On the Fourth of July every year we honor the Patriots past and present who gained us our freedom and who have fought to preserve it ever since. Parades, concerts, fireworks and celebrations occur all over New Hampshire and everywhere else in America to celebrate our independence from a foreign oppressor in 1776. The freedom won by those patriots is being obliterated every year though, by an ever increasing number of police DWI roadblocks all over New Hampshire. Thousands of New Hampshire citizens and visitors will be stopped and hassled in police roadblocks this weekend. The government's own records reveal that about 99% of the citizens who are seized and subjected to unwanted dealings with the police in these roadblocks have done nothing wrong at all. They simply drove on a New Hampshire road on a holiday weekend that the police selected for a federally funded DWI blockade. The police call these "DWI Crackdowns" among other law enforcement nicknames.
As the 2009 Fourth of July Weekend begins, it is more likely than ever that you will be stopped at a DWI roadblock in New Hampshire. That is because your individual right to be left alone if you are doing nothing wrong is being sand-blasted away for the sake of police convenience. The police receive federal grants to block roads. The police mantra goes that it is easier for the police to catch drunk drivers and "send a strong message about DWI" by erecting these blockades. If that were really so though, wouldn't the number of DWI arrests and DWI induced accidents go down if the number of drivers on our roads remained constant?
Is the high price that we all pay in terms of our civil liberties worth what we get in return from DWI roadblocks? If DWI roadblocks actually were effective, the number of DWI arrests and DWI caused accidents and fatalities would go down every year. They don't. In New Hampshire the number of alcohol related fatalities and accidents has remained constant, despite a rise in the number of police roadblocks from 7 roadblocks in 2005 to 44 roadblocks in 2008. There were 1, 127 drivers seized in 2005 DWI roadblocks that netted only 10 DWI arrests. In 2008 there were 8,649 drivers seized in 44 New Hampshire DWI roadblocks and only 52 drivers were even arrested for DWI in those roadblocks.
Does any one see an alarming trend here? Wake-ee, wake-ee!
In 2005 there were 4,903 DWI arrests made in New Hampshire, state-wide. There were 7 DWI roadblocks in New Hampshire that year. In 2007, there were 41 DWI roadblocks, roughly 6 times the number of DWI roadblocks as in 2005. Surely with a 600% increase in the frequency of this allegedly effective law enforcement tool the number of DWI arrests must have skyrocketed, wouldn't you think?
Shockingly, the actual number of DWI arrests was exactly the same statewide in 2007 as in 2005: 4,903. It is statistically improbable that these two numbers would come out exactly the same in two different years, much like hitting your same daily number on two different nights, but these are the state's own numbers. It is appalling that a 600% increase in the number of DWI roadblocks in a 3 year span did not generate one single additional DWI arrest in 2007 versus 2005 across the entire state of New Hampshire, year after road blocking year.
When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence in 1776, and when John Adams and Benjamin Franklin edited it, and when the first congress approved it, can it seriously be argued that this is what they had in mind?
Happy Fourth of July, and be prepared for police blockades in your travels this weekend.
Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
Legal Advertising
Friday, July 3, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The Constitution Still Applies to Children: Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding
In the past week the United States Supreme Court has decided a number of important cases. Two of them have received the most attention. One was Ricci v. DiStefano, decided June 29, 2009 which is noteworthy because it both a) involved a complex reverse discrimination issue and b) overruled a decision of Supreme Court nominee Judge Sotomayor. The other was Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, decided June 25, 2009, which was a landmark interpretation of the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause as applied to the certificates of analysis used by prosecutors in drug and DWI cases.
Another important opinion was issued on June 25th in the case of Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, also known as the "middle school strip search case". The facts of the Safford case were outrageous: a 13 year old middle school girl was brought from her classroom to the assistant principal's office. She was interrogated there by a male assistant principal. The assistant principal and his administrative assistant searched the girl's backpack and found no contraband. The girl continuously denied having any contraband.
The two school employees accused her of distributing pills in the school and confronted her with 5 pills (one of which was an over the counter ibuprofen pill). The young girl denied any knowledge of the pills. The assistant principal then ordered that the girl be brought to the school nurse's office to be searched for pills.
Once inside the nurse's office, the school nurse and the administrative assistant ordered the girl to remove her outer clothing and they searched it, finding nothing. The school officials then ordered the girl to pull her bra out and shake it as they watched, which exposed the girl's breasts, but again exposed no pills. The school officials then ordered the 13 year old to pull out the elastic on her panties which exposed her pelvic area to the school's henchmen. This too revealed nothing. After this humiliating series of searches was concluded, the school officials did not bring the girl back to her classroom. They did not call her mother. Instead they left her sitting on a bench outside the assistant prinicpal's office for two hours after the strip search had concluded.
In Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, the Supreme Court ruled that this outrageous strip search violated the Fourth Amendment. In a major victory for the privacy rights of all citizens, but particularly some of the most vulnerable to privacy intrusions, this opinion establishes, at least, that the government cannot extend the battlefield in its "War on Drugs" to a 13 year old's underwear.
Mark Stevens
Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
Another important opinion was issued on June 25th in the case of Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, also known as the "middle school strip search case". The facts of the Safford case were outrageous: a 13 year old middle school girl was brought from her classroom to the assistant principal's office. She was interrogated there by a male assistant principal. The assistant principal and his administrative assistant searched the girl's backpack and found no contraband. The girl continuously denied having any contraband.
The two school employees accused her of distributing pills in the school and confronted her with 5 pills (one of which was an over the counter ibuprofen pill). The young girl denied any knowledge of the pills. The assistant principal then ordered that the girl be brought to the school nurse's office to be searched for pills.
Once inside the nurse's office, the school nurse and the administrative assistant ordered the girl to remove her outer clothing and they searched it, finding nothing. The school officials then ordered the girl to pull her bra out and shake it as they watched, which exposed the girl's breasts, but again exposed no pills. The school officials then ordered the 13 year old to pull out the elastic on her panties which exposed her pelvic area to the school's henchmen. This too revealed nothing. After this humiliating series of searches was concluded, the school officials did not bring the girl back to her classroom. They did not call her mother. Instead they left her sitting on a bench outside the assistant prinicpal's office for two hours after the strip search had concluded.
In Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding, the Supreme Court ruled that this outrageous strip search violated the Fourth Amendment. In a major victory for the privacy rights of all citizens, but particularly some of the most vulnerable to privacy intrusions, this opinion establishes, at least, that the government cannot extend the battlefield in its "War on Drugs" to a 13 year old's underwear.
Mark Stevens
Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
Friday, June 5, 2009
The Right to An Independent Breath Test Preserved by the New Hampshire Senate Judiciary Committee 5-0
On May 11, 2009 I wrote an article in this blog titled Did You Know that the New Hampshire State Legislature is in the Process of Taking a Right Away From You? The article concerned a bill sponsored by the department of safety that would have squashed the right of New Hampshire citizens to independent breath testing in DWI cases. At that time House Bill 363, which would annihilate an important right in New Hampshire and which costs the state nothing had quietly passed the House of Representatives.
It is important to note again that the cost of obtaining the independent analysis is borne ENTIRELY BY THE DRIVER! Yes, that's right, these independent tests don't cost the state one red cent. So why would the state want to strip the accused driver of the best chance to challenge the state's evidence? There may be some reasons for it, but none of them are good ones.
The state recently announced that it had purchased a new $500,000.00 Bat-Mobile to roll out at DWI roadblocks. It is more likely this year than ever that you will stopped for no reason at all in a DWI roadblock, a numbers-driven event, frequently marked by very marginal cases resulting in arrests to justify the grant money needed to run more roadblocks. So the state bought a half-million dollar shiny new truck, and wanted to annihilate one of the few remaining challenges that an accused has when he or she decides to blow into a breath gadget, when that challenge is paid for entirely by the citizen. Sound fair?
NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS: Despite the state's efforts in convincing the house of representatives to pass HB 363 in order to stomp out this important right for no reason other than easier prosecutions for the state, the Senate Judiciary Committee has wisely killed this bill by voting 5-0 that the bill was inexpedient to legislate.
So for now, this right to prove the state's drunk-in-the -box isn't infallible survives. It is important to remain vigilant and keep an eye on bills the legislature is considering.
Mark Stevens
Have a safe night,
Mark Stevens
New Hampshire Lawyer Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
It is important to note again that the cost of obtaining the independent analysis is borne ENTIRELY BY THE DRIVER! Yes, that's right, these independent tests don't cost the state one red cent. So why would the state want to strip the accused driver of the best chance to challenge the state's evidence? There may be some reasons for it, but none of them are good ones.
The state recently announced that it had purchased a new $500,000.00 Bat-Mobile to roll out at DWI roadblocks. It is more likely this year than ever that you will stopped for no reason at all in a DWI roadblock, a numbers-driven event, frequently marked by very marginal cases resulting in arrests to justify the grant money needed to run more roadblocks. So the state bought a half-million dollar shiny new truck, and wanted to annihilate one of the few remaining challenges that an accused has when he or she decides to blow into a breath gadget, when that challenge is paid for entirely by the citizen. Sound fair?
NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS: Despite the state's efforts in convincing the house of representatives to pass HB 363 in order to stomp out this important right for no reason other than easier prosecutions for the state, the Senate Judiciary Committee has wisely killed this bill by voting 5-0 that the bill was inexpedient to legislate.
So for now, this right to prove the state's drunk-in-the -box isn't infallible survives. It is important to remain vigilant and keep an eye on bills the legislature is considering.
Mark Stevens
Have a safe night,
Mark Stevens
New Hampshire Lawyer Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Today's Article in the Eagle Tribune Regarding ByeByeDWI.com
Hello everyone.
In today's Eagle Tribune there is an article regarding my effort to advertise ByeByeDWI.com on police cruisers. I have attached a link to that article below. Thank you all for the many thoughtful emails I have received on this topic.
http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_154043208.html
Have a great day!
Mark Stevens
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
Legal Advertising
In today's Eagle Tribune there is an article regarding my effort to advertise ByeByeDWI.com on police cruisers. I have attached a link to that article below. Thank you all for the many thoughtful emails I have received on this topic.
http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_154043208.html
Have a great day!
Mark Stevens
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
Legal Advertising
Friday, May 22, 2009
Trying to Avoid Unwanted Contact with Police this Weekend by Mark Stevens 603-893-0074
Hello everyone.
Your chances of having an unwanted encounter with the police this Memorial Day weekend are higher than ever before. That is because the government has issued massive money for roadblocks and saturation patrols. The problem with that strategy is that roadblocks do not usually lead to many real DWI arrests. Typically, the police have to stop about 100 cars to hope to find one person who they even SUSPECT of DWI. What they end up citing though are lots of other motor vehicle arrests, people with warrants and the like so they can report "SIX ARRESTED AT DWI CHECKPOINT", etc. If you peel back the onion you will find that only one or two were DWI arrests, and the rest were a flotsam and jetsam of sundry motor vehicle code offenses or benign inspection violations. Some points that might be helpful to bear in mind if you drive at night over this weekend are:
1. Make Sure Your Inspection Stickers and Registrations Are Valid. An important reminder if you are driving this weekend is to make sure that your car has a valid inspection sticker, as well as a valid registration. When you drive into a roadblock, or even drive by the police this weekend without a valid inspection sticker you can count on being stopped and hassled. Like all the motor vehicle code, the police often co-opt this to see if you have been drinking or have drugs in your car. The penalty for a violation of this section of the motor vehicle code is $60, but the real penalty is when the police smell alcohol or suspect that you have been drinking after stopping you for the lack of an inspection sticker. Many drivers who are initially stopped for this minor violation end up charged with DWI, DUI or OUI. AVOID one potential for this by making sure your inspection stickers are up to date.
2. Make Sure Your Plate Lights and Other Lights Work. Everyone driving at night should check their brake lights, plate lights, and other lighting, as well as their inspection stickers and license plates, to avoid some unwanted interaction with police. The cheesiest of motor vehicle stops begin with a passive equipment violation such as those I've just mentioned. In these types of stops, the driver is not exhibiting any signs of impairment. The driver may be obeying the speed limit, maintaining appropriate lane control, and otherwise following every rule of the road, but he finds himself in the flashing blue glow of police lighting wondering why he was stopped.
This high number of stops for equipment violations in recent years is not because the police have taken a sudden interest in the functioning of plate lights, or their concern for whether drivers are using turn signals late at night when there is no one else on the road to signal. Rather, the police have a broader goal: the police have co-opted the motor vehicle code to fight the war on drugs, and many DWI arrests ensue after these stops when the police can't find any drugs after the stop.
Avoid giving the police some of these chances to legally stop you by making sure that all your lights are functioning, your registration and inspection stickers are up to date, and your license is valid.
PREPARATION FOR THIS WORST CASE SCENARIO. It is not a bad idea to prepare for this event. Have your license and registration in an easy place to find and an easy place to quickly and effortlessly produce upon demand. Don't put your license in a difficult spot to pull it out quickly when you need to. Practice taking your license out of your wallet in the safety of your home. CONSIDER GETTING A REGISTRATION HOLDER TO KEEP YOUR VEHICLE REGISTRATION IN. If you do not have one send me an email with your mailing address and I will send you a registration holder for every one of your vehicles free of charge. Then practice producing your license and registration fairly frequently. It will make it easier to do if you ever have to produce them under a pressurized roadside situation.
Have a safe weekend,
Mark Stevens
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
Legal Advertising
Your chances of having an unwanted encounter with the police this Memorial Day weekend are higher than ever before. That is because the government has issued massive money for roadblocks and saturation patrols. The problem with that strategy is that roadblocks do not usually lead to many real DWI arrests. Typically, the police have to stop about 100 cars to hope to find one person who they even SUSPECT of DWI. What they end up citing though are lots of other motor vehicle arrests, people with warrants and the like so they can report "SIX ARRESTED AT DWI CHECKPOINT", etc. If you peel back the onion you will find that only one or two were DWI arrests, and the rest were a flotsam and jetsam of sundry motor vehicle code offenses or benign inspection violations. Some points that might be helpful to bear in mind if you drive at night over this weekend are:
1. Make Sure Your Inspection Stickers and Registrations Are Valid. An important reminder if you are driving this weekend is to make sure that your car has a valid inspection sticker, as well as a valid registration. When you drive into a roadblock, or even drive by the police this weekend without a valid inspection sticker you can count on being stopped and hassled. Like all the motor vehicle code, the police often co-opt this to see if you have been drinking or have drugs in your car. The penalty for a violation of this section of the motor vehicle code is $60, but the real penalty is when the police smell alcohol or suspect that you have been drinking after stopping you for the lack of an inspection sticker. Many drivers who are initially stopped for this minor violation end up charged with DWI, DUI or OUI. AVOID one potential for this by making sure your inspection stickers are up to date.
2. Make Sure Your Plate Lights and Other Lights Work. Everyone driving at night should check their brake lights, plate lights, and other lighting, as well as their inspection stickers and license plates, to avoid some unwanted interaction with police. The cheesiest of motor vehicle stops begin with a passive equipment violation such as those I've just mentioned. In these types of stops, the driver is not exhibiting any signs of impairment. The driver may be obeying the speed limit, maintaining appropriate lane control, and otherwise following every rule of the road, but he finds himself in the flashing blue glow of police lighting wondering why he was stopped.
This high number of stops for equipment violations in recent years is not because the police have taken a sudden interest in the functioning of plate lights, or their concern for whether drivers are using turn signals late at night when there is no one else on the road to signal. Rather, the police have a broader goal: the police have co-opted the motor vehicle code to fight the war on drugs, and many DWI arrests ensue after these stops when the police can't find any drugs after the stop.
Avoid giving the police some of these chances to legally stop you by making sure that all your lights are functioning, your registration and inspection stickers are up to date, and your license is valid.
PREPARATION FOR THIS WORST CASE SCENARIO. It is not a bad idea to prepare for this event. Have your license and registration in an easy place to find and an easy place to quickly and effortlessly produce upon demand. Don't put your license in a difficult spot to pull it out quickly when you need to. Practice taking your license out of your wallet in the safety of your home. CONSIDER GETTING A REGISTRATION HOLDER TO KEEP YOUR VEHICLE REGISTRATION IN. If you do not have one send me an email with your mailing address and I will send you a registration holder for every one of your vehicles free of charge. Then practice producing your license and registration fairly frequently. It will make it easier to do if you ever have to produce them under a pressurized roadside situation.
Have a safe weekend,
Mark Stevens
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
Legal Advertising
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
New Hampshire DWI Defense Lawyer Mark Stevens' Radio Appearance on Ridin Dirty Radio Today KLAA AM 830 in LA at 2:15 PM EST
I am going to be a guest today on Ken Sharp's Ridin Dirty Radio Show at 2:15 pm EST. In LA you can listen in at KLAA AM 830, or from New Hampshire and anywhere else it will be live streaming at:
http://www.ridindirtyradio.com
Have a great day!
Mark
Mark Stevens
New Hampshire Lawyer Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
http://www.ridindirtyradio.com
Have a great day!
Mark
Mark Stevens
New Hampshire Lawyer Mark Stevens
LAW OFFICES OF MARK STEVENS
5 Manor Parkway
Salem, NH 03079
Tel 603-893-0074
http://www.ByeByeDWI.com
http://www.ByeByeOUI.com
http://www.ByeByeDUI.com
http://www.twitter.com/byebyedwi
http://www.byebyedwi.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
