THE IMPORTANCE OF DOING THINGS RIGHT

THE IMPORTANCE OF DOING THINGS RIGHT

If you are charged with a DUI the most important things to be concerned about initially are trying to have the DUI amended or dismissed, avoiding jail, and keeping your license. Seldom does one think about what will occur after the case has been disposed of. This is understandable as the demands and stress of the person charged is overwhelming. However, you must not lose focus about the conditions imposed by the court after you have completed your case.

Once the case has been completed, hopefully favorably, you must ensure that the conditions imposed by the court, namely, an alcohol evaluation, the class and/or treatment, DUI Victim's Panel, and fines, etc. The danger if you do not complete any of the above in a timely manner is that you'll be called back to court to face an angry Judge - do not fall prey to that! Facing the Judge again may lead to jail, additional fines, or additional attorneys fees. Do things right to avoid this problem! This also is a reminder to complete such things as an alcohol evaluation, follow up, DUI Victim's Panel, before the end of the case - a good attorney will help you accomplish this.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

Brief History of the BAC DataMaster

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence."

Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

The BAC DataMaster is used in Washington State for breath tests

DataMaster

The DataMaster evolved from the BAC Verifier. The operation of both machines is very much the same although the casing of the machine, the printer, the layout of the printed circuit boards, the software, the mounting of the breath tube, the circuitry, and the simulator are different. The casing for the DataMaster are all metal which is supposed to eliminate certain radio frequency interference, while the casing for the Verifier is plastic.

Fundamentally there are several differences between the BAC Verifier and the DataMaster, including the printers, the circuit board layout and the chemistry. The Verifier had a central processing unit (CPU) board underneath the machine which caused some maintenance problems due to its location. The DataMaster design attempted to resolve this issue and included nine printed circuit boards which supposedly result in easier maintenance, removal, and replacement. Additionally, the manufacturer claims that the printed circuit boards are a superior electrical design because the different circuits are isolated. Because the original Verifier had problems with electrical interference within the circuitry of the CPU, the CPU board was changed in the DataMaster.

Also changed in the DataMaster design was the detector circuitry. The DataMaster has a variable resister while the Verifier had a fixed resistor. The variable resistor in the DataMaster was designed so that the resistance value can be adjusted thereby increasing the stability of the signal produced by the detector.

The most important change in the DataMaster however was the updated software. Software is constantly changing and being improved and advanced and the Verifier could not adapt to these changes. The Verifier had a limited RAM data storage capability while the DataMaster has expanded RAM data storage capacity and as such could accommodate additional software. The mathematical formula used to calculate the presence of acetone in breath samples was also changed in the new DataMaster software.

Yet another difference between the older Verifier and the DataMaster is that the DataMaster uses a different simulator. The Verifier uses the Smith & Wesson simulator, while the DataMaster uses a Guth simulator. The last notible change between the two machines is the breath tube mounting. In the DataMaster the breath tube can be adjusted when placed in the mounting pivots while on the Verifier the breath tube, once attached, is fixed in one position. Despite the changes between the Verificer and the DataMaster there are several reported problems with the DataMaster devices.

Most of these problems have originated in the State of Washington and have included repair and maintenance problems, problems with the meter valve (instability producing imprecise readings, or failing to produce readings), problems with zeroing, instability of infra-red lamps, improper display of interferents (generally ) acetone), problems with displaying results to three decimal points, and problems with lack of specificity for ethanol. Additionally, as is the case with computer-controlled machines (ie. the Intoximeter 3000, Intoxilyzer 5000, and the Verifier) the DataMaster is subject to “transient error.” Transient error occurs when the computer will not function properly for a period of time until it corrects itself.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

The History of NHTSA

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence."

Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is an agency of the Executive Branch of the United States Government and part of the Department of Transportation. According to the agency its mission is to “[s]ave lives, prevent injuries, reduce vehicle-related crashes.” www.nhtsa.dot.gov No other entity, save the government itself, has had a greater influence in the field of DUI in the United States than NHTSA.

NHTSA’s primary role within the government is to write and enforce safety, theft-resistance, and fuel economy standards for motor vehicles (under the banner of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) system). In addition to these roles NHTSA also licenses vehicle manufacturers and importers, allows or blocks the import of vehicles and safety-regulated vehicle parts, administers the VIN system, develops the anthropomorphic dummies used in safety testing, as well as the test protocols themselves, and provides vehicle insurance cost information.

Another of NHTSA’s significant activities is the creation and maintenance of the data files maintained by the National Center for Statistics and Analysis. In particular, the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) has become a resource for traffic safety research in the United States and other countries. NHTSA has a lot on its plate in addition to its role in vehicle safety and in particular DUI law.

In 1966 the United States Department of Transportation was born (on October 15, 1966). Around this time other government agencies were created which would eventually join to become NHTSA, including the National Traffic Safety Agency, the National Highway Safety Agency, and the National Highway Safety Bureau. NHTSA was officially established in 1970 by the Highway Safety Act of 1970. In 1972, the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act expanded NHTSA’s scope to include consumer information programs.

Presently NHTSA has an annual budget of US $815 Million (2007) and the agency classifies most of its spending under the “driver safety” heading, with a minority spent on “vehicle safety,” and a smaller amount on environmental matters of which it is in charge (i.e. vehicular fuel economy). NHTSA’s impact in the DUI field has been significant, and of particular note has been their role in DUI investigations and the standardization of FSTs.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

Mandatory Alcohol/Drug Evaluations

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence."

Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

Mandatory Alcohol/Drug Evaluations

Mandatory alcohol/drug evaluations and treatment of DUI offenders to address potential substance abuse problems has support in law enforcement, in the judiciary, and organizations such as MADD. The idea is that if the offender is evaluated, found in need of treatment, and thereafter is treated for substance abuse issues then the chance of repeating the crime of DUI is diminished. Wells-Parker, E., Bangert-Drowns, B., McMillen, R. & Williams, M. Final results from a meta-analysis of remedial interventions with DUI Offenders. Addiction. 90:907-926 (1995)

MADD also suggests that an evaluation and treatment are not enough to correct future problems with drinking and driving and are not a replacement for other sanctions. MADD states that “[t]reatment works best when coupled with sanctions like administrative license revocation or vehicle impoundment.” Id.; www.madd.org There are too many critics of this approach to mention in this book.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

Deferred Prosecution

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence."
Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

Deferred Prosecution

A unique approach to alcohol treatment is an optional (not mandatory) program afforded defendants in Washington State. In Washington State individuals charged with DUI are given an opportunity to utilize alcohol (or drug) treatment as a means to have their DUI dismissed. The program is called “deferred prosecution” and is unique to that State. Deferred prosecution permits those who are alcohol or drug dependent (or suffer from mental health issues) to enter into a two year treatment program in exchange for a complete dismissal of the charge (or charges) in five years, no jail, no fines, and no loss of license. Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 10.05

The Washington legislature has recognized that some people who are charged with criminal offenses are not necessarily criminal by nature but suffer from a problem that needs treatment. Jolly, David N. The DUI Handbook For The Accused. Outskirts Press. Pages 124-125 (2007) The legislature has recognized that the best way to keep an alcoholic (or drug addict) from driving drunk (or affected by drugs) is to get him or her to stop drinking or abusing drugs. Id. From this belief came the deferred prosecution statute. Id.

In order to qualify for deferred prosecution the defendant must obtain an evaluation from a state approved treatment agency. The treatment facility conducts a detailed assessment and if it concludes that the criminal conduct was the result of alcoholism, drug addiction or mental health problems and that the individual is amenable to treatment then the court will permit the petition (application) for deferred prosecution. Washington State only permits an individual to use this program once in a lifetime.

The program consists of a statutorily required two-year treatment program which is broken down to a demanding three phase schedule. The first phase is typically three or four nights a week (sometimes five nights a week depending on the provider) for the first three months (seventy -two hours of treatment in the first 90 days) or can involve an inpatient program. Phase two involves weekly treatment and counseling for six months. Phase three, the least rigorous of the three phases, requires counseling once a month for the balance of the two-year program. Additionally, two Alcoholics Anonymous or other self-help meetings per week are required for the full two years. Complete abstinence is required and the individual must be in total compliance or faces the risk of having the program revoked.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

Ignition Interlock Device

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence."

Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

Ignition Interlock Device

The ignition interlock device (IID, or breath alcohol ignition interlock device (BIID)) is gaining popularity in governmental circles, court systems, and advocates against the crime of driving under the influence. The device is a breath test type apparatus that is connected to the vehicle’s dashboard, or more correctly to its ignition mechanism. The instrument requires the driver to provide a breath sample before allowing the vehicle to start. If the breath sample renders a clean result (i.e. a blood alcohol concentration reading below the permitted amount (usually, 0.00, 0.02, or 0.04 per cent)) the vehicle’s engine will start. Alternatively, if the driver provides a breath sample that is over the required amount then the vehicle will not turn over and the failed attempt will be reported to the governing agency.

While the vehicle is in motion (or the engine is turned on) the IID will randomly require the driver to provide another breath sample. The time between required breath samples is dependant on the calibration of the unit, however typically random breath samples are required every 10 to 20 minutes while the vehicle is in operation.

The purpose behind the random breath sample is to prevent a driver from having a “sober” friend blow into the device starting the vehicle. If the requested breath sample is not provided or exceeds the required limit, the device will record the incident, warn the driver and then start up an alarm (e.g., lights flashing, horn honking, etc.) until the ignition is turned off, or a clean breath sample has been provided.

A common, but inaccurate belief is that interlock devices will turn off the vehicle’s engine if alcohol is detected. Due to the fact that this would then create an unsafe or dangerous driving situation that would expose interlock manufacturers to substantial liability, a vehicle’s engine does not turn off if a breath sample detects too much alcohol on a driver’s breath. It is physically impossible for an interlock device to turn off a running vehicle.

Most of the ignition interlock devices in use today use an ethanol specific fuel cell for a sensor. This type of sensor is an electrochemical device where alcohol undergoes a chemical oxidation reaction on a catalytic electrode surface, typically made of platinum, to generate an electric current. This current is then measured and converted to an alcohol equivalent reading. Fuel cell technology is not nearly as accurate or reliable as the infrared spectroscopy technology used in evidentiary breathalyzers. However, IIDs are obviously substantially cheaper and smaller and therefore more practical for more widespread use.

The devices keep a running record of the activity on the unit and this record, or log, is printed out or downloaded each time the device’s sensors are calibrated, commonly at 30, 60, or 90 day intervals. In the DUI realm these records are provided to the courts for probation review and to the Department of Licensing in some instances. If the court still has jurisdiction and a violation is detected the court may require the driver to re-appear and possibly face addition sanctions.

To support the advocacy of the installation of IIDs there is research that suggests that drivers who have interlocks installed have lower recidivism rates while the device is in use, but that recidivism rates rise after interlock removal. Voas, R.B.; Marques, P.R.; Tippetts, A.S.; and Beirness, D.J. Alberta Interlock Program: The evaluation of a province-wide program on DUI recidivism. Addict 94(12):1849- 1859 (1999); Tashima, H.N., and Helander, C.J. 1999 Annual Report of the California DUI Management Information System. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Motor Vehicles Research and Development Section. (1999) Further, there are even a few studies that have reported that recidivism was significantly reduced both during interlock installation and after removal. Weinrath, M. Ignition interlock program for drunk drivers: A multivariate test. Crime Delinquency 43(1):42-59 (1997); Beck, K.H.; Rauch, W.J.; Baker, E.A.; and Williams, A.F. Effects of ignition interlock license restrictions on drivers with multiple alcohol offenses: A randomized trial in Maryland. Am J Public Health 89(11):1696-1700 (1999)

There have been concerns that the installation of IID is in fact, dangerous. One study observed that “the risk of a subsequent crash was higher for drivers installing an IID by 84 percent.” DeYoung, D.J., Tashima, H.N., and Masten, S.V. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock in California. California Department of Motor Vehicles. Presentation at the 84th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C. Page 10 (January 11, 2005) This finding is not surprising considering the device demands drivers provide breath samples periodically while driving.

Other concerns are that false positives can occur in an IID. In one study a man who was attempting dramatic weight loss and who was on a very low calorie diet had his IID fail to start. International Journal of Obesity. 31 559-561. (August 8, 2006) The IID company Smart Start states that the following items can cause their device to fail: spicy foods, certain mouthwashes, some chocolate mints, Altoids, Dentyne and other gums, cinnamon rolls and donuts (the sugar and active yeast can combine to create a low level alcohol fail) and smoke (if blown directly into the unit). www.smartstartinc.com The debate regarding their value and their need shall continue.

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/

DUI Victim Panel-A brief History

From the recently published book, "DUI / DWI: The History of Driving Under the Influence." 
Available for purschase at: http://www.amazon.com/DUI-DWI-History-Driving-Influence/dp/1432746227/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258400052&sr=1-3

DUI Victim Panel

MADD has advocated for many years the mandatory attendance at a victim impact panel (VIP) for those charged with a DUI. A DUI VIP is an event in which the attendees listen to presentations made by relatives of victims or victims of DUI incidents and/or accidents. These victims or relatives relate their experiences to the attendees.

Most DUI VIPs charge for participation and some of the money collected from fees paid by participants eventually find its way back to MADD. In fact the organization collected $4,436,481 in 2006 from VIPs.

There have been mixed reviews over the years regarding the value of the DUI VIP. Some groups believe that they have tremendous preventative value while others believe that they are valuable to the recovery of victims. According to the John Howard Society, some studies have shown that allowing victims to give testimony is psychologically beneficial to them and aids in their recovery and in their positive opinion of the criminal justice system. Victim Impact Statements. John Howard Society of Alberta (1997) In the alternative, a New Mexico study suggested that DUI VIPs tended to be perceived as confrontational by multiple offenders. According to the study such offenders then had a higher incidence of future offenses. Woodall, W.G., Delaney, H., Rogers, E. & Wheeler, D.R. A Randomized Trial of Victim Impact Panels’ DWI Deterrence Effectiveness. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions (CASAA), University of New Mexico (2000) Overall the effects and overall value of victim impact panels on recidivism has been mixed. Shinar, D., and Compton, R.P. Victim impact panels: Their impact on DWI recidivism. Alcohol Drugs Driv 11(1):73-87, (1995); Fors, S.W., and Rojek, D.G. The effect of victim impact panels on DUI/DWI rearrest rates: A twelve-month follow-up. J Stud Alcohol 60(4):514-520 (1999); C’de Baca, J., Lapham, S.C., Paine, S., and Skipper, B.J. Victim impact panels: Who is sentenced to attend? Does attendance affect recidivism of first-time DWI offenders? Alcohol Clin Exp Res 24(9):1420-1426 (2000)

For information on your DUI, please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com/