Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers callers’ questions during a 30 minute radio interview with the Legal Forum. Recorded in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County North Carolina.
Most people have heard of ignition interlock devices before. People are vaguely familiar with the idea that a device is attached to your car that you must first blow into before the ignition will turn over. Beyond this bit of information, most people are in the dark about the specifics for how and when ignition interlock devices are used. To find out more about ignition interlock devices and how they work in North Carolina, keep reading.
Charlotte DWI and Criminal Defense Attorney J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can the police search my car without a warrant?”
The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently issued a long-awaited opinion concerning the constitutionality of the state’s implied consent law. The Appeals Court affirmed the law, holding that a warrantless breath test qualifies as a valid search so long as it is connected to a lawful arrest.
Charlotte DWI and Criminal Defense Attorney J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “What am I obligated to do if I’ve been pulled for Drinking and Driving?”
Long before Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown, and long before New York City police restrained an alleged untaxed-cigarette seller named Eric Garner, killing him and sparking a wave of protests nationwide, a Texas campus police officer shot and killed a 23-year-old college student outside his campus apartment after pulling him over for suspected drunken driving in circumstances that had some calling for a murder charge against the officer.
Charlotte DWI and Criminal Defense Attorney J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Are breath test results always accurate?”
New, portable breath-testing machines sold by Breathometer, Inc. and other companies are making waves in the public marketplace, particularly among college-aged and twenty-something adults. Users of the device in North Carolina should beware: it will probably not help you if you are pulled over for drunk driving.
What is it?
In plain terms, the Breathometer and the newer “Breeze” products are portable, handheld devices that people can use to test their own breath-alcohol content. Entrepreneur Charles Michael Yim founded Breathometer, Inc. in 2012 in order “to build the world’s first portable breath analysis platform to help people make smarter decisions, improve healthcare and save lives.”
The original Breathometer machine plugged directly into the audio jack of a smartphone. The latest “Breeze” product works in a similar fashion, using “a next-generation electrochemical fuel cell sensor[.]” It is an “FDA registered, law-enforcement grade product,” according to Breathometer, Inc.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Should I talk to the police?”
Americans are well informed of the facts—and the rhetoric—surrounding the high-profile police killings of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and Eric Garner in New York City this past summer. Most are just as familiar with killing of two New York City police officers last weekend by a man who said the point-blank shootings were retribution for Garner’s killing.
The man—Ismaaiyl Brinsley—allegedly posted on the website Instagram some three hours before fatally shooting officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos that he was “Putting Wings on Pigs Today.” The term “pig” is an insulting form of slang that refers to a law-enforcement officer. One gives someone wings—a reference to angel’s wings—by murdering someone. Brinsely’s post, translated, meant he planned to kill some police officers.
Now police in Chicopee, Massachusetts are seeking a criminal complaint against a 27-year-old man who also allegedly used the phrase “put wings on pigs” in a post on his Facebook page. That man—Charles DiRosa—is not accused of killing anyone, but police view the comment as a threat, according to Chicopee Police Department spokesman Michael Wilk.
The complaint, filed by members of the detective bureau in Chicopee District Court, is described as a “show-cause” complaint. A report by the local CBS affiliate described the charge against DiRosa as a “Threat To Commit A Crime.” At the show-cause hearing, the District Court will decide whether the complaint is valid. If so, DiRosa will be entitled to have a trial to answer and defend against the charge.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
The move is on—in the wake of riots and protests over police shooting and choking deaths of two unarmed men in Ferguson, Missouri and New York City—to equip police officers nationwide with body cameras. Privacy advocates, police chiefs and at least one police union, however, are expressing concerns about the plan.
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the Obama Administration has proposed spending $75 million on 50,000 body cameras to be fitted upon law-enforcement officers across the United States.
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department is well ahead of the curve on body cameras. Earlier this year, CMPD Chief Rodney Monroe announced that all officers in Charlotte would be equipped with body cameras. (See related blog: “CMPD police body cameras may mean Ferguson never comes to Charlotte”).
This, Monroe said, would increase the trust the community has in police and, at the same time, would provide the State with crucial evidence regarding the circumstances of crimes and the conduct of responding officers.
The Post, citing NBC News, which in turn cited St. Louis hip-hop artist and activist Antoine White, said police body cameras might not be all they are cracked up to be. White, who met with President Barack Obama at the White House on Monday to discuss the recent events in Ferguson, told NBC News that “Giving a policeman a camera does not prevent him from shooting me in the head.”
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
Researchers in Stockholm, Sweden have published findings that appear to show a link between two genetic mutations and a propensity to commit violent criminal acts.
The researchers studied the DNA of 800 Finnish criminals and compared it with 2,000 non-incarcerated Finns who had given DNA samples for a previous study. The researchers found that the two genetic mutations rendered individuals 13-times more likely than the general population to commit a violent crimes. The study did not draw a causal link between the mutations and violent crime.
Researchers hope the information is valuable to “offenders who want to break their cycle of repetitive violence.”
The study’s lead author, Dr. Jari Tiihonen, said researchers found that offenders with one of the two mutations experienced marked spikes in dopamine whenever they consumed drugs or alcohol, which could have fueled criminal activity.
Tiihonen suggested, for instance, that in addition to traditional forms of criminal punishment, offenders with certain genetic mutations could be administered drugs while incarcerated that “make it impossible… to use alcohol anymore… given the medication’s ability to make drinking unpleasant and distasteful.”
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “What is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony?”
Like other criminal defense attorneys, I would almost never recommend that a defendant waive one’s right to a jury trial.
Until last week, defendants in North Carolina could not be convicted of a felony but upon unanimous verdict of a jury of one’s peers. Now that right has been diluted, and criminal defendants have a new right: the right to waive their rights.
For the second time in two years, voters in the Tar Heel State have amended North Carolina’s State Constitution. Earlier this year, a pair of federal court judges struck down a 2012 state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
This time around, voters in the Old North State narrowly passed a state constitutional amendment that will enable defendants in criminal superior matters to waive jury trials.
Article I, Section 24 of the Constitution of North Carolina will now read:
Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: What are the long term effects of being convicted of a crime?
Former Charlotte mayor Patrick Cannon found himself back in federal court in Charlotte last Thursday, where he faced the same federal district court judge who sentenced him to 44 months in prison last month.
Judge Frank Whitney told Cannon he embarrassed the city by accepting bribes in the mayor’s office and then embarrassed the city again by voting in this year’s elections.
Cannon cast his votes on October 30 at Community House Middle School, records show. In the State of North Carolina, persons convicted of felonies are ineligible to vote.
The United States Attorney argued that Cannon was a sophisticated voter and should have known that he had been stripped of his voting rights. The government asked that Cannon’s bond be revoked and that he be placed in custody immediately.
Judge Whitney agreed that Cannon had violated the terms of his bond but declined to place Cannon in immediate federal custody. Instead, Cannon will be fitted with an electronic monitoring device and will be confined under house arrest until he reports to a minimum security federal prison in West Virginia at the end of the year.
J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can I be arrested without evidence against me?”
Bill Stevenson became the latest North Carolina magistrate to resign his post in the wake of court rulings that paved the way for same-sex marriages to being in the Tar Heel State. The Gaston County magistrate—like at least six others in the state—cited religious objections to same-sex marriage as the reason for his resignation.
Magistrates, judges and clerks were warned by North Carolina’s Administrative Office of the Courts that if they refused to officiate same-sex weddings, they could be suspended, removed from office, or face criminal charges. Refusing to perform same-sex weddings, a memo warned, constituted a willful violation of a magistrate’s duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
The magistrates may be wondering exactly who is bound by the law, since the state’s highest law-enforcement official—Attorney General Roy Cooper—announced in July that he would not defend North Carolina’s State Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. At the time, Cooper correctly predicted that the Amendment would be overturned, but it is undisputed that he instructed justice department attorneys to ignore then-existing law when he ordered them to “stop making arguments we will lose, and instead move forward.”
Cooper was not alone. At least seven other state attorneys general refused to enforce bans on same-sex marriage. In each case, the attorneys declared that state laws or state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage either violated the Constitution or created ethical conflicts for lawyers asked to defend the bans.
Charlotte Criminal Lawyer Blog
