News reports have well documented that police around the country, including in Massachusetts will be on heightened patrol. While it is not illegal to consume alcohol and drive, Massachusetts OUI law not only preclude someone from driving drunk, but whenever their ability to operate a motor vehicle safely is diminished or reduced by alcohol. While this is a difficult standard to satisfy at trial and to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, it takes very little for the police to have probable cause to make an arrest.

Accordingly, it is important if you drink to have a designated driver, walk or take a taxi cab to avoid facing a Massachusetts drunk driving charge.

Congress has been putting more effort into getting more states to require convicted drunk drivers to test their breath for alcohol before getting behind a steering wheel. A House transportation bill that was just proposed would offer additional highway funds to states that require ignition interlock devices for DUI offenders.

Melanie's Law was signed into law on October 28, 2005. Its purpose is to enhance the
penalties and administrative sanctions for Operating Under the Influence (OUI) offenders in Massachusetts. According to this law, any driver with a second or subsequent OUI who is eligible for a hardship license or for license reinstatement will be
required to have an Ignition Interlock Device attached to any vehicle the driver owns, leases, or operates (including an employer's vehicle) at the driver's expense.
A driver with a hardship license must use the device for the entire life of the hardship license and for two additional years after the license has been reinstated.
If a driver with two or more OUI offenses is eligible for license reinstatement, the Ignition
Interlock Device will be required for two years.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Los Angeles County and other California counties have installed these ignition devices for DUI offenders and is running a pilot study now through 2016. There is an on going national debate as to whether or not this breath test ignition devices are effective. The idea of requiring the devices for all drunk drivers nation wide is opposed by the American Beverage Institute. They feel that the use of the interlocks would "deny judges the ability to distinguish between a driver one sip over the limit and high -BAC repeat offenders." Many argue that dangling money in front of these financially strapped states to nudge them into requiring these devices is not justifiable.

According to ABC news reports, Rima Fakih, former Miss America from Michigan, will stand trial in March on a drunken-driving charge unless a plea deal is reached. DUI plea bargains are rare for DUI cases. However, plea bargains offer DUI offenders a lighter sentence in return for a guilty plea. In Fakih's case, two police breath tests put her blood alcohol content over twice the legal limit. She claims she was not drinking and driving despite she was pulled over for weaving in and out of traffic. The officers also found an open bottle of champagne behind the driver's seat.

Fakih has been charged in Michigan with drunk driving, careless driving, and having an open container of alcohol, all misdemeanors. Lawyers carefully look over and study the facts of the case before they decide to recommend a bench or jury trial. For example, a bench trial may be suggested if the judge is known to be a good judge for the defendants or in a case where a not guilty verdict rests on a specific legal point that a judge would be more likely to recognize than a jury. In Massachusetts where a defendant may have multiple OUI charges, a bench trial would be less inclined to be recommended. In these cases, the judges would know that it was a multiple offense, where as a jury would not be told this. A judge in Massachusetts is not legally allowed to consider the fact of past multiple offenses, but this may still cloud his/her judgement.

Bench trials are most common in first or second offenses of OUI charges. Generally speaking, if a person is charged with a third offense or greater, the case would best be heard by a jury. The judge is not known until the case is set down for trial. The DUI Attorney and the motorist would discuss the advantages and disadvantages of a bench and jury trial largely on the attorney's experience with the judge that has been assigned.

While Massachusetts OUI defense lawyers like to see a person found not guilty of an OUI charge based on the facts of the case, seeing that a police officer has had charges dismissed sometimes can be controversial.

In this case, according to Fox News, 47-year-old Thomas McCarthy was arrested in November by Saugus police after they chased him. Police said that the trooper captain smelled of alcohol and had an open container in his car, which was state-owned.

Once an officer smells what they believe to be alcohol, they typically will start an OUI investigation on the spot.

That's going to include asking the driver to take a breathalyzer test , as well as adhering to field sobriety tests, which include walking in a straight line, heel-to-toe, standing on one foot without falling and following an object that moves side to side.

But did that happen in this case? According to Fox News it did not and that is why the charges were eventually dismissed. The news station reports that police did not make the trooper submit a breath test or do field sobriety tests, giving him an opportunity to get out of the charge.

The Daily Item reports that the trooper pleaded innocent to a charge of negligent operation of a motor vehicle after the first-offense OUI charge was dropped due to insufficient evidence. He also faces charges of failing to stop and marked lane violations.

Certainly, an experienced Massachusetts OUI defense lawyer is going to look at every aspect of the case to ensure that policies and procedures were followed and that the defendant's rights were upheld. A lawyer will also take time to look at all the actions of the law enforcement officers who made the arrest.

If officers' only "evidence" is the smell of alcohol, but there is no proof of a field sobriety test or a breathalyzer test reading, motions will be filed with the court to dismiss the charges and there will be very little proof at trial. Motorists need to beware however, that refusing the submit to a breathalyzer test carries with it separate penalties.

Sobriety checkpoints, also referred to as DUI roadblocks , are conducted all over the country except in 11 states. In the state of Massachusetts, OUI roadblocks are randomly conducted. However, police activities at OUI checkpoints and roadblocks must be conducted in strict accordance with established Massachusetts policies and procedures as set forth by
Commonwealth v. Anderson, 406 Mass.343 (1989) .

Massachusetts OUI checkpoints are instituted by Massachusetts law enforcement in order to catch drivers who may be operating under the influence. When a person is pulled over at a sobriety checkpoint, typically the motorist has a very strong case at trial as there is no evidence of erratic driving.

According to a U.S. Centers for Disease Control research project,which combined 23 studies, DUI checkpoints reduce alcohol-related crashes by 22%. However, as previously mentioned, DUI checkpoints are not conducted in 11 states, such as Rhode Island and Washington because they are either considered illegal by law or state constitution. Some lawmakers in these 11 states are challenging this and are striving to bring back the DUI sobriety checkpoints. For example, news staff in Seattle report some lawmakers argue that they need to bring back DUI sobriety checkpoints in order to reduce deaths due to drunk driving. According to them, 37% of all traffic fatalities in Washington involved drunk drivers as reported in 2011 traffic data. "Bringing back checkpoints would mean more than 40 lives each year in Washington State," claims Washington State Patrol Ursino.

The 11 states that do not conduct these DUI roadblocks, such as RI, claim that they are ineffective and that the number of people that turn up drunk are only about 1 %. Lawmakers who oppose implementing sobriety road blocks claim it is a waste of law enforcement resources. Washington lawmakers have tried and failed to bring back sobriety checkpoints in recent years. The House Bill 1912 represents their latest effort to make these DUI roadblocks legal.

The national debate whether or not these sobriety checkpoints are effective and whether or not the 11 states will implement them continues. Although they tend to be controversial, DUI checkpoints have survived most legal challenges. Massachusetts OUI roadblocks still prevail and continue to be used as a way to reduce drunk driving.

It appears that the Framingham OUI lawyer will use the officer's poor driving record to rebut a claim that Obama's Uncle went through a stop sign almost striking the officer. To read about the details of the arrest from August 20, 2011, click here to review the report of the BostonChannel.com.

The safety records of the officer may reveal that the officer had a bias and a reason to overstate the details in the report. Additionally, the records will put the officer on the defensive and will be relevant in the court assessing his testimony and determining if there was reasonable suspicion for the initial stop.

Being charged with OUI in Massachusetts is a serious offense, but a driver's past can make a new charge even more difficult to deal with. That's because in Massachusetts, prior OUI convictions can make future penalties for a drunken driver more severe.

Having past convictions affect a future sentence may not seem fair, but that's how the laws are written. The tiered nature of the state's drunk driving law make it critical to fight each charge. A first-offense DUI in Massachusetts is often the most beatable. Taking a plea today can put your future at risk tomorrow.

In order to prove a person is facing their eighth OUI charge in Massachusetts, the prosecution must be able to prove the past convictions. In many cases, a person may have been charged and convicted of a drunken driving related crime in a different state, many years ago. The court case recording system in many states wasn't very good, so prosecutors sometimes have difficulty proving past convictions. In some cases, the documentation is lost, deleted or doesn't show the necessary information to prove a conviction.

In this case, prosecutors believe a Duxbury man has seven prior OUI convictions and he was recently arrested on another OUI charge. The man will be held in a jail until his next court date in mid-February.

Mark Dirsa was ordered held in a Plymouth jail after a Plymouth District Court judge ruled that he's "dangerous" and must be held in custody. He was arrested Dec. 28 in Kingston after police allege he crashed into a sedan.

He is next scheduled to appear in court Feb. 13 for a pretrial hearing. The newspaper reports that if he is convicted of OUI he would face a lifetime driver's license suspension as well as more than two years in jail.

The newspaper reports that state records show the 54-year-old has an eight page-long driving infraction record. But his prior drunken driving convictions go back to the 1980s and 1990s. Based on the state's lifetime look-back law, all previous convictions can be counted at sentencing.

Police say the man is dependent on oxycodone and told police that he took the drug on the morning of the crash. Police reported that they found 11 pill bottles in his truck's glove compartment. He also faces charges of falsifying a prescription last year to obtain oxycodone.

The newspaper article doesn't provide additional details about why police suspect he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Simply admitting to taking a pain pill the morning of an afternoon accident doesn't rise to the standard of proof for an OUI conviction. Unless other testing was done to show this wasn't simply an accident, the defendant may have an opportunity to fight this charge.

The Book answers common questions, such as explaining the court process, court terminology and common defenses used in defending DUI cases. The book also answers questions regarding the license consequences when you are charged and explains the different consequences when you refuse the breathalyzer test or take the test and fail. I would appreciate any feedback or comments on the book and can be found on Facebook at DelSignore Law. You can click on this Link to LIKE the facebook page. You can also find the book for sale on Amazon but I would be happy to provide a free copy if you request one through my website.

You can contact me directly at 781-686-5924 for questions regarding Massachusetts OUI laws or to request a copy of the book.

Criminal charges stemming from fatal accidents are always serious. But the issues are often exacerbated by allegations of drunk or drugged driving. These cases should always be handled by an experienced Plymouth criminal defense attorney. In many cases, " accidents" really are "accidents." While tragic, criminal charges are often unwarranted.

Robert Zelnick, 71, of Brookline, is accused of turning his SUV into the path of a motorcycle driven by Brendan Kennedy, of Plymouth. The accident occurred on Clark Road in the vicinity of the Route 3 on-ramp.

A magistrate in Plymouth District Court found probable cause to charge Zelnick with failure to yield to oncoming traffic and motor vehicle homicide. His driver's license was immediately revoked by the Registry of Motor Vehicles.

Under Massachusetts law (Chapter 90, Section 24G), a conviction for motor vehicle homicide is punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a 15-year suspension of a defendant's driver's license.

In this case a Massachusetts defense attorney will carefully review the facts and circumstances of this accident. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports failure to yield is one of the leading causes of fatal motorcycle accidents in the United States. Often, this can be because the motorcycle is traveling too fast. In other cases, the setting sun or other visual obstructions may contribute to the accident. Proving the defendant was not responsible for the accident would typically result in a dismissal of the charges. Proving he was not solely responsible, or that mitigating circumstances exist, may result in a reduction or dismissal of the charges.

In order to be convicted of vehicular homicide in Massachusetts, the state must prove that you were operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, or that you were operating recklessly or negligently, so that lives were endangered. And that as a result of such actions, a death occurred.

Applying the law requires a certain amount of common sense. After all, there is an at-fault party in every fatal accident. Theoretically then, in cases where an at-fault party survives a fatal accident, he or she could be charged with vehicular homicide. Yet that is not the case. These charges most often stem from drunk driving accidents -- though there has been no public assertion that alcohol or drugs were involved in this case. In such cases, the defense attorney will work to defend a client from both the drunk driving charge and the allegation that he or she was responsible for causing the accident. If either can be disproven, a reduction or dismissal of the charges is possible.

Zelnick spent more than two decades working for ABC News before accepting a position at Boston University, where is is a professor of national and international affairs. The Boston Globe reports he is the author of four books and has worked as a reporter in Israel and Moscow and as a Pentagon correspondent.

As the Buffalo True Crime Examiner reports, there is a full-court press underway nationwide to try to cut down on drunken driving, despite statistics showing that numbers are significantly down from the past few decades.

Massachusetts OUI lawyers know such enforcement efforts increase the risk of marginal and unfair arrests. There will be an increased presence of law enforcement officers -- both local and state -- attempting to make as many OUI arrests in Massachusetts as possible in the coming weeks.

As we head into the holiday season, this is a busy time for police officers anyway. There will be nearly 92 million people traveling this holiday season, Providence Business News reports, based on AAA travel predictions. That equals about 30 percent of the U.S. population who will travel 50 miles or more from home this year, a 1.4 percent increase from last year's estimation.

About 91 percent of those travelers will be moving by vehicle, so the number of people on the highways will be staggering.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has also thrown in its two cents, saying that it is conduction a nationwide enforcement of OUI laws. The agency is spending $7 million of taxpayer dollars on a "Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over" advertisement campaign that is expected to run during the last two weeks of the year and into the New Year.

In 2010, overall rates of drunken driving declined, however. Statistics released this December show that nationwide, there were more than 500 fewer alcohol-related traffic deaths in 2010 compared to 2009, good for a 5 percent drop.

Despite this, authorities still try to dig up statistics to try to justify the emphasis on pulling people over and trying to charge them with OUI. Operating a vehicle under the influence in Massachusetts is a serious offense and while it is still the most commonly charged crime in the state, the penalties continue increasing.

A person who faces a first-time offense with no prior criminal history can be subjected to major sanctions, including jail time, a one year driver's license suspension, fines and fees, possible alcohol education program and the possibility of probation in lieu of, or in addition to, jail time.

Those are major penalties for a one-time mistake. That's why it is important to fight the charges and look at all possible avenues of defense. A skilled Massachusetts OUI lawyer will examine all aspects of the case, but pay particularly close attention to the breath testing equipment and procedures used by law enforcement and the field sobriety test results.

It is sometimes possible to show that either the equipment used by police was faulty or the officer's observations during field sobriety testing -- walking heel-to-toe, maintaining balance on one leg or following an object with one's eyes -- contradict with what actually happened.

In the Ashland man's case, he appeared recently in Framingham District Court, where a judge held him without bail until an upcoming hearing.

The MetroWest Daily News reports that 54-year-old James Guy was scheduled back in court where it will be determined if he's a danger to the public. He was arrested one recent night after a report of a hit-and-run accident. A man said his vehicle was hit and the other driver took off.

When police got to the scene, the other vehicle returned, but when police attempted to pull the driver over, he drove off, the newspaper reports. Eventually stopped, police identified the man as Guy. Police reported that he tried to walk off, but they stopped him. He told them he didn't have a license, which is why he walked away. Officers reported smelling alcohol on his breath.

Police said he failed a field sobriety test -- walking nine steps heel to toe -- and after that, they arrested him. The Massachusetts OUI lawyer said he failed the field sobriety test only because his feet were not pointed in the right direction and he has vertigo, which can affect his balance.

Certainly, health issues can be a factor when taking field sobriety tests. An experienced DUI lawyer in Massachusetts will be able to point out weather or health related issues that may have made the tests difficult. And there are other defenses that may be applied, as well, depending on the circumstances.

Being charged with OUI in Rehoboth is a serious, and potentially life-changing, event. Having additional charges levied by police and prosecutors can make a bad situation worse.

But it doesn't mean you are powerless. Hiring an experienced Massachusetts OUI lawyer can have a positive impact on the outcome of your case.

In some cases, evidence seized by police can be tossed out of an OUI case if procedures weren't followed. And individual pieces of evidence, such as breath test results and field sobriety testing, may be inadmissible in some cases. A lawyer is the best way to address those facts and whether or not they belong in an OUI case.

Rehoboth police allegedly found the woman inside an unlocked vehicle in a parking lot. Police said her 3-year-old son was inside the vehicle as well.

According to a police report, the woman was passed out with blood on her face and hands, the newspaper is reporting. The car had minor front-end damage, police said, opining that the vehicle may have hit a tree or stump. The vehicle was found in a parking lot at the edge of Middlebrook Country Club's parking lot on Pleasant Street.

When police awoke the woman, she allegedly displayed signs of intoxication. Officers spotted a bottle of vodka in the car's front seat. Officers said it was half-empty. The woman was taken to the hospital and treated and the boy's father was called to pick him up.

After being arraigned, Roberts was released on $2,500 cash bail and is scheduled to appear back in court in mid-December.

A child endangerment conviction can lead to a driver's license loss for one year. In some cases, that charge and other related charges can be dropped if the defendant agrees to enter a plea to the OUI charge. But that may not be the best plan of action and taking the prosecutor's first plea offer may not serve the defendant well, either.

In Massachusetts, in order to be found guilty of OUI, the prosecution must prove the three elements of the crime -- that the defendant operated the vehicle, that the defendant did so in a public place and that while operating the person was under the influence or their blood-alcohol level was above 0.08.

Proving that a person was "operating" a vehicle can be difficult sometimes, if the person isn't pulled over by police while driving. But the state has made it easier for the state to prove because even people whose cars are parked can be considered to be operating the vehicle.

Yet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported this fall that men were responsible for 81 percent of drinking and driving incidents in 2010.

Some of these statistics can be unreliable. For instance, law enforcement runs public relations and media campaigns trying to get people to think that OUI in Massachusetts and nationwide is on the rise.

But, studies have shown that the number of OUI incidents in Fall River, Framingham, Boston and elsewhere are actually on the decline. So, what do you believe?

Our Westborough OUI lawyers recognize that law enforcement will believe the statistics that justify their DUI road blocks and saturation patrols -- DUI is a moneymaker and they are looking to make as many OUI arrests as possible. Whether numbers are up or not, police will be out in full force.

The CDC reports that adults drank and drove 112 million times in 2010 according to the agency's survey. Men ages 21 to 34 made up 32 percent of all drunken driving episodes, but make up only 11 percent of the population. Eighty-five percent of drinking and driving involved binge drinking -- 5 or more drinks for men or 4 or more drinks for women in a short period.

A study by The Century Council, as reported by The Washington Post, suggests that mothers have been drinking and driving with their children more often lately. A study found that the average female drunk driver is older and more educated than their male counterparts.

The profile of a typical female drunken driver didn't surprise researchers, who put together the study after the 2009 accident of a mother in New York who was under the influence of drugs and alcohol and caused a wrong-way crash that killed her, her daughter, three nieces and three men in another vehicle.

The article suggests that some parents, especially mothers, may have a glass of wine or two with friends while caring for their children. This may be a more common situation than we might realize.

But like any OUI case, the charges must be proven. Even a person arrested can't be considered guilty until it is proven in court, despite the court of public opinion. That's what trials are for. And women may face additional charges, most commonly child endangerment, which can increase the potential penalties for a conviction.

The Commonwealth has a great burden in proving someone committed a crime and simply going on the word of the officer who pulled the vehicle over is not enough. More must be proven.

If field sobriety tests were conducted, they must have been conducted appropriately, with consideration taken for weather conditions and possibly the person's physical ailments, could have affected the outcome. If there were witnesses and dash cam surveillance, that, too, should be a factor.

If a driver consents to a breath test machine sample, the reading should be challenged. These machines have been known to be faulty, as thousands of cases have been dismissed because the machines either weren't properly calibrated or maintained or they weren't manufactured correctly.

All of these are factors in a Massachusetts OUI case. Whether you're a woman or a man, it's no matter. An experienced Massachusetts OUI lawyer can help.

The child endangerment charge makes the decision whether to elect a trial or resolve the case more complex. Upon conviction of child endangerment, there is a one year license loss. In some cases, a prosecutor may agree to drop the endangerment charge in exchange for a plea to the OUI offense.

This case may present strong defenses. The observations reported in the Patriot Ledger all appear to be observations that can be minimized at trial. No driver drives perfectly straight down the road at all times; in fact it is common to see drivers make errors and correct their steering. In this case, it appears that the car drifted over the double yellow line. It is likely that after the officer put his blue lights on, the driving was normal and appropriately. This can be used to argue that the drifting resulted from inattention to the road rather than alcohol consumption.

Additionally, the news account claims that the motorist had trouble finding the registration and handed the officer a pile of papers. In many police reports, the officer will claim almost any action is a sign of someone under the influence; either the motorist took too long looking for the correct document or being nervous gave the officer several documents to find the registration.

In some cases, police reports can appear extremely negative to someone charged with a Massachusetts OUI offense. However, I have met with many motorists and explained what appeared to be a very negative report presents some important defenses in the case. If you have any questions about the significance of any observations made by an officer in your police report, feel free to call me at 781-686-5924 or send an email through this website addressing your question.