area, feel free to contact us for a free consultation to determine if the DUI roadblock and/or your arrest was legal.

In order to successfully prosecute a defendant for the crime of DUI (also referred to as driving under the influence, driving while intoxicated, DWI or drunk driving), the State has to prove that the defendant was the actual person driving the vehicle. In most DUI cases, that is obvious because the DUI investigation and arrest result from an alleged traffic violation committed by the defendant who is in the process of driving the vehicle. However, many DUI investigations and arrests result from traffic crashes where the police officer arrives to the scene after the crash. In this case, the police officer does not have personal knowledge that the defendant was driving. If there are other people involved in the crash, they may or may not be able to say that the defendant was driving depending on what they were able to see, whether they were seriously injured or other factors. In a one vehicle crash, it is likely that there are no witnesses to testify as to who was driving other than the defendant him/herself.

In Florida, we have what is called the accident report privilege. This law provides that when a person is involved in a traffic crash in Florida, he/she is required to talk to the police and say what happened in the crash. However, what that driver says cannot be used against the driver in a criminal case, such as a DUI case, or a civil case for personal injuries or wrongful death. So, if the only evidence a police officer and the State have in a DUI case to prove that the defendant was the one driving is the defendant's own statement that he/she was driving, that cannot be used against the defendant to prove the DUI case.

In a DUI case in Florida, the fact that the defendant was driving seems like an obvious element for the State to prove. However, in some cases where an accident occurred, it can be a very difficult element for the State to prove and one that can result in the DUI charges being dropped.

During the course of a DUI investigation, the police officer will often request that the driver submit to a breath test, aka breathalyzer. If the driver agrees to submit to the breathalyzer test, there are certain rules the police officer must follow for the breath test to be valid. When a person gets arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol ("DUI") in Florida, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("DMV") will automatically suspend the driver's license. This suspension is independent of the criminal case and the potential suspension that is part of a criminal sentence.

A person arrested for DUI in Florida has a right to challenge the DMV's license suspension through a formal hearing. At that hearing, the criminal defense lawyer can raise certain issues relating to whether the stop of the driver was legal, the police officer had reason to arrest the driver and the breath test was valid.

One of the rules relating to breath tests referenced above is the 20 minute observation rule. If the driver agrees to the breathalyzer test, a police officer must observe the driver for at least 20 minutes prior to administering the breathalyzer test. The purpose of this rule is to make sure the driver does not ingest anything by mouth or throw up which would alter the breath test results. Once a police officer has confirmed that the driver has neither taken anything by mouth or vomited for a continuous 20 minute (or more) period, it is proper to administer the breathalyzer test.

In one Florida DUI case, the surveillance camera in the area where the breathalyzer test was administered showed that the driver went into the bathroom unescorted for two minutes during this 20 minute observation period. The police officer tried to claim that she watched him for the full 20 minutes, but the video proved this to be false. Because there was a two minute period where the police officer could not say exactly what the driver was doing, the subsequent breathalyzer test results were invalidated, and the driver's suspension was reversed.

There has been a significant increase in the number of women who have been arrested and convicted for DUI in the Jacksonville, Florida area according to a study and interview reported at www.News4Jax.com. The article cited a study that indicated the percentage of women pulled over and arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (also referred to as a DUI, a DWI or drunk driving) has increased almost 30% between 1998 and 2007 (the article does not indicate what area these numbers cover). A member of the State Attorney's Office for the Jacksonville, Florida area also confirmed that they have noticed an upward trend in the percentage of women defendants who have been arrested and charged with DUI, particularly in the more serious cases such as DUI manslaughter when the DUI was allegedly related to an accident that resulted in a death.

Another DUI trend noted by the Jacksonville, Florida prosecutor is the increase in DUI arrests related to drugs as opposed to alcohol. A person can be arrested for driving under the influence of illegal drugs or prescription drugs just as he/she can be arrested for driving while intoxicated.

However, despite the increase in women arrested for the crime of DUI, men are still arrested for DUI at a much higher rate than women.

It is not uncommon for a person to be arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (also commonly referred to as DUI, DWI or drunk driving) and driving with a suspended or revoked license, or DWLS, in Florida. Under those circumstances the prosecutor will file at least two charges in the information, one for DUI and the other for DWLS. If the defendant decides to take the case to trial, those two charges should be separated, or severed. In other words, the jury that hears the evidence related to the DUI charge should not hear the evidence and decide the case related to the driving with a suspended license charge. A different jury at a new trial should decide the second charge.

The reason these charges should be severed is because the evidence pertaining the driver's alleged suspended license, such as his driving history, is unrelated to the evidence related to the DUI, and vice versa. This relates to the idea that unduly prejudicial evidence should not be admissible in court. It is prejudicial for the state to present evidence of the defendant's driving history and suspended license in his/her DUI trial because that evidence has nothing to do with the DUI and only paints the defendant in a bad light with irrelevant evidence. Likewise, when a jury is deciding whether the defendant was driving with a suspended license, it is prejudicial for the state to present evidence of the defendant's intoxication because that is irrelevant to the DWLS charge.

Where a defendant has been charged with driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and driving with a suspended or revoked license in the same case, it is important for the criminal defense lawyer to file a motion to sever those charges so the state is not permitted to admit unnecessary and prejudicial evidence against the defendant at the trial. The jury should only hear the specific evidence relevant to the particular charge.