2022-Recent Case Results (January-June)
DISCLAIMER: These are actual results from the Dominy Law Firm's DUI / OVI cases and criminal cases in Columbus, Ohio and the central Ohio area. However, the results achieved in past criminal defense cases and drunk driving defense cases is not necessarily indicative of the results which may be achieved in your case because the facts of every case are unique.
DUI/OVI Reduced to Reckless Operation. Our client was stopped for a speeding violation (47 mph in a 35 mph zone). The officer talked with our client and believed our client may be under the influence of alcohol. The officer administered two sobriety tests, and our client declined to perform one sobriety test because the ground was so uneven. The officer arrested our client, and our client declined to take a breath test. The officer charged our client with Speed and OVI and also imposed a one-year administrative license suspension for refusing the breath test.
We contested the case. The investigation showed that, while our client was driving, there was no evidence of impaired driving. According to the officer’s training, speeding is not evidence a driver may be under the influence . Our client performed reasonably well on the sobriety tests and did not appear to be obviously intoxicated. Rather than have a trial, the prosecution dismissed the charge of Speed and reduced the charge of OVI to a charge of Reckless Operation. The one-year administrative license suspension was replaced with a six-month suspension.
Driving Under Suspension Case Dismissed. We do not typically represent clients for traffic tickets other than DUI/OVI, but we agreed to represent this client for a case of Driving Under Suspension. The case was a few years old and had never been resolved, so there was a warrant for our client’s arrest and a block on our client’s driver license. The warrant was lifted, and the case was scheduled for a hearing. Our client had moved out of Ohio, so we arranged to have the hearing held in our client’s absence. At the hearing, the case was completely dismissed.
DUI/OVI Case Dismissed. An officer pulled-over our client for going left of center and ultimately charged our client with Left of Center and OVI. We appeared for the client’s arraignment and discovered the officer did not file the traffic ticket. The entire case was dismissed, and the ticket was never filed. The dismissal did not involve brilliant legal work, but it shows what can happen when the case is contested.
DUI/OVI Resolved With Lesser Offense and No License Suspension. Our client was stopped for multiple marked lanes violations. The officer observed the odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy/dilated eyes, and slurred speech, as well as delayed responses to questions. The officer asked our client to submit to field sobriety tests, and our client refused. Our client also refused a breath test and was subjected to a one-year Administrative License Suspension , in addition to the charges of OVI and Marked Lanes.
We entered a plea of Not Guilty and obtained discovery from the prosecution. After reviewing the discovery, we concluded the prosecution’s ability to prove OVI was questionable. On the other hand, the Administrative License Suspension was sound and would remain in place even after a Not Guilty verdict. The prosecution dismissed the charge of Marked Lanes, amended the charge of OVI to a no-points violation, and agreed to terminate the one-year Administrative License Suspension.
Criminal Damaging Case Dismissed. A motorist aggressively accelerated toward our client and his dog in a crosswalk. Our client reacted by smacking the hood of the car. The motorist contacted the police and claimed our client kicked his car door. The police filed a complaint charging our client with Criminal Damaging.
We pled Not Guilty and requested a jury trial. Before the trial, the prosecution offered to dismiss the case if our client agreed to pay the cost of repairing the driver’s door. Although we believed the trial would result in a Not Guilty verdict, our client’s cost-benefit analysis suggested our client should accept the offer. Our client paid restitution, and the case was dismissed. We then helped our client get the case records sealed .
Favorable Outcome in Child Endangering DUI/OVI. Our client was stopped for speeding and not having a license plate light. The officer believed our client may be under the influence, so the officer had our client perform sobriety tests. The officer arrested our client for OVI, and our client declined to take a breath test. There was a child in the vehicle, so the officer charged our client with Child Endangering and OVI, as well as the speeding and license plate light violations.
We entered a Not Guilty plea and investigated the case. The investigation showed the license plate light was out, but the speeding allegation was based on the officer’s estimate. The investigation also showed our client spoke well, had good mental cognition, and had good balance and coordination. The prosecution amended the OVI to a non-moving violation and dismissed all the other charges.
Commercial Driver License Saved in DUI/OVI Case. An officer saw our client make a right turn without signaling. The officer approached our client and observed the strong odor of alcohol, as well as slurred speech. The officer administered field sobriety tests, and our client’s performance was fair. Our client refused a breath test. There were two children in our client’s vehicle, so the officer charged our client with OVI, Child Endangering, and a turn signal violation. Our client was also subjected to an Administrative License Suspension (A.L.S.). Both the A.L.S. and the OVI conviction will trigger a one-year disqualification of a commercial driver license .
We contested the case and obtained discovery from the prosecution. The discovery showed the officer jumped to the conclusion of OVI within 30 seconds of the stop. It also showed one of the field sobriety tests was inadmissible, and our client did not generally appear to be intoxicated. The prosecution amended the OVI to Physical Control and stipulated to termination of the A.L.S., so our client did not receive a CDL disqualification.
Bus Driver’s DUI/OVI Reduced. Police investigated our client following a one-car accident. The officers noticed the odor of alcohol and bloodshot/glassy eyes, so the officers had our client perform field sobriety tests. The officers arrested our client, and our client provided a urine sample. The urine test showed an alcohol level above the ‘high test’ limit. Our client was charged with OVI and Failure to Control.
We entered a plea of Not Guilty.& As we investigated the case, our client engaged in alcohol counseling. The admissibility of the urine test was questionable, and the effects of the accident provided a defense. The prosecution dismissed the charge of Failure to Control and reduced the charge of OVI to a no-points offense.
DUI/OVI with Urine Test Reduced. Our client was stopped for speeding and weaving. The officer used the cruiser’s microphone to get our client to pull-over. The officer observed signs of intoxication scored many ‘clues’ when our client performed field sobriety tests. The officer arrested our client, and our client submitted a urine sample. The urine test result showed an alcohol concentration of .209.
We contested the case and obtained discovery. The discovery materials showed some signs of intoxication may have been due to exhaustion, and others may have been due to a language barrier. The forensic technician who performed the urine test was unavailable for the hearing on our motion to suppress the urine test. The prosecution then amended the OVI charge to a no-points traffic offense.
Reduction in DUI/OVI with Accident. Our client was involved in a one-car accident. An officer encountered our client and observed slurred speech and the odor of alcohol. The officer also observed that our client had difficulty sitting up in the ambulance. The ambulance took our client to a hospital. The officer charged our client with Failure to Control and OVI.
We pled Not Guilty and investigated the case. The investigation showed the officer did not administer any field sobriety tests, did not administer a breath test, and did not collect a sample of blood or urine for forensic testing. We determined the prosecution’s case was not strong, and we were willing to have a trial. Rather than having a trial, the prosecution dismissed the charge of Failure to Control and reduced the charge of OVI to a lesser offense with no license suspension.
Felony DUI/OVI Reduced to Misdemeanor. Our client collided with a motorcycle, and witnesses claimed our client was drunk. Officers responded to the scene and investigated. The officers determined our client was under the influence and arrested our client. Our client had three prior OVI convictions in the last ten years, so our client was charged with Felony OVI. Our client’s vehicle was impounded and was subject to forfeiture.
We appeared in court, obtained the release of our client’s vehicle, and pled Not Guilty. We investigated the case and found it to be relatively strong for the prosecution. We verified that our client paid for the damage to the motorcycle, and our client took steps toward rehabilitation. Rather than litigating the case, the prosecution agreed to reduce the felony OVI to a misdemeanor OVI with the condition that our client participate in a court rehabilitation program. Our client’s vehicle was not forfeited or immobilized.
DUI/OVI ‘Impaired’ Amended to Non-Moving Violation. Our client was stopped for speeding: 71 mph in a 55 mph zone. The officer approached our client’s vehicle and smelled the odor of alcohol. The officer also observed that our client’s speech was slurred and eyes were bloodshot and glassy. Our client reportedly performed very poorly on field sobriety tests. Our client was arrested and refused a breath test. Our client was charged with Speed and OVI ‘Impaired’ and was also subjected to a one-year Administrative License Suspension for refusing the breath test.
We attended the arraignment, got our client’s license returned, and entered a plea of Not Guilty. We reviewed the evidence and prepared defenses to the charge of OVI ‘Impaired’. At a later court appearance, the prosecution dismissed the charge of Speed and amended the charge of OVI ‘Impaired’ to a non-moving violation. The prosecution also agreed to replace the one-year license suspension with a six-month suspension.
Breath Test OVI Reduced. An officer was dispatched on the report that our client and a friend were causing trouble at a store. The officer stopped our client for failing to signal a lane change. The officer observed signs of intoxication and administered field sobriety tests. Our client took a breath test , and the result was .112. Our client was charged with OVI ‘Impaired’, OVI ‘Per Se’, and a turn signal violation.
We contested the case and obtained discovery. The discovery showed that our client’s lane change was necessary to avoid parked cars. The discovery also showed the detention for field sobriety testing was questionable, and our client did not look obviously intoxicated on the videos. The prosecution dismissed the turn signal violation, dismissed one charge of OVI, and reduced the other charge of OVI to Reckless Operation.
Reduction in Case of OVI and Obstructing Official Business. A caller reported that our client was involved in an altercation in his home and drove away from his home under the influence. As our client was driving into his driveway, a police officer motioned for him to stop. Our client continued into the garage and got out of the car. Officers tackled our client, and our client reportedly resisted. The officers charged our client with OVI and a felony charge of Obstructing Official Business.
We plead Not Guilty to all charges. We obtained body camera videos from the prosecution, and the videos were helpful to our defense. The videos showed our client likely did not see the officer motioning for him to stop. The videos also showed our client did not really resist after being tackled. Our client plead guilty to the charge of OVI, and the prosecution amended the felony charge of Obstructing Official Business to a misdemeanor charge of Disorderly Conduct.
DUI/OVI Reduced to Reckless Operation. A police officer stopped our client for failing to use a turn signal. The officer observed the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the vehicle. The officer saw that our client’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy, and our client acknowledged drinking alcohol. The officer administered field sobriety tests and arrested our client. Our client refused a breath test and received a one-year Administrative License Suspension . Our client was charged with a turn signal violation and OVI.
We contested the case and reviewed the discovery materials from the prosecution. The body camera videos showed there was a real question about whether the officer was authorized to detain our client for field sobriety testing. The videos also showed that our client performed well on the tests. Ultimately, the turn signal violation was dismissed, the OVI was reduced to Reckless Operation, and the one-year license suspension was reduced to six months.
DUI/OVI and Improperly Handling Firearms Reduced. Our client was asleep in the median of a freeway with the car in gear and a foot on the brake. Officers woke our client and observed the odor of alcohol. The officers also observed our client had glassy/bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and urine on his pants. The officers conducted field sobriety tests and arrested our client. Our client had a loaded firearm in the vehicle. Our client refused a breath test. Our client was charged with OVI and a felony charge of Improperly Handling Firearms .
We plead Not Guilty to both charges and investigated the case. We were able to show that our client had a concealed carry permit from another state. We also raised the issue of the prosecution’s ability to prove operation of the vehicle at the time of being under the influence. The prosecution reduced the OVI charge to a no-points violation and reduced the felony charge of Improperly Handling Firearms to a misdemeanor.
High Blood Test OVI Reduced. Our client was involved in a motorcycle accident, and an officer went to the accident scene. The officer smelled the odor of alcohol, saw bloodshot/glassy eyes, and heard slurred speech. The officer did not administer sobriety tests, as our client was taken to the hospital. A blood test at the hospital showed a blood alcohol concentration of .371. Our client was charged with OVI and Failure to Control.
We contested the case. We determined that, without the blood test result, the prosecutor’s case would be weak. We filed a motion to suppress the blood test. The prosecution did not have the necessary expert witness for the blood test. The prosecution dismissed the Failure to Control and amended the OVI to a non-moving violation.
Old DUI/OVI Dismissed. Our client was pulled over for a Marked Lanes violation. The officer noted the usual signs of intoxication and conducted field sobriety tests. The officer placed our client under arrest, and our client refused the breath test. Our client failed to appear in court, and an arrest warrant was issued.& Five years later, our client hired us. We arranged to have the warrant set aside and have the case reopened. Based on witness problems, the prosecution completely dismissed the case.
Child Endangering DUI/OVI Dismissed. Our client was stopped for a muffler violation, and the officer saw that our client had glassy/bloodshot eyes. The officer also saw a bottle of liquor on the floor of the car, and our client acknowledged recently consuming alcohol. The officer had our client perform field sobriety tests, and our client did pretty well on the tests. Our client took a breath test, and the result was .061 (below the prohibited concentration). Our client had children in the car, so our client was charged with Child Endangering, OVI, a seatbelt violation, and a muffler violation.
We contested the case. The evidence for the OVI charge was not strong, and the Child Endangering charge was based on our client operating a vehicle under the influence with children in the car. Our client completed a parenting education class. The prosecutor then dismissed the OVI, Child Endangering and Seatbelt Violations, and our client pled guilty to the muffler violation.
DUI/OVI Drugs Charge Reduced. Our client was involved in a one-car accident. Officers reported to the scene and observed evidence consistent with drug intoxication. The officers administered sobriety tests and arrested our client. The officers searched our client’s vehicle and found drug paraphernalia. Our client refused a chemical test.& Our client was charged with OVI and Failure to Control.
We pled Not Guilty and investigated the case. We obtained medical records showing our client had a condition which would impair performance on field sobriety tests. We also found evidence there was a passenger in the car who fled the scene, and it appeared the drug paraphernalia belonged to the passenger& Rather than take the case to trial, the prosecution dismissed the charge of Failure to Control and amended the charge of OVI to a no-points offense.
Reduction in Second-Offense OVI with Accident. Our client crashed and ended-up stuck on top of a rock. The property owner called the police. The police observed signs of intoxication, so they had our client perform field sobriety tests. The police arrested our client, and our client submitted a urine sample. The urine test results showed the presence of amphetamines and an alcohol level of .199. Our client was charged with OVI as a second offense within ten years.
We pled Not Guilty and looked into the case. Our investigation and research suggested the urine alcohol test may not be admissible. We were also prepared to demonstrate the amphetamine result was due to our client’s prescribed Adderall, which was taken as prescribed. We did not need to demonstrate that in court, as the prosecutor stipulated the OVI was a first offense, and our client pled guilty to that stipulated offense.
Dismissal in Underage Case with Fake ID. Our client was a 20-year old college student who purchased alcohol at a convenience store. When our client left the store, he was arrested. The arresting officers charged our client with Underage Alcohol Possession and False Identification.
We went to court, sought diversion, and simultaneously prepared to contest the charges, in case our client was not accepted into a diversion program. Our client was granted the diversion program, on the condition that our client complete additional community service. Our client completed the community service and an alcohol education program. The case was dismissed, and our client never had to appear in court.
Third-Offense OVI Reduced to Non-Moving Violation. Our client was driving home and drove into a field beside the freeway. The accident was reported to the police, and officers responded to the scene. The officers observed the odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and glassy/bloodshot eyes. The officers administered field sobriety tests and arrested our client. Our client refused to consent to a breath test. Our client had two prior convictions for OVI within the last ten years, so our client was facing a minimum of 60 days in jail, vehicle forfeiture, and a license suspension for up to 12 years.
We contested the case, reviewed the evidence, and filed a motion to suppress evidence. Following a hearing on our motion, the judge suppressed the field sobriety tests. Without the tests as evidence, the prosecutor’s case was weak. Accordingly the prosecutor amended the third-offense OVI to the non-moving violation of Physical Control. The sentence included no jail time, a one-year license suspension, and no vehicle forfeiture or immobilization.
Underage Alcohol Possession Case Dismissed. Our client was visiting a friend on the campus of The Ohio State University. Our client, under the age of 12, purchased a bottle of champagne. Soon after that, our client was confronted by Liquor Control agents. The agents arrested our client and confiscated our client’s fake identification. Our client was not charged for the fake i.d. but was charged for Underage Alcohol Possession .
We took a two-part approach to the case. We requested that our client be screened for a diversion program, and we also requested the evidence from the prosecutor’s office. Our client was accepted, and the program was successfully completed, so our client’s case was dismissed. Our client will be eligible to have the case records sealed in one year.