DWI, Drugs, Assault, Probation Revocation, Sexual Offenses, Theft, Juvenile Defense. Felony and Misdemeanor Offenses in State and Federal Court
Driving While Intoxicated, DWI and Your Drivers License Forney, Texas DWI Defense Lawyer.
Sexual Offenses, Drug Offenses, Assault and Violent Crimes, Theft, Truancy/School Related Criminal Charges.
No one saves a drug search like our Supreme Court. It seems that few Constitutional protections apply if the police find drugs. . The latest example is Virginia vs. Moore.
SCOTUS in their own words
Held: The police did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they made an arrest that was based on probable cause but prohibited by state law, or when they performed a search incident to the arrest.
Recently, the 6th Court of Appeals (Texarkana) released an opinion in.39 acres vs. the State of Texas . In Texas, asset forfeiture cases list the property as the defendant. For example, The State of Texas vs. Ford F-150, or The State of Texas vs. $24,762 are potential forfeiture case names.
.39 acres was actually about Henry Doke, the owner of the Dew Drop Inn in Marion County. The Dew Drop Inn was a commercial space rented out on a month to month basis.
A search warrant was issued for suspected drug activity at the DDI. The police show up and find cocaine and make a few arrests. The State moves to seize the DDI and the land (.39 acres).
DMN reports that Dallas County Criminal courts have a growing backlog of felony cases.. Even with the addition of two new felony courts in 2005 the number of pending cases is still growing each year. DMN estimates there are 24,126 pending felony cases in Dallas.
What could possibly cause such a huge growing backlog of felony cases? Hmmm…. DMN explores.
The reasons given for this vary, depending on whom you ask. The local criminal justice system has many parts, and defense lawyers and prosecutors can contribute to slow-moving cases. Some cases are more complex and difficult than others, and thus take longer to try. But judges play a big role, too – for example, in the speed with which they hear motions and make decisions.
I haven’t contributed to the blog discussion on the West Texas Polygamy raids because I know very little that is not on CNN. However, I have dealt with CPS in Kaufman County and in East Texas. It’s that experience I’d like to share.
I am not sure if this experience is reflective of all CPS cases in Kaufman. However, I was taken aback by the process.
A little background. I had a contested hearing on a removal by Kaufman CPS. CPS came in, stole the child, and wanted my client to sign off on the removal without a contested hearing. Right.
Collin County has jumped on the Vampire Prosecutor bandwagon with “no refusal” DWI weekends. A recent DMN story featured a Collin County ADA talking about their new tough on DWI blood draw program.
I filed an open records request for communications, documents, memos etc regarding implementation of this program. After all, if the Collin County District Attorney is so proud of this program then why not share the details with the public?
As usual, the CCDA sought to keep the records secret via the Attorney General. Cheap “tough on crime” PR stunts are easy for bureaucrats. Actually revealing what they are doing to the public is always met with resistance.
Yesterday, I had two cases on the docket in the 422nd District Court in Kaufman. I quickly browsed through the courts docket and noticed that around 15 criminal cases were set to be heard that afternoon. A quick glance at the State’s file bucket showed that roughly 8 of those cases were for drugs.
Plea Negotiation Conferences
In the 422nd a common court setting is a Plea Negotiation Conference, or PNC. I had two of those today. I spent time talking to a prosecutor on the various aspects of my cases. Both cases were reset.
RateMyCop.com lets citizens rate and review police officers. Some Texas prosecutors don’t like the idea. I think it’s great. Police have a troubled history of policiing themselves. More information helps everyone. RMC could prevent future Tulias from happening.
Here is an interview with founder Gino Sesto.
1. Name/Background/Resume
Gino Sesto. 37yrs old, living in Culver City, CA. 15+ year Advertising background.
2. How did RMC get started?
Having a dinner with a good friend 7 or 8 months ago, and the topic turned to traffic tickets. We spoke about our experiences for at least a half hour. It dawned on me the next day that there is a website here. People all have experiences with officers, both good and bad. The best part is they remember them like it happened just yesterday. After doing some research and realizing I could get lists of names from the departments themselves we decided to make the site. We mailed over 1,000 requests to departments around the country and received over 500 back. I learned that over 40,000,000 traffic tickets are given out every year. On each traffic ticket there is a line for the officer to fill out. His/Her name and id number. Aha! That’s what we need. People keep those tickets for at least 6 months, so the data is there, and certainly the users are there. Everyone has an opinion on those tickets, and they usually tell all their immediate friends about the ticket.
3. Would RMC be possible without open records laws?
Absolutely, the open record laws only allowed us to seed the “kitty”. Without the 140k names that we have now, the press wouldn’t have bothered with us, but eventually the users would have grown the database to that point. Just 5 days ago we launched the ability for users to add to our database, and we have already had over 400 names submitted. Getting the names from the police departments only got the website to grow faster than it would have without the names
I have long argued that the Standard Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) used in DWI detection are a fraud. The science is garbage that has never been peer reviewed. However, tell a lie long enough and it becomes the truth. In Texas 3 SFSTs are used in almost every DWI case; the HGN, one leg stand and walk and turn. Officers are led to believe that these tests are highly accurate in detecting impairment and bac levels over .08. As with any good propaganda the weaknesses and flaws in the research are never mentioned.
A fortuitous Google search led me to Dr. Greg Kane. Dr. Kane has examined the field sobriety validation studies. He has examined the raw data that cops never see. His conclusion- the numbers don’t add up.
Why would a sober person refuse field sobriety tests? Read on to find out.
1. Name, Background, Resume
Greg Kane. live in metro Denver. I have degrees in math and in physics from Rice, 1980. I went to med school at UT Houston; I practiced internal medicine from ’91 till ’98. Since ’98 I’ve been a consultant to attorneys working on medical malpractice claims. See www.medmalEXPERTS.com
2. How did you get involved with SFST?
We medical doctors spend a lot of time interpreting imprecise physical tests. A spot on an x-ray may mean cancer, or it may mean nothing. Do you cut the lady open, or do you send her home? Medicine has developed a sophisticated mathematics for answering questions like that. In med school they teach you that math. As a math – physics guy, I though it was cool. My post-graduate research dealt with how that mathematics worked out for one specific type of x-ray. So I come to the question of SFST accuracy with an interest and some expertise in the mathematics of “accuracy.”
As an expert broker I get calls from defense attorneys looking for a doctor to counter FST evidence. Too often these cases involve drivers who failed an FST, had a BAC of zero, and are now charged with driving while intoxicated by, say, a therapeutic level of some benign medicine prescribed by their own doctor. The government’s reasoning: they failed an FST, they must have been impaired.
Because I happen to know how science says FST results are correctly interpreted, I know the government’s theory is wrong. The most difficult thing in life is to know how to do a thing right and to watch somebody else do it wrong, without comment. Also, it’s un-American to convict people with secret evidence, and with “scientific” tests that don’t work.
3. What did you learn about SFST validation studies?.
First, all the usual stuff defense attorneys complain about. They were never peer reviewed. They’re chock-a-block with procedural and logical flaws.
Second, I discovered things that don’t get talked about. For example
l The “accuracy” statistic the NHTSA uses to validate the SFST is a technical mathematical statistic that does NOT reflect the likelihood that a DUI defendant who failed the test was impaired.
l The NHTSA’s “accuracy” statistic is open to manipulation. Simply by manipulating the group of drivers you choose to “study,” you can set up your validation study beforehand so it is certain to “discover” whatever arrest accuracy you’ve been paid to validate. Not only is it possible to manipulate study groups this way, that’s actually how it’s done in real life. NHTSA contractors do manipulate their study groups in a way that uses this statistical trick. Every NHTSA FST validation study that “discovers” a high FST accuracy uses this trick. Every validation study that fails to use this statistical trick also fails to “discover” a high FST accuracy.
l SFST studies do not study SFSTs. They study officers instincts. The “accuracies” they report are not the accuracies of the standardized FST, they are the “accuracies” of officers’ unstandardized gut instincts about whether each driver is impaired or not. Validation study officers are as accurate as they are only because they repeatedly ignore the SFST. If they did actually rely on the SFST, their arrest accuracies would be substantially worse. That’s right, worse. SFSTs are less accurate than officers’ gut instincts, and validation study reports prove it.
l All FST validation studies keep the accuracy of the SFST itself secret. When I looked at the raw data for the 1998 San Diego study, I was shocked. To a first approximation the SFST works like this: Everybody fails. Everybody fails, and officers release people their gut instinct tells them are not impaired.
At the 0.04% BAC level:
296 drivers took the SFST
292 failed—99%.
4 passed— 1 %
On innocent people the accuracy is 7%! If juries rely on the SFST to decide the guilt of drivers charged with DWAI at the current 0.05% level, they will wrongly convict 93% of the innocent drivers who go to trial.
4. Tell us about your mathematical analysis. How is it done?
Basically it’s as if the government were pushing Youth Cream. The claim is, rub YC on your face and you wake up looking, acting and feeling young. So the government pays for Youth Cream validation studies done at an elementary school, and guess what, 95% of the people who used the cream in the scientific study did look, act, and feel young. Then the government claims the contractors’ research proves YC is highly accurate at making people young. But the secret isn’t in the cream, it’s in how contractors picked the group they “studied.”
It’s the same for SFSTs. Validation contractors “discover” high accuracies because they load their study groups with drunks.
The home page of my web site fieldsobrietytest.info links several of my published articles on how sensitivity-specificity-predictive-value science applies to SFSTs.
5. Officers are taught these tests are highly accurate. Is that true?
Yes and No.
Yes, there is a technical mathematical statistic called “accuracy,” and Yes the “accuracy” of SFSTs is high in the manipulated study groups in the government studies.
No, SFSTs are not accurate in the everyday sense that the answers they give are usually correct. The never before published raw data I managed to uncover proves that within the margin of error a failed SFST carries no implication of impairment. None. You can’t tell whether the person who failed the test is actually impaired, or whether they’re just one of the 93% of innocent people who also fail the test.
6. How do sober drivers fare on SFSTs?
At the 0.04% BAC, on innocent people the accuracy is 7%! That’s not a typo. Seven percent. If juries rely on the SFST to decide the guilt of drivers charged with DWAI at the current 0.05% level, they will wrongly convict 93% of the innocent drivers who go to trial.
At 0.08% BAC, on innocent people the SFST is only 29% accurate! That’s worse than a coin toss. If juries rely on the standardized field sobriety test to decide the guilt of drivers charged with DUI at the 0.08% level, they will falsely convict 71% of the innocent drivers who go to trial.
One reason I prefer freedom over government is accountability. If a business does not provide the goods and services the public wants customers take their money elsewhere and the business fails.
Government is the opposite. Failing programs see their budgets increased and almost never close. DARE is one such program. By all accounts DARE HAS BEEN A COMPLETE FAILURE. DARE has shown no efficacy in keeping kids from using drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes. Yet the government continues to waste over a billion dollars a year on DARE.
This week, President Bush issued a proclamation declaring DARE day. Do we really need a day to celebrate government propaganda? Really? Surprisingly,Pushingback.com is the only place I could find this moving declaration from our Commander in Chief.
Here is a column I wrote for the Ellis County Press. It should run soon.
Imagine you are a juror for a criminal case. The evidence is clear that the defendant broke the law. However, your conscience tells you the law is unjust and should not be enforced. What do you do?
John Jay, our nation’s first Supreme Court Justice stated that “It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision… you [juries] have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the la w as well as the fact in controversy.”
Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog