On December 1st, 2009 Govenor Ritter signed into law a bill criminalizing text messaging while driving. The new law will make texting and driving a Class A driving infraction.

See the Denver Post Article below:

Here's the new TV spot that will be premiered on NBC's "The Office" on November 19th at 8:00 PM.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnJOUqWCAx4

Stay tuned for future commercials in the series. Up next, "Money Bed".

 There is a reason that every workplace in America conducts sexual harassment training and seminars regularly. There is a reason why many companies prohibit romantic liasons of any type between employees. There is a reason why any attorney will tell you that you should not date people at work if you value your job. The reason? Lawyers, of course.

Companies incur huge liability stemming from the sexual activities of their employees if that activity can be tied to the workplace in any way. More details are emerging about the pervasiveness of David Letterman'’s affairs, e.g., the special bedroom above his studio in which he conducted his affairs and the fact that there were several different women.

This has legal observers wondering when the lawsuits are coming. One question is whether any of the specific women involved felt pressure to engage in sex with Letterman in order to keep or advance a career. This would mean that the sexual activity was not entirely voluntary and would constitute sexual harassment.

The other question is whether Letterman’'s activities with these women created a hostile workplace in general. That would be the case if Letterman was making unwanted advances or if there was favoritism toward the women willing to have affairs with Letterman.

Then the ultimate question becomes whether Letterman makes more money for the network than he loses for them in settlements.

In Colorado during the winter months, it is not uncommon tohear on the radio or on television news that the city is on “cold reporting status” or “accident alert”. Most people don’t know exactly what that means tothem, or how it affects their responsibilities when they are in a car accidentduring cold reporting.

 The Colorado Springs Government page has a helpful resource for cold and counter reporting of car accidents.

http://www.springsgov.com/Page.aspx?NavID=777

The City’s website lists the criteria for counter reporting when the city is on accident alert:

 No fatality or injury requiring medical attentionand transport to a hospital by ambulance was sustained by any person(s)involved in the accident, and;

No driver involved in the accident is suspectedof driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and;

The accident does not involve damage to anypublic property (a road sign, utility pole, etc.) other than wildlife, and;

All vehicles and drivers involved are present atthe scene and the driver, vehicle and insurance information is available to beexchanged, and;

 The accident occurs on private property and:

No fatality or injury requiring medical attentionand transport to a hospital by ambulance was sustained by any person(s)involved in the accident, and;

No driver involved in the accident is suspectedof driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and;

All vehicles and drivers involved are present atthe scene and the driver, vehicle and insurance information is available to beexchanged ( a hit and run accident involving an unoccupied parked vehicle shallbe counter reported unless the suspect driver is known by name or the suspectvehicle can not be located or described to include the license plate number);and

There is no major damange to another's property;e.g., vehicle through a building.

 The accident occurs on a city street and involves minor damage withthe apparent amount of damage to any one vehicle or other property being lessthan $1,000, and:

No fatality or injury requiring medical attentionand transport to a hospital by ambulance was sustained by any person(s)involved in the accident, and;

No driver involved in the accident is suspectedof driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and;

All vehicles and drivers involved are present atthe scene and the driver, vehicle and insurance information is available to beexchanged, and;

Noone insists that the police respond

 Do not forget to get as much information from the otherdriver as possible. This should definitely include the following:

Name

Address

Telephone Number

Date of birth

Driver’s License information

Vehicle Model and License number

Information of owner of vehicle (if different from driver),especially insurance information.

Insurance information-get it all including the provider, policynumber and agent’s name.

The Law Offices of McDowell & Laybourne is pleased to announce that Steven T. Rodemer has joined the firm. The firm will now be known as McDowell Laybourne & Rodemer, LLC. 

Steven Rodemer was formerly with the McDivitt Law Firm as an associate attorney handling personal injury cases. His practice at McDowell Laybourne & Rodemer will be 100% personal injury litigation, including auto accidents, medical malpractice, wrongful death and premises liability. 

Most of the headlines about college football this weekend were about  BYU’s Coleby Clawson’s monster hit on Sam Bradford or the “suckerpunch heard ‘round the Pac-10” from LaGarrette Blount. This past weekend was called “Respect Weekend” by the NCAA in an effort to promote sportsmanship in the first week of the College Football season. One of the goals of Respect Weekend was to have the entire team and staff, meet at midfield before the game for a handshake. No one expected teams to meet at midfield after the game for a slugfest.

Here's the clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8ojSurhmEk

But that’s what fans in Boise got when Boise State University’s Defensive End Byron Hout taunted, and slapped Oregon’s Running Back LaGarrette Blount on the shoulder. As Hout turns away after making a comment to Blount, Blount threw a quick right cross that sent Hout to his knees. Blount wasn’t done yet though. He went on to push his teammates yell at fans, and apparently even tried to get at one of the more vocal Boise fans all the while having to be restrained by multiple teammates and staff.

Punishment came swift for Blount as Oregon’s coach Chip Kelly suspended Blount for the remainder of the season, including the post season. That is, if Oregon can even make it to the post season after looking absolutely anemic against BSU, and now having lost their star running back.

Idaho law under section 18-903 describes the crime of “battery” as, 

    “(a)  Willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of

another; or

    (b)  Actual, intentional and unlawful touching or striking of another

person against the will of the other; or

    (c)  Unlawfully and intentionally causing bodily harm to an individual.”

Blount’s actions certainly seem to fit the bill. And as a former prosecutor myself, 

I can tell you I would’ve have loved to have had high definition footage of any 

crime I was prosecuting. So why hasn’t the Boise District Attorney brought charges

 against Mr. Blount? 

Criminal charges are few and far between for fights on a football field. However, 

one of the most violent sports, hockey, has a richer tradition of filing charges for 

acts that crossed the line. Wikipedia has a great article about incidents in hockey 

that brought about criminal charges.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_in_ice_hockey

One of the most famous cases was in 2004 when Todd Bertuzzi punched Steve 

Moore in the back of his head causing “three fractured vertebrae, a grade three 

concussion, vertebral ligament damage, stretching of the brachial plexus nerves, 

and facial lacerations”. As the game was played in Canada, British Columbian 

prosecutors charged Bertuzzi with assault causing bodily harm. Bertuzzi later 

plead guilty to assault charges and was given one year probation and a 

conditional discharge. A conditional discharge is similar to a deferred sentence, 

whereby he can have the charges dismissed if he completed his probationary 

term satisfactorily. 

So what is different about what Blount did and what Bertuzzi did? Isn’t fighting 

in hockey part of the game? In Blount’s case it was after the game was over, 

not on the field of play. Was it because it was so clearly a “sucker punch”? Was 

it because Moore was so badly hurt that charges were filed? 

Obviously, the decision to whether or not to file charges is up the discretion of 

the District Attorney, but they do not appear to be forthcoming. Personally, I 

think Blount has received enough punishment from Oregon by suspending him 

for the remainder of his senior season. But I also feel strongly that every incident should be 

reviewed on a case by case basis. Certainly a game does not provide an excuse 

(or a valid defense) to assault another person. Mr. Blount will certainly feel the 

far-reaching impact of this punch as his NFL draft stock plummets from not

 having the opportunity to showcase his talents this year, and as he will now be 

considered a character risk for any NFL team. So was Respect Week a 

success? Maybe we should ask LaGarrette Blount, as he seems to have learned 

the hardest lesson about sportsmanship this week.

  Read more about criminal law: http://www.pikespeaklaw.com/criminal.html

The Colorado Springs Gazette is reporting that several Colorado agencies are participating in a DUI "crackdown". The Boulder, Logmont and Lafayette police departments are working with the Boulder County Sheriff's Department to ramp up the County's DUI enforcement . The Gazette is also reporting at least one DUI checkpoint at the popular labor day tourist destination, Rocky Mountain National Park. The exact location has not been disclosed.

See the Gazette article here: http://www.gazette.com/news/gearing-61412-colorado-officers.html

Don't be surprised if other Colorado counties are engaged in their own DUI crackdowns this weekend. Colorado Springs Police have set up at least one checkpoint in the city tonight (9/4/09), and will likely run one or more checkpoints throughout the weekend. If you are stopped for drinking and driving, remember to contact a DUI attorney. http://www.pikespeaklaw.com/contact/

To read more about Colorado DUI laws go to our DUI page: http://www.pikespeaklaw.com/drunk.html

One of the most popular searches on Google this week was searching for "white people stole my car" to see if the internet rumor was true that Google would in fact suggest that you really meant "black people stole my car".

So, obviously the first thing I did was give it a go, and as you can imagine, Google did not in fact suggest any other race, but did return 454,000 results for the search term as I entered it.

 Here is the screen capture that has caused the rumors:

Check out Google insights to follow the trend.  You will see that it started out in the US and has now picked up popularity in Canada and the UK as well. It also appears that is just started late last week, as August 19 appears to be the start of the increasingly popular search term.

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=white%20people%20stole%20my%20car&date=today%201-m&cmpt=q

My guess is that the screen grab above is a hoax based on someone misspelling "black" to get the suggestion, and then retyping "white" in the search term.

How about some real racial profiling? Check out this story about keeping an eye out for campers who leave tortilla wrappers, drink tecate beer and listen to mexican music. Why? Well, the US Forest Service says these campers could be armed Marijuana growers...

 http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-hispanic-campers-profiling,0,569514.story

        If you have a security clearance for your occupation and end up getting
charged for a criminal or drunk driving offense, you may be worried about
losing your clearance.  And with good reason.  You will have to fill out
a form when you renew your clearance, and there is a question on the form
asking if you have been charged or issued a ticket for any criminal or
drunk driving offense.

        Notice that the question is not whether you have been convicted, but
rather if you have been charged.  These are two very different things.
Anyone can charge anyone with anything at any time in the US, but it
takes the government proving your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for a
jury to convict you.

        The agency reviewing your clearance form does a "whole person" analysis,
meaning the agency considers whether the entirety of your profile would
qualify you for a clearance.  Thus, there is no bright-line rule as to
whether your charges or convictions will disqualify you.

        This is important for two reasons.  One, you should not assume that any
one charge or conviction will automatically cause you to lose your
clearance.  And two, even if you beat your case in court, you still must
explain and mitigate your charges.  For example, if you get drunk driving
charges dismissed, it is still a good idea to enroll in some sort of
alcohol counseling anyway to smooth over the fact that you got the
charge.

        Still, there are some general rules to consider.  One is that if the
court is lenient with you, the panel reviewing your form will look
favorably on that fact.  Another is that domestic violence convictions
are usually an automatic disqualifier.

        The best rule of thumb is that you should work with an experienced
criminal law attorney to garner the best possible outcome with the least
amount of risk.  Even if you lose your clearance, you still need to
position yourself for obtaining other employment by minimizing the hit to
your criminal record.

Literally. That is the accusation against Wallace Souza, a former police officer, politician and TV host in Brazil. Souza hosts a highly rated real crime television program based in Manaus, a city deep in the Amazon rainforest. Souza and his son Rafael (who is currently incarcerated on multiple charges, including homicide) are accused of orchestrating these murders, and then sending out his TV crews to get exclusive video and thereby boost his ratings on his TV show “Canal Livre” (Free Channel).

But wait, there’s more: Souza is also accused of being a drug trafficker, and that the victims were his competition for drug operations in the area. Talk about killing two birds with one stone.

State police intelligence chief Thomaz Vasconcelos stated in an interview with The Associated Press, "The order to execute always came from the legislator and his son, who then alerted the TV crews to get to the scene before the police," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/11/wallace-souza-brazilian-t_n_257061.html

Canal Livre depicts the rise of crime in and around Manaus, and the state of Amazonas in Brazil. The city of Manaus has a population of 1.7 million people in a region that is otherwise sparsely populated, but largely lawless. It is a hub city for all sorts of goods as it sits on the confluence of the Negro and Solimoes rivers. It is also a hub for drug traffickers throughout the Northern part of South America.

Below is a clip from the Canal Livre show. It shows a Canal Livre reporter arriving at the scene of a homicide before the police arrived, where the victim was burned and the body was still smoking. WARNING: As you can imagine, the video is not suitable for children, or for the squeamish. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jll87TT8yMY

This story is out of Sao Paulo, where the unnamed teenager started her killing spree at the tender age of 15. She is believed to have stabbed to death between 30 and 50 men, all with the same knife.

Fox News reports, “She even smiled as she reeled off her list of victims - which is feared to make her the world's most prolific teenage serial killer. She calmly bragged to police: "I don't have enough courage to hold a gun — but I can hold a knife.”

Although her motive for the murders is unclear, the Fox News articles states, “The girl – who can't be named because she is still a minor – said she began targeting men in her home city of Sao Paulo, Brazil ‘for money, revenge and to bring justice.’”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,540226,00.html

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2592734/Girl-aged-17-knifes-30-men-to-death.html

If her confession proves to be true, she would be the most prolific teenage serial killer in history. Outside of the recent upswing in school shootings post-Columbine, the instances of teenagers who commit multiple murders are extremely rare. Most teenagers who commit multiple murders usually attack their parents or other family members, not strangers. The teenage serial killer is even rarer. In the United States one of the more famous teenage serial killers is Craig Price, also known as the “Warwick Slasher”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Price

The unnamed Sao Paulo teenager states that the reason she came forward was avoid upsetting her family and to avoid being tried as an adult. I am unaware of the legal possibility of trying juveniles as adults in Brazil, however, this tactic is unlikely to work in most States in the U.S.

 In America, there is a broad precedent for trying juvenile as adults for violent crimes. In fact, the state of Rhode Island recently changed their state law on minors being tried as adults largely because of the Craig Price case. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273461/

In Colorado, the youngest a child may be tried as an adult is at the age of 12, but certain specific requirements must be met. See Colorado Revised Statute 19-2-517 http://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/PDF/WHEN%20A%20CHILD%20CAN%20BE%20TRIED%20AS%20AN%20ADULT.pdf.

Laws on trying children as adults in the United States will vary State to State, and the age requirements and type of crime committed will vary as well.

I am interested in following this case as it develops to learn the true motives of this teenager and to see what sort of help was provided to her in these killings. As some of the bodies were hidden or moved, it seems highly unlikely that a teenage female would be able to commit these crimes by herself. Additionally, this wouldn’t be the first case of organized crime or drug cartels using a teenager as an enforcer in their criminal enterprise.

With the understanding that juvenile offenders should be treated differently from adults, Colorado legislators have written the law to afford juveniles additional protections and provisions under the law. Section 19 of the Colorado Code, also known as "The Children's Code", was created specifically to outline how juvenile offenders should be handled by the criminal justice system. The Colorado Children's Code applies to minors between the ages of 10 and 17.  Amongst other things, Section 19 delineates sentencing structure, criminal procedure, the use of juvenile facilites (such as juvenile detention centers), and provides for expungement of juvenile records.

The definition of "Expungement" can be found in the Colorado Revised Statutes §19-1-103 (48). "'Expungement'...means the designation of juvenile delinquency records whereby such records are deemed never to  have existed." Expungement is done by actually physically sealing the delinquency record or otherwise marking on the file or computer file in a conspicuous manner that the records are designated as expunged. These records may only be reviewed by an order of the Court after a hearing where good cause is shown to view the records. Even then, all interested parties must be given five (5) days notice of the hearing.

 Contrary to popular belief, expungement of records is not automatic at a certain time, or when the juvenile turns 18. A person must petition the Court before the Court will grant an expungement. Further, certain requirements must be met under the law.

The expungement requirements can be found in Colorado Revised Statutes §19-1-306.  The Court may order that a juveniles records be expunged if certain criteria are met. First, that the Juvenile has not been adjudicated for any juvenile offense, or convicted for a misdemeanor or felony since release from juvenile parole. Second, that there are no felony or misdemeanor charges, or other delinquency proceeding pending against the petitioner. Third, that the Juvenile has been rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the Court. Fourth, that the expungement would be in the best interest of the petitioner and the community. 

Additionally, certain time requirements must be met before a juvenile may even petition the Court for expungement of records. A juvenile may petition the Court for expungement immediately if the are found not guilty at trial. A juvenile must wait to petition for expungement  in other cases. A juvenile must wait one year from the completion date of a diversion program, or from the date of contact with law enforcement that was never referred to another agency.

A juvenile must wait four years from the date of release from probation/jurisdiction of the court, completion of parole, or commitment to the Department of Human Services.

If the juvenile has been adjudicated as a repeat or mandatory juvenile offender, he must wait ten years from the date of release from juvenile parole, and must not have violated any further criminal statutes. 

In some cases, juveniles are not eligible to expunge their criminal records. If a child has been adjudicated an aggravated juvenile offender, a violent juvenile offender, been adjudicated for a crime of violence, or adjudicated for an offense involving unlawful sexual behavior as outlined in CRS §16-22-102, they are not eligible for expungement. A juvenile who has been direct filed, or filed as an adult into district court, may also not petition the Court for expungements of records. 

If a juvenile is eligible, he or she should seriously consider petitioning the Court for an expungement of their Juvenile records. There are no filing fees or other court costs associated with filing for expungement of juvenile records.  Once a petition is filed correctly a hearing will be set for a Judge or a Magistrate to hear arguments regarding the expungement of records. If the Court grants the expungement an order will be sent to the District Attorney's Office, Law Enforcement and other agencies where records may be found, directing the agencies to expunge the juvenile's records in their files.

Almost everyone has been stopped by law enforcement at one time or another for a traffic violation. Whether the stop is for something as simple as a burned out headlight, or you didn’t come to a complete stop, we all know that feeling when we see the flashing lights in our rearview mirror. Imagine how much worse that feeling is when you have had a little too much to drink. Every day I meet with people who have been charged with traffic violations and drunk driving offenses. As I explain to a client their rights, one of the comments I hear most is “I wish I had known that when I was stopped.”

Many people are under-educated about the law, or even misinformed about their rights and what decisions they should make when they are stopped for a traffic offense. Many people think they should just do whatever the police them because they don’t have any other options. Below is a basic list of things to keep in mind when you are stopped for drunk driving or driving under the influence of drugs. Laws will vary from state to state, and the following list is Colorado specific. Please check with a local attorney about the laws in your specific area.

1. You have the right to remain silent. You do not need to answer any questions the police ask you about where you were going, why they stopped you, or how much you have had to drink. Even from their very first contact, the police are trying to build a case against you. Always be polite with the officer, but do not make any statements about what happened, how much you have had to drink, or any other violation they are investigating.

After you provide the officer your driver’s license, insurance and registration, your best advice is to keep your mouth shut. When the officer stops you he is looking for any clue that you may be under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Even if you answer innocuous questions, the officer is looking for clues when you talk such as the smell of alcohol on your breath, or slow/slurred speech.

One of the officer’s first questions is almost always, “How much have you had to drink tonight?” Some of the most common answers to this question are, “two beers”, or, “I had a couple with dinner”. Many people erroneously think that if they minimize their use it won’t look as bad, but by admitting to alcohol use you are helping law enforcement build a case against you.

2. Do not take any roadside sobriety tests.  Roadside sobriety tests are voluntary. These tests are used to help the officer determine if you are under the influence and can be used at trial and at the Department of Revenue/Motor Vehicle hearing against you. Do not provide the police with any additional evidence that can bolster their case. These tests often include eye tests, walk and turn, one leg stand, alphabet or counting tests.

This includes any preliminary breath tests (PBT) at the scene of the stop. The results of the PBT are not admissible in Court in Colorado because they are so inaccurate. However, the police use these tests to confirm their suspicion that you are under the influence, and to build their case against you for further tests that are admissible in Court.

3. If you do not take the "mandatory" chemical test, you could lose your license. In Colorado, if you do not take the mandatory chemical test of your breath or blood as is required under express consent laws, you will lose your license for a year in addition to any other license suspension imposed. These chemical tests include a blood test, a breath test or urinalysis. The mandatory breath test is different from the PBT, and is typically done on a large machine called an intoxilyzer at the police station after an observation period is completed under strict regulations. If you don’t know whether a test is required under the law to avoid additional license consequences, ask the officer. In many cases you would be best advised to submit to a chemical test of your blood. In Colorado, a second sample will be taken of your blood at the time of the initial blood draw. This second sample is available to you to be tested at an independent lab.  In some cases this second result can come back lower, or so different from the first test as to cast doubt onto the result of either test. These results can be used to your advantage in plea negotiations and at trial.

If you refuse chemical testing you can still be charged with drunk driving. Many people believe that if they don’t submit to a test, then the government will not be able to pursue a case against you for drunk driving. Prosecutors may still use all other evidence they obtained against you such as bad driving, smell of alcohol, visual clues of intoxication, roadsides tests, and even the fact that you refused the test can be used against you in Court.

4. You have a limited time to request a Department of Motor Vehicles/Department of Revenue hearing. If you are above the legal limit of a .08 BAC in Colorado two proceedings will begin against you, 1) the criminal process, and 2) the DMV/DOR process. Although the criminal process can carry hefty penalties such as fines, jail, community service, and alcohol classes, the DMV only has the power to suspend or revoke your driving privileges. You may say, “Only? My ability to drive is a huge deal.” That is why it is so important to request a DMV hearing before the time runs and the suspension automatically goes into effect.

In Colorado, you have seven days from the date of the results of the breath test to request a hearing or your license will automatically be revoked. For a blood test, the procedure is a little different. Whereas the results of a breath test are immediate it often takes a few weeks for blood results to come back from the lab. If you were above a .08 the police will forward your results to the DMV and you will receive a notice via mail. This letter will have all instructions on how to request a hearing and a deadline by which the hearing must be requested. Whether you chose a breath test or blood test, you should request a hearing as soon as possible so you can explore all legal and factual defenses at the DMV/DOR hearing to protect your driving privileges.

When you request the hearing you will receive a temporary permit that is valid until the date of the hearing. Remember, if you don’t request the hearing you will automatically lose your license. In many situations there is a legal or factual defense that can save your license if the proper arguments are presented at the hearing.

5. Hire an experienced Drunk Driving Attorney as soon as possible. A drunk driving case presents many highly complex legal and procedural issues. A plea or a conviction to a drunk driving charge can have lasting implications on your life, your license, and your freedom. It can also have many unforeseen consequences as well. An experienced drunk driving defense attorney will advise you at all stages of your case of potential pitfalls and other issues as they may arise in your case.

A DUI lawyer will review your case for all legal and factual deficiencies in the government’s case against you to help you present your best defense. The old saying that “only a fool represents himself” could not be more true. The earlier you hire an attorney, the better, so as to avoid making any costly mistakes early in the case.

Upcoming articles to include:

Juvenile Expungements,

When/How can I reinstate my license,

and the always popular,"Is that even legal?"

Boating accidents are on the rise across the United States. The U.S. Coast Guard reported in 2007 that nearly 

22% of all boating fatalities were alcohol or drug related. Boating Under the Influence (“BUI”)  was also listed 

as the fourth most common factor for boating related accidents after: (1) operator inattention, (2) careless/reckless 

operation, and (3) excessive speed. http://www.uscgboating.org/statistics/accident_stats.htm

Everyone is familiar with drinking and driving laws, but in recent years, boating under the influence has received more 

attention from Federal and State law makers. In 2001, the US Coast Guard revised the standard for the legal blood alcohol 

content for operators of boats and other recreational vessels. This summary of Federal BUI standards is from the EPA website:

“For recreational vessel operators, the final rule lowers the current Federal BAC

threshold from .10 BAC to .08 BAC. This change is appropriate because

boating accident statistics show that alcohol use remains a significant

cause of recreational boating deaths and because we support a trend in

State recreational boating laws toward the .08 BAC standard. Further,

the revised Federal BAC standard does not supercede or preempt any

enacted State BAC standard. Additionally, the final rule replaces the

term ``intoxicated'' with the phrase ``under the influence of alcohol

or a dangerous drug.'' This change brings the regulations into

conformance with current statutory language. The final rule is expected

to reduce the number of recreational boating deaths and injuries

resulting from accidents caused by operators under the influence of

alcohol or a dangerous drug.” 

See http://www.epa.gov/EPA-IMPACT/2001/January/Day-10/i551.htm

After the Federal law changed in 2001, many states have followed suit in lowering the legal limit for boating 

under the influence to .08 BAC. Colorado is one example of a state that has recently made some major changes

 in its BUI laws. In August of 2008, two major changes were made to the Colorado BUI laws, see Colorado Revised 

Statutes 33-13-108.1. First, Colorado lowered the legal limit to mirror the Federal law and lowered the previous legal limit 

from .10 BAC to .08 BAC. Second, Colorado widened the scope of type of vessels that a person could receive a BUI 

while operating. Under the old law, only operators of motor boats and sailboats could be arrested for a BUI. After the 

changes to the BUI law, an operator of any vessel may be charged with a BUI if they are in control of the vessel and 

are over the legal limit.  This includes all watercraft operated by motor, wind, paddle, oar, jet skis, sailboats, kayaks and 

even canoes and rafts. 

Under Colorado law, boating under the influence is a misdemeanor. A first BUI offense is punishable by up to a year in jail, 

96 hours of public service, a fine not to exceed $1,000, and carries a 3 month restriction on operating a vessel. Subsequent 

convictions can carry greater penalties including a mandatory five day jail sentence (maximum is still one year in jail), 120 

hours of public service, a fine of up to $1,500, and a one year restriction on operating a vessel. 

As the boating laws and regulations will vary from state to state, it is very important to educate yourself on the local boating 

laws in your area and all areas where you plan on operating your boat, or other water vessel. In all cases, it is better to be safe 

than sorry, and anyone operating a boat should take great caution to avoid any alcohol or drugs that might affect their ability 

to operate their vessel, for their safety and the safety of others. However, if you or someone you know, has been charged with

 a boating under the influence ticket, obtain legal representation as quickly as possible to protect your rights. 

Ok, so you’ve been issued a ticket in Colorado for Driving Under the Influence (“DUI”) or Driving While Ability Impaired (“DWAI”).  Take a deep breath; it’s not the end of the world.  In fact, there may be a way to beat your case entirely.

For example, the police must have had a valid reason to stop you or contact you in the first place.  If they did not, the DUI case is going nowhere.  Police are not allowed to just stop any car driving down the road.  They must have a legitimate reason to pull you over or to contact you.

It is also possible to get the chemical test thrown out of court.  Then the prosecutor is left with no test results to use against you and a big hole in his evidence.  Breathalyzers have a strict set of operation rules, and the operator of the Breathalyzer may invalidate the test by not following the rules.  In addition, the Breathalyzer must be properly maintained and operating correctly. 

The procedures for blood testing also must be followed to obtain a legal test.  You will always want to retest the second blood sample as well.  Sometimes the retest result comes in under the legal limit or varies so much from the original test that the original test is deemed invalid.

Jurisdiction is a fancy word that means the geographic area a certain police officer is allowed to patrol and conduct police activities.  You will want to double check that the officer who gave you a ticket had jurisdiction to do so.  If not, you can beat your DUI.

Even in our high tech world of advanced communications, there are still certain hearings where police officers need to be physically present to give their testimony.  And in some cases, no cop equals no DUI.  Yeah, it’s a strange technicality, but this strategy may be appropriate for your case.

Now, how do you exploit these strategies?  Hire a good, local DUI attorney.  You are looking for someone who knows everything there is to know about these cases.  You also want to hire someone who practices exclusively in the geographical area where you got your ticket.  A local attorney knows the judges, prosecutors, juries, and, most importantly, the little tricks specific to that city to get you the best result possible. 

Do not hire someone who is making promises or guarantees, as tempting as it may be.  That person is just trying to get your money by telling you what you want to hear when he or she has no way of knowing what will happen to your case without first looking at all the police reports, scouring the chemical test reports, negotiating with the prosecutor, etc.

Finally, if you cannot afford an attorney, apply for representation at the public defender’s office.  Do not try to represent yourself, or you will have a fool for a client.

You may have heard the term "Lautenberg" before, or even known someone who was "Lautenberged". This is the term commonly used when a soldier is discharged from the military based on the effects of the Lautenberg Amendment as it pertains to domestic violence misdemeanors and the possession of a firearm. What is the Lautenberg Amendment? How does it effect military personnel, and regular citizen's rights to possess a firearm under the Second Amendment?  

In September of 1996, an amendement to the Gun Control Act of of 1968 (GCA) was passed establishing a comprehensive Federal ban on the possession of firearms by person convicted of a misdemeanor act of domestic violence₁. This amendment to the GCA, commonly referred to as the "Lautenberg Amendment" (Lautenberg), prohibits persons convicted of misdemeanor or felony crimes of domestic violence from shipping, transporting, possessing or receiving firearms or ammunition.Lautenberg also prohibits knowingly selling or providing a firearm to a person who is known to have a domestic violence conviction.

Prior to the passage of Lautenberg, there was a public service exemption that included "any firearm or ammunition imported for, sold or shipped to, or issued for the use of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision therof." This public interest exemption loophole has also been closed by Lautenberg, and now applies to all persons that have been convicted of domestic violence charges including Federal and State law enforcement officers, and military personnel.₂

 In Colorado, domestic violence means, "An act of or threatened act of violence upon a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship. 'Domestic violence' also includes any other crime against a person or against property or any municipal ordinance violation against a person or against property, when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved with in an intimate relationship."₃

Under Colorado law, "Domestic violence" covers a wide range of criminal activity, including any crime used for coercion, control, punishment, intimidation or revenge of a current or past initmate partner. It is important to note that domestic violence only refers to intimate relationships, it does not cover parent and child, or sibling relationships. An "intimate relationship" in Colorado is described as, "a relationship between spouses, former spouses, past or present unmarried couples, or persons who are both the parents of the same child regardless of whether the persons have been married or have lived together at any time."₄ This means that domestic violence is not only between spouses, but can be against a girlfriend/boyfriend or even against an ex. It also includes homosexual partnerships.

Every day  members of the military are charged with acts of domestic violence. These acts range from acts of violence such as shoving, kicking or hitting, which is often charged as harassment or third degree assault where there are no weapons or serious bodily injury. It also includes computer or phone harassment, violation of restraining orders, menacing, or even criminal mischief (damaging property).

If you are charged with domestic violence, it is not uncommon to be offered a plea bargain on your first appearance in Court. If you are in the military, you must be aware that any sort of plea agreement to a domestic violence charge can have a devastating impact on your military career and your future. If you are not in the military, you must be aware that a plea of guilty in a domestic violence case can keep you from ever owning a firearm again under Lautenberg.

In January of 2004, Fort Carson (Colorado) released an information paper on the implementation of the Lautenberg Amendment . It can be found in it's entirety here. The paper provides instruction on how to handle military personnel convicted of domestic violence under Lautenberg. It states in part:

2. SUMMARY:  The Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act makes it unlawful for any person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony crime of domestic violence to ship, transport, possess or receive firearms or ammunition.  The amendment also makes it a crime for any soldier, including armorers and commanders, to issue a firearm to anyone they know, or have reason to believe, has a conviction for domestic violence.  The M-60 machine gun and squad automatic weapons are considered individual weapons for the purpose of this law.  However, the Lautenberg Amendment does not affect crew served weapons such as tanks, missiles and aircraft. 

3. DEFINITIONS: 

   a. Effected soldiers: Those soldiers known to have, or whose commanders have reason to believe have, a “qualifying conviction” for a misdemeanor or felony crime of domestic violence.   

   b. Qualifying conviction:  A person has a qualifying conviction if: 

      (1)  The person was convicted, in state or federal court or any general or special court-martial, of a misdemeanor or felony crime and the offense has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon;
       (2)  The convicted offender was, at the time of the offense, a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, or a person with whom the victim shared a child, or a person who was living with the victim as a spouse, parent or guardian, or a person with whom the victim cohabited in an intimate relationship;
         (3)  The prosecution has not been deferred or the conviction has not been expunged or set aside, or the convicted offender has not been pardoned for the offense.   
      (4)  Colorado law authorizes deferred sentences for persons who plead guilty to committing an act of domestic violence.  Participation in this “Diversion Program,” administered by the El Paso County District Attorney’s Office, requires a guilty plea and constitutes a qualifying conviction for purposes of the Lautenberg Amendment.  The qualifying conviction exists for the duration of the Program, and upon successful completion the guilty plea is withdrawn and the charge is dismissed.  Once the charges are dismissed there is no longer a “qualifying conviction” for purposes of the Lautenberg Amendment.   

   c. What does not qualify: 
       (1) Summary Court-Martial convictions, non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ, and deferred prosecutions from certain other states are not qualifying convictions.  
       (2) Pending charges of domestic violence are not qualifying convictions.   
         (3) A Case Review Committee (CRC) determination that allegations of abuse are substantiated does not mean that a soldier has a qualifying conviction.  Commanders determine whether a qualifying conviction is the factual basis for substantiated abuse.₅  

As you can see, soldiers that have a qualifying domestic violence conviction can no longer possess a firearm or ammunition under Lautenberg. Even a deferred sentence or a Diversion program can trigger Lautenberg. The Information Paper states that once the deferred sentence or the diversion program is complete and the case is dismissed, that the charges are no longer a "qualifying conviction" for Lautenberg purposes. However, all military personnel should be mindful of the possible consequences to their career upon entering a deferred sentence or other program that can often last several years and could also lead to a discharge. It is strongly advisable to consult the Legal Assistance/JAG or a private attorney regarding the specific situation.

Remember that Lautenberg amendment applies to civilians as well. If you plead to any felony or even a misdemeanor domestic violence offense you will be prohibited under Federal law from possessing a firearm. What's more, is the ban is retroactive, meaning, if you have ever had a domestic violence conviction in your past, even before the passage of Lautenberg,  you are prohibited from possessing, trading, shipping, receiving or transporting a firearm or ammunition. 

If you have been charged with a domestic violence offense in Colorado speak to an attorney immediately before you make any decisions that can greatly effect your future, your career and your rights under the Second Amendment. 

1. See 18 U.S.C. §922.

2. See 18 U.S.C. §925(a)(1).

3. See C.R.S. §18-6-800.3(1)

4. C.R.S. §18-6-800.3(2)

5. Information Paper, Guidance on HQDA message 16 October 2003 SUBJECT: Final Implementation of the Lautenberg Amendment. 

At Pikespeaklaw.com we get a lot of inquires about license suspensions and revocations, or for our English  fans, "driving bans". If you're British, be sure to check out one of my favorite sites, www.drivingban.co.uk/ . (it isn't really one of my favorites, it is actually rubbish).

 As so much of our website traffic inexplicably comes from England (and explicably so little of our business) I thought maybe we'd discuss some of our similarities with those across the pond, specifically our shared angst over losing our driver's licenses.

Just this week, I heard two songs by English artists that mention loss of driving privileges. If anyone knows of any other songs about losing your driver's license, feel free to leave the lyrics in the comments section. The following lines are from the Arctic Monkeys song, "When the Sun Goes Down"

And what a scummy man
Just give him half a chance
I bet he'll rob you if he can
Can see it in his eyes,
That he's got a driving ban
Amongst some other offences 

Link to video of the song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W_hEdt1Xes

Funny thing, I know exactly what he's talking about. As I have discussed in previous blog entries, there are many ways to lose your license, whether it be from points, a DUI, unpaid child support, or well, just go read 20 ways to lose your license . 

Another great song referencing loss of driving privileges is Lily Allen's classic, "LDN"

To wit;

Riding through the city on my bike all day
Cause the filth took away my licence
It doesn't get me down and I feel ok
Cause the sights that I'm seeing are priceless

At least she's upbeat about it.  Not all of of us have the ability to ride a bike, or walk to work or school, and desperately need to drive on a daily basis. 

First, pay attention to your the points on your license. Different age groups have different point allotments, so minor drivers need to be especially aware of their point totals. See here.

Second, if you get a letter from the DMV, open it. Then do what it says. In many cases you can have a hearing that may result in a shortened suspension, or even a red license. 

Third, suspensions just don't go away, you need to proactively reinstate your license or your ability to drive will continue to be suspended.

If you are like Lily Allen and can ride your bike all over town,  maybe you can go without a license for awhile, and get some exercise, fatty. Otherwise, feel free to look through this site for other helpful information for Colorado residents on reinstating your driving privileges. Or call us at (719) 227-0022, and we can get you going in the right direction.