In an 8-to-1 vote, the court ruled on a case from Missouri where a state trooper drove a suspected drunk driver to a local hospital and ordered the man’s blood be drawn to check the blood alcohol level. The man had been driving erratically and when stopped by the officer, had refused to take a Breathalyzer test.

The court ruled against the state of Missouri, who had argued that a warrant shouldn’t be required since the more the time passes, the less alcohol will remain in the bloodstream. However, the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects the right of people against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

The Supreme Court did not agree with the state’s argument and said, in most cases, the risk that blood alcohol levels could fade over time was not more important that the need for officers to obtain a warrant to give blood tests in the state.

“In such circumstance, there would be no plausible justification for an exception to the warrant requirement,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She noted that one officer can secure a warrant while the officer’s partner drives the motorist to a hospital or other facility perform the blood test.

To read more about the case, look at the Supreme Court decision.

If you are facing any type of criminal charges, it is imperative to speak with an experienced Virginia criminal defense attorney. Call for your free, immediate consultation.

The new law, that the Governor signed last month, raises the fines from $20 to $125 for the first offense and a $250 fine for a second offense. It also makes the action a primary offense instead of a secondary offense, which means officers can pull you over if they observe you texting, reading a text or checking email.

Drivers can still use a handheld cell phone for activities such as making calls or utilizing the GPS features when driving.

The new law was introduced by the governor and was his second attempt to increase fines for handheld cell phone use.

Critics have pointed out that while it is a step in the right direction, it may not have the desired effect because drivers are still allowed to use their hands to make phone calls and get directions via GPS. They argue the new measures may be difficult to enforce because someone who is accused of it may argue they were doing something not covered by the measure.

Currently, 40 states have passed texting bans and 10 have passed handheld mobile cell use bans for drivers. The state measure is slated to take effect July 1.

If you are facing any criminal driving offenses in Virginia, it is important to discuss your situation with a Virginia criminal lawyer. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

A recent article in The News & Advance discusses the challenges with some aging criminal codes in Virginia by discussing a recent case involving a 21-year-old who was convicted of child pornography charges because he had a nude photo of his 17-year-old girlfriend, whom he had dated for two years. According to the current law, those who engage in sexting violate many child pornography laws including production and distribution of child pornography, possession of child pornography as well as solicitation, which are felonies and can carry strict prison terms.

There have been previous attempts to amend the current laws so young adults in those situations who participate in sexting are not facing the same charges as child predators, but lawmakers caution you have to be careful so to not make it easier to violate the laws for those they are originally intended.

If you are facing criminal charges, it is imperative to speak with an experienced Virginia criminal defense attorney and do what you can to protect your freedom. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

McDonnell promised to not change the aim of the legislation, which makes using any mobile phone a primary offense in Virginia. This means an officer can pull over and cite a driver who is breaking no other laws at the time, but who is texting, surfing, emailing or using other applications. Without the measure, texting while driving is a secondary offense, which means a driver must first be pulled over for committing another offense and then can be cited for using a handheld mobile device.

The amendment would amend the texting while driving fines to be more in line with common fines for driving under the influence of alcohol as well as reckless driving. The bill that passed did require a minimum fine of $250 for a first offense and a $500 fine for a second or subsequent offense. McDonnell amended those fines by half. This year’s legislature reconvenes April 3 to consider McDonnell’s proposed amendments and vetoes.

If you are facing any type of criminal charges, it is imperative to speak with an experienced, qualified Virginia criminal defense attorney. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

The House measure, which had passed the Senate earlier this month, passed  with a 82-56 vote Friday. The governor has tried to repeal the death penalty before and has argued that the death penalty is both expensive and does not work well. He helped reintroduce the legislation in January and has said he will sign the bill into law.

Assuming the governor signs the bill, Maryland will become the 18th state to abolish the death penalty and the sixth to do so since 2007. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, prior to 2007, no legislature had abolished the death penalty since the 60s. Maryland will join Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico and New York in banning capital punishment.

Maryland had reinstated the death penalty in the mid 70s and since then only five sentences were carried out. The last execution in Maryland occurred in 2005 and the change would not affect the five people awaiting death currently on death row in the state.

Currently a defendant cannot receive a death sentence for a felony where he/she was not responsible for the murder. One person has been freed from death row after being proved innocent and two clemencies were granted. The death penalty is not a sentencing option in Washington D.C., but remains an option in Virginia where 110 people have been executed since the death penalty was reenacted.

If you are facing charges in any type of criminal case, it is in your best interest to obtain a reliable and experienced criminal defense attorney. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

On one hand, proponents argue that taking DNA samples is more or less the fingerprinting of the 21st century, but on the other hand, opponents argue gathering such information without a warrant is a violation of a person’s Fourth Amendment right and should not be allowed.

According to several news outlets, Justice Samuel Alito referred to this case as the “most important criminal procedure case that this court has heard in decades.”

The case Maryland v. King was brought before the court after Alonzo Jay King Jr. was arrested in Maryland in 2009 on assault charges and was eventually tried and convicted in a 2003 rape case after his DNA was matched.

In April, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the state law authorizing collection from people arrested, but not convicted violated the person’s Fourth Amendment right.

According to the National Institute of Justice‘s web site, the federal government along with 28 states (as of June 2012) have enacted arrestee DNA collection laws authorizing collection of DNA following an arrest or charging of a person. Louisiana passed the first such law in 1997 and four more states did the same before Congress passed the DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 requiring any adult arrested for a federal crime provide a DNA sample. Since that time, 23 additional states followed suit.

Thirteen of those states collect samples from anyone arrested of a felony, while the rest only collect from those arrested for violent crimes such as sexual assault. In seven states, DNA can be collected in certain misdemeanor cases as well.

In Virginia, there must be a judicial determination of probable cause, warrant or formal indictment or arraignment before a sample may be collected a there must be a state-initiated expungement of the sample.

Oftentimes the samples of certain convicted offenders must be uploaded to a national federal database along with a state database.

The case is expected to be decided by June.

If you are facing criminal charges, it is imperative to obtain an experienced criminal defense attorney. Call our office today for your free, initial consultation.

Currently, drivers may not be pulled over only for texting while driving. They could be penalized if they were pulled over for another offense and a first offense only carries a $20 fine for a first offense and a $50 fine for a subsequent offense.

With the new legislation officers would be allowed to pull a driver over who was seen texting while driving, even if they were not committing another offense. Fines would also be increased to $250 for a first offense and $500 for a subsequent offense. Additionally, anyone found guilty of texting while driving in addition to reckless driving will automatically face a minimum fine of $500.

These were not the first attempts at passing legislation to ban texting while driving in Virginia. All past attempts to pass new measures have previously failed in this and past legislative sessions.

Now the House will consider Senate Bill 1222 and the Senate will consider House Bill 1907.

According to the National Safety Ad Council, a texting driver is 23 times more likely to get into a crash than a non-texting driver and an estimated one million people chat and text while driving daily. The average text takes a driver’s eyes off the road for nearly five seconds. When driving at 55 mph, a driver will drive the length of a football field.

If you are facing any criminal charges for reckless driving, driving under the influence or any type of driving offenses, it is important to discuss your case with an experienced Virginia criminal defense attorney. Call today for your free, confidential consultation.

The Virginia House Bill 2012 passed Monday by a vote of 83-16 and the Virginia General Assembly passed a bill Tuesday by a vote of 36-2.

Charlottesville, Va., adopted their resolution with a 3-2 vote Monday. The resolution calls on the United States to adopt legislation formally prohibiting information gathered by the use of domestic drones from being used in either Federal or State court. In addition, the city pledges to abstain from doing the same thing with any drones in their possession.

Although this was a step closer for privacy advocates to keeping their privacy, it was a watered-down version of the original resolution introduced that would have banned all Charlottesville municipal agencies from buying, leasing, borrowing or testing drones.

The state’s measure requires no state or local law enforcement agency shall utilize an unmanned aircraft system before July 1, 2015.

The bill allows for use of drones in cases where there is a “major disaster” or Amber Alert, allowing a search and rescue operation to use police drones when it is necessary to protect life, health or property.

The state’s passed measures are also pared down from earlier drafts requiring law enforcement to obtain government permission to purchase a drone and a warrant to operate the unmanned aerial vehicles.

Gov. Bob McDonnell has yet to decide if he will sign the bill into law.

If you are facing criminal charges in Virginia it is important to discuss your situation with an experienced Virginia criminal defense attorney. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

Judge Lawrence F. Clark Jr. ruled that breathlyzer machines used by law enforcement to measure the intoxication level of drivers cannot be accurate beyond a blood-alcohol reading of 0.15 percent.

In Pennsylvania, that means breathlyzers alone cannot be used to prosecute drivers under the highest level of DUI penalties. That decision may affect tens of cases and may have judges reevaluting hundreds or thousands more.

The breathlyzer in question is the popular Intoxilyzer 5000EN, which the judge referred to as extremely questionable.

According to reports, testimony in the case showed the judge the machines, due to state regulations, are not properly calibrated and therefore not reliable to give accurate blood-alcohol readings on any level.

The case stems from a Dauphin County DUI case of a Elizabethtown man. The man was charged with a DUI after a crash three years ago in Londonderry Township.

If the decision is upheld in state courts, a majority of DUI cases from recent years may come into question.

If you are facing criminal charges, it is crucial to obtain a criminal defense attorney to help you defend your freedom. Call today for your free, initial consultation.

The bill would have restored voting rights to many of the more than 350,000 felons who have served their time, but are unable to vote. Governor Bob McDonnell has already restored the rights for more than 4,000 felons.

Under Virginia law, proposed amendments to the Constitution must pass the state legislature twice before passing a statewide referendum before the amendment can be put into effect.

Members of the Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee of the Privileges and Elections Committee voted 6-1 to indefinitely pass by the bill, not allowing it to reach the floor of the House.

Virginia’s laws are considered one the harshest in the country in regards to regaining voting rights, which includes an unofficial 60-day deadline for processing requests.

If you are seeking to restore your civil rights after serving time for a crime, contact our Virginia criminal defense attorneys to discuss your options.