Source: http://federallawyersmassachusetts.com/tag/driving-under-the-influence/
Timestamp: 2013-05-24 07:49:05
Document Index: 117856773

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 11', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 3', '§ 636', '§ 636', '§ 634', '§ 161', '§ 161', '§ 164', '§ 164']

Driving Under The Influence | Massachusetts Federal Criminal Lawyers
Driving Under The Influence	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI Excessive Force Arrest	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI Excessive Force Arrest
Plaintiff arrestee filed an action against defendant officer asserting claims for assault and battery in connection with an arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI
Whether the officer used excessive force in arresting defendant?
The officer stopped the arrestee’s vehicle and charged him with driving while under the influence of liquor and other motor vehicle offenses. The arrestee claimed that the officer used excessive force in arresting him. The officer claimed that the arrestee resisted arrest and attempted to escape and that the force used was reasonably necessary to restrain him. The court charged the jury that (1) the arrestee had the burden of proving that he was injured, (2) the officer had the burden of proving that he was privileged to use force because the arrestee resisted and attempted to escape, and (3) the arrestee had the burden of proving that, notwithstanding any privilege the officer may have had, the force used was excessive. The trial judge submitted the case to the jury.
The SRIS Law Group Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your criminal case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your criminal case
Our Massachusetts lawyers defend clients charged with a criminal federal charge before the following federal courts:
Our Massachusetts lawyers have a thorough understanding of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Criminal Laws.
Our client meeting location in Cambridge, MA. Our firm has over 5 experienced federal criminal defense attorneys to defend you if you are charged with a federal crime. Contact us to help you through every phase of representation, starting from a Rule 5 hearing, to a detention hearing, to an arraignment, to a plea negotiation and all the way up to a jury trial if necessary.
Posted in Attorneys | Tagged Assault And Battery, Boston Massachusetts, Criminal Case, Defendant, Driving Under The Influence, Driving Under The Influence Of Alcohol, Dui Arrest, Dui Lawyer, Excessive Force, Federal Courts, Federal Lawyer, Law Group, Lawyer Massachusetts, Massachusetts Lawyer, Massachusetts Lawyers, Street Springfield, Street Worcester, Trial Judge, United States Facts, Worcester Massachusetts	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct False Arrest Malicious Prosecution	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct False Arrest Malicious Prosecution
Plaintiff motorist filed a civil rights action against defendant police officers, claiming that they violated his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, § 11J, and committed battery, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, infliction of emotional distress, and libel. The officers filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct
Whether the defendant’s rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act were violated?
A police officer stopped a vehicle the motorist was driving after he saw the vehicle roll through a stop sign and noticed that a registration sticker on the vehicle had expired. After the officer told the motorist that his vehicle would have to be towed, the motorist began arguing with the officer, he disobeyed the officer’s instruction to remain in his vehicle, and he followed the officer to his police cruiser, where he stood in a lane of traffic and continued the argument. The officer called for backup and when other officers arrived, they arrested the motorist and charged him with disorderly conduct and driving under the influence of alcohol. The motorist took two breathalyzer tests at the police station which showed that he was not under the influence of alcohol, and he was subsequently acquitted of disorderly conduct. The district court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the motorist for disorderly conduct and the evidence he presented in the complaint he filed against the officers failed to show that they violated his rights under the U.S. Constitution, the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, or the common law. The court dismissed the motorist’s complaint.
Posted in Attorneys | Tagged Breathalyzer, Civil Rights Act, Defendant, Disorderly Conduct, Driving Under The Influence, Driving Under The Influence Of Alcohol, False Arrest, False Imprisonment, Federal Lawyer, Fourteenth Amendments, Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Lawyer Massachusetts, Libel, Malicious Prosecution, Police Cruiser, Police Station, Probable Cause, Registration Sticker, Stop Sign, U S Constitution	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Money Laundering Conviction	Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Money Laundering Conviction
United States v. Peter John
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI
Whether the snowmobile OUI was properly characterized as motor vehicle OUI?
Defendant argued that a snowmobile OUI conviction should be characterized as a fish and game violation, which was not counted under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 4A1.2. The court, however, found that the offense compared more closely to driving under the influence. The snowmobile OUI and motor vehicle OUI were virtually identical. The dangers posed by both offenses were similar, as were the penalties. Thus, the prior convictions for snowmobile OUI would count in calculating defendant’s criminal history. Defendant sought to compare his condition of release violation to contempt of court, which was exempt under § 4A1.2(c)(1). However, a comparison between the elements of the crimes revealed that while having some similarities, the crimes were distinct, particularly since a violation of a release order was a strict liability crime. The penalties also differed. The exemption was not warranted. Defendant’s participation in the offense was not minimal, but essential, for purposes of a reduction under USSG § 3B1.2. Finally, defendant raised the issue but proffered no evidence to show that one of his prior convictions was constitutionally infirm. The court found that: defendant’s two convictions for operating a snowmobile under the influence and his conviction for violating a condition of release would count in his criminal history calculation; defendant was not a minor participant; defendant failed to show that one of his prior convictions was constitutionally infirm.
Posted in Attorneys | Tagged Contempt Of Court, Crimes, Criminal History, Defendant, Driving Under The Influence, Federal Lawyer, Fish And Game, Lawyer Massachusetts, Massachusetts Lawyer, Money Laundering Conviction, Motor Vehicle, Participant, Presentence Report, Prior Convictions, Sentencing Guidelines, Snowmobile, Strict Liability, United States, Ussg, Wit	§ 636.3 Suspension or revocation of driving privileges.	§ 636.3 Suspension or revocation of driving privileges.
In addition to the requirements of § 634.10 of this subchapter:
(a) Administrative suspension or revocation of installation driving privileges applies to the operation of a motor vehicle on Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Airfield.
(b) Installation driving privileges will be suspended for up to 6 months for drivers who accumulate 12 traffic points within 12 consecutive months, or 18 traffic points within 24 consecutive months.
(c) The Garrison Commander and Deputy Garrison Commander are designated as suspension/revocation authorities for:
(1) Suspension of driving privileges should the evidence indicate that a charge of driving under the influence is warranted or;
(2) The suspension/revocation for accumulation of 12 traffic points within 12 months or 18 points within 24 consecutive months.
Posted in Massachusetts Federal Traffic Ticket Defense | Tagged 12 Months, Accumulation, Authorities, Driving Privileges, Driving Under The Influence, Fort Stewart, Garrison Commander, Hunter Army Airfield, Motor Vehicle, Revocation, Traffic	23 U.S.C.A. § 161 Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors	23 U.S.C.A. § 161 Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors
(a) Withholding of apportionments for noncompliance.–
(1) Fiscal year 1999.–The Secretary shall withhold 5 percent of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) on October 1, 1998, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.
(2) Thereafter.–The Secretary shall withhold 10 percent (including any amounts withheld under paragraph (1)) of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) on October 1, 1999, and on October 1 of each fiscal year thereafter, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.
(3) Requirement.–A State meets the requirement of this paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law that considers an individual under the age of 21 who has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent or greater while operating a motor vehicle in the State to be driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence of alcohol.
(b) Period of availability; effect of compliance and non-compliance.–
(1) Period of availability of withheld funds.–
(A) Funds withheld on or before September 30, 2000.–Any funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment to any State on or before September 30, 2000, shall remain available until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized to be appropriated.
(B) Funds withheld after September 30, 2000.–No funds withheld under this section from apportionment to any State after September 30, 2000, shall be available for apportionment to the State.
(2) Apportionment of withheld funds after compliance.–If, before the last day of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are to remain available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State meets the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall, on the first day on which the State meets the requirement, apportion to the State the funds withheld under subsection (a) that remain available for apportionment to the State.
(3) Period of availability of subsequently apportioned funds.–Any funds apportioned pursuant to paragraph (2) shall remain available for expenditure until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the funds are so apportioned. Sums not obligated at the end of that period shall lapse.
(4) Effect of noncompliance.–If, at the end of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State does not meet the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the funds shall lapse.
Here are some of the charges you could face for a traffic violation on federal property.
Posted in Massachusetts Federal Traffic Ticket Defense | Tagged Apportionment, Apportionments, Blood Alcohol Concentration, Compliance, Driving Under The Influence, Driving Under The Influence Of Alcohol, Driving While Intoxicated, Fiscal Year, Motor Vehicle, Motor Vehicles, Noncompliance, Paragraph, Paragraphs, Subsection	23 U.S.C.A. § 164 Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence	23 U.S.C.A. § 164 Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence
Posted in Massachusetts Federal Traffic Ticket Defense | Tagged Abuse Of Alcohol, Alcohol Concentration, Conviction, Driving Privileges, Driving Under The Influence, Ignition Interlock System, Immobilization, Impoundment, Imprisonment, Intoxicated Driver Law, License Suspension, Liters, Mechanical Power, Milliliters, Motor Vehicle, Motor Vehicles, Offens, Public Highways, Repeat Offenders, Term Alcohol	Massachusetts Federal DUI/DWI Reckless Driving Suspended License Speeding & Traffic Offense Defense	The Massachusetts federal traffic defense attorneys of SRIS, P.C. who practice in Federal Court ensure that they stay current with the Federal Traffic Laws and Federal Criminal Procedure.
Posted in Massachusetts Federal Traffic Ticket Defense | Tagged Commonwealth Territory, Defense Attorneys, Defense Lawyer, Driving Privileges, Driving Under The Influence, Dwi Lawyer, E Mail, Federal Attorneys, Federal Jurisdiction, Information Laws, Law Group, Offense Defense, Reckless Driving, Repeat Offenders, Tamil Telugu, Territorial Sea, Traffic Defense, Traffic Laws, Traffic Lawyer, Traffic Offense, Traffic Offenses, Traffic Ticket Defense, Traffic Violation, Unsafe Operation	CLIENT MEETING LOCATIONS