Case Results

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.

MAY, 2025

DUI/OVI Charge Reduced in First Offense.  Our client was stopped for speeding.  The officer reportedly observed signs of alcohol intoxication and had our client do field sobriety tests.  The officer arrested our client, and our client took a breath test.  The test result was .106, so our client was charged with two types of first-offense OVI, as well as the speeding violation.

We pled Not Guilty and reviewed the evidence.  The evidence showed the officer did not observe signs of alcohol intoxication until after ordering our client to get out of the vehicle.  We filed a motion to suppress evidence.  In the motion, we argued the officer did not have legal justification to order our client out of the vehicle, which is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.  After the motion was filed, the prosecution dismissed the charge of Speed, dismissed one charge of OVI, and amended the other charge of OVI to a non-moving violation.  Our client’s sentence was a fine only.

Records Sealed for Sexual Imposition Case.  Our client was originally charged with Sexual Imposition.  We represented him for that charge, and it was dismissed.  We then filed an application to have the case records sealed.  The judge held a hearing and ordered that the case records be sealed.

Medical Defense Results in Favorable Outcome for DUI/OVI.  A police officer stopped our client for driving left of center on a curvy road.  The officer observed signs of intoxication and had our client perform sobriety tests.  After the tests, the officer called an ambulance because our client appeared to be having a problem with blood sugar levels.  The medics confirmed our client’s blood sugar was very high, so they transported our client to the hospital.  Our client submitted a urine sample, and the result was over the ‘high test’ limit.  Our client was charged with OVI and Left of Center.

We entered a plea of Not Guilty and explored our client’s medical defense.  We obtained medical records from the hospital which confirmed our client’s blood sugar level was very high.  We obtained articles indicating the symptoms of high blood sugar are very similar to the symptoms of alcohol intoxication.  We presented the medical defense to the prosecutor.  The prosecutor dismissed the charge of Left of Center and reduced the charge of OVI to a lesser offense.

Second-Offense DUI/OVI Reduced.  Our client was stopped for a Marked Lanes violation, and the officer smelled alcohol, so the officer had our client get out of the vehicle.  The officer administered the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test, and our client declined to perform the other standardized field sobriety tests.  The officer arrested our client, and our client refused to submit to a breath test.  Our client had a prior OVI conviction within the past ten years.  Our client was charged with OVI ‘impaired’, OVI ‘test refusal with prior conviction’, and Marked Lanes.  Our client was facing 20 days to 180 days in jail, vehicle immobilization, a license suspension for up to seven years, yellow license plates, and an ignition interlock device.

We contested the case and reviewed the discovery materials from the prosecution.  The cruiser video showed the Marked Lanes violation was minimal.  The body camera video showed the officer administered the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test incorrectly.  We filed a motion to suppress evidence, arguing the test was inadmissible and the officer did not have probable cause to make the arrest.  On the day of the motion hearing, the prosecution dismissed the charges of Marked Lanes and OVI ‘test refusal with prior conviction’ and stipulated the OVI ‘impaired was a first offense.  Our client did not receive a jail term,  vehicle immobilization, yellow license plates, or an ignition interlock device, and the license suspension was only one year.

APRIL, 2025

Felony Records Sealed Over Prosecution Objection.  Our client was convicted of Obstructing Justice, a third-degree felony.  After the applicable waiting period expired, we filed an application to seal the case records.  The prosecution objected to the record sealing, and the judge held a contested hearing.

At the hearing, we demonstrated our client took significant steps toward rehabilitation.  The prosecution argued the government had a legitimate interest in maintaining the records to deter future criminal conduct.  We countered that our client had not engaged in any other criminal conduct since the incident or before the incident, so maintaining the records was not necessary for specific deterrence.  We also showed our client’s interest in sealing the records, for future career advancement, outweighed any governmental interests.  The judge agreed and ordered that the case records be sealed.

DUI/OVI Amended and License Suspension Terminated.  Our client was stopped by a police officer for a red light violation.  The officer observed signs of alcohol intoxication and had our client do field sobriety tests.  The officer arrested our client, and our client refused a breath test.  Our client refused a breath test in a previous case, so the Administrative License Suspension in this case was two years.  Our client was charged with a red light violation and OVI ‘impaired’.

We pled Not Guilty and obtained the evidence from the prosecution.  The evidence showed our client admitted to drinking alcohol and said a breath test may be over the limit.  However, our client performed pretty well on the field sobriety tests and did not appear to be obviously intoxicated.  The two-year Administrative License Suspension was terminated and the red light violation was dismissed.  The charge of OVI was amended to a non-moving violation with no driver’s license suspension.

DUI/OVI with Accident Reduced.  Our client slid into a ditch and called for a two truck.  The tow truck driver called the police.  An officer responded and noticed our client had bloodshot/glassy eyes, slurred speech, and an odor of an alcoholic beverage.  The officer had our client perform sobriety tests and a breath test.  The breath test result was .130.  Our client was charged with Failure to Control, OVI ‘impaired’, and OVI ‘per se’.

We contested the case and reviewed the evidence.  We discovered the breath test was likely inadmissible, so the prosecution could not prove the charge of OVI ‘per se’.  On the charge of OVI ‘impaired’, it was debatable whether the prosecution could prove our client’s guilt.  The prosecution ultimately dismissed the Failure to Control, dismissed the OVI ‘per se’, and amended the OVI ‘impaired’ to a no-points traffic offense.

High Test DUI/OVI Resolved Favorably. Our client was involved in a two-car accident.  Our client was extricated from the vehicle and taken to an ambulance.  In the ambulance, an officer noticed the odor of alcohol, and our client admitted having a little too much to drink.  The officer administered field sobriety tests and arrested our client.  Our client took a breath test in a mobile breath-testing unit, and the result was .236.  Our client was charged with Failure to Control, OVI ‘impaired’, and OVI ‘per se’.  As the result of the breath test was over .170, it was considered a ‘high test’, so our client was facing at least six days in jail and mandatory use of restricted (yellow) license plates.

We entered a plea of Not Guilty and reviewed the discovery materials.  That review showed the officer did not administer Miranda warnings, so our client’s statements were likely not admissible.  It also showed the justification for detaining and arresting our client was questionable.  We filed a motion to suppress evidence.  On the day of the motion hearing, the prosecution dismissed the charges of Failure to Control and OVI ‘per se’ (high test), and our client pled guilty to the charge of OVI ‘impaired’.  Our client avoided a jail term and the restricted (yellow) license plates.

MARCH, 2025

Shoplifting Case Dismissed.  Our client was apprehended by a security officer at a department store.  The security officer claimed our client failed to scan items at the self-scan checkout.  Our client was with another person during the checkout process.  Our client was charged with Theft (shoplifting).

We pled Not Guilty and obtained the security video from the store.  The video showed the other person with our client failed to scan items at the self-scan checkout, but our client scanned all the items in his possession.  The prosecution could not prove our client knew the other items were not scanned.  The prosecution dismissed the case entirely.

DUI/OVI Dismissed.  A police officer stopped our client for a Marked Lanes violation.  The officer observed the odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and slurred speech.  The officer had our client perform sobriety tests.  After the tests, the officer arrested our client, and our client refused a breath test.  The officer charged our client with Marked Lanes and OVI ‘Impaired’. 

We contested the case and obtained discovery from the prosecution.  The discovery included the officer’s body-worn camera video.  The video showed our client did not appear to be under the influence.  We demanded a jury trial.  The prosecution ultimately dismissed the OVI, and our client pled guilty to the Marked Lanes charge. 

Underage Client’s High-Test DUI/OVI Reduced.  Our client was stopped by a police officer for making a u-turn and driving without headlights.  The officer observed signs of intoxication and administered field sobriety tests.  The officer also seized alcohol containers from our client’s car.  Our client took a breath test, and the result was .214.  Our client was under 21, so our client was charged with High-Test OVI and Underage Alcohol Possession.  Our client was facing a jail term of at least six days, a license suspension of one year to three years, yellow license plates, and an ignition interlock device.

We entered a plea of Not Guilty and reviewed the evidence.  We also filed a motion to suppress evidence, challenging the field sobriety tests and the arrest justification.  The prosecution dismissed the charge of Underage Alcohol Possession and reduced the charge of High-Test OVI to a charge of Operating a Vehicle after Under Age Consumption.  No jail term was imposed, and the license suspension was 90 days.

Domestic Violence Charge Reduced.  Our client’s daughter reported to a school teacher that our client hit her.  The daughter’s mother reported the accusation to law enforcement, and it was forwarded to Child Protective Services.  Our client was investigated and charged with Domestic Violence. We investigated the case.  Our investigation revealed our client was in the process of a contested divorce with the daughter’s mother, and the daughter had incentive to falsify the allegation.  We also learned the school teacher, a mandated reporter of domestic violence suspicions, did not report the incident.  The prosecution reduced the charge of Domestic Violence to a charge of Disorderly Conduct.  Our client pled guilty to that reduced charge and paid a $150 fine.

FEBRUARY, 2025

Assault Case Dismissed.  A flight attendant alleged that our client assaulted her on a flight from Houston to Columbus.  When the flight landed in Columbus, our client was interrogated by a police officer.  Our client was then charged with Assault.

We appeared in court with our client.  The prosecution realized they could not prove the element of venue:  that the alleged offense occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.  As a result, the case was completely dismissed.

Commercial Driver’s CDL Saved in DUI / OVI case.  A police officer received a dispatch that our client was parked in the roadway.  An officer went to the scene and talked with our client.  The officer observed the odor of alcohol, and our client admitted having about eight drinks.  After administering field sobriety tests, the officer took our client to a police station.  Our client took a breath test, and the result was .127.  Our client was charged with OVI.  Our client had a commercial driver’s license (CDL), so an OVI conviction would result in a one-year disqualification of the CDL.

We contested the case.  After reviewing the evidence, it was clear the prosecution may not be able to prove our client ‘operated’ the vehicle while ‘under the influence’ or ‘over the limit’.  The prosecution amended the charge of OVI to a non-moving violation with no license suspension, so our client’s CDL was not disqualified.

Expungement Granted for Felonies.  Our client was convicted of two felony offenses:  Obstructing Justice and Receiving Stolen Property.  We filed an application to seal the records for the case.  The judge was initially reluctant to grant the application because a Probation report indicated our client did not pay restitution in full.  We showed the judge a judgment entry specifically stating restitution was paid in full.  The judge then granted the application and issued an entry ordering that the case records be expunged.

Reduction in Charge of Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle.  Our client was stopped for driving recklessly, and the officer observed signs of alcohol intoxication.  Our client denied drinking and refused all tests.  The officer arrested our client and found a loaded handgun.  Our client was indicted for a felony Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle.

We entered a Not Guilty plea and reviewed the prosecutor’s evidence.  Our evaluation of the case was the prosecution would have difficulty proving our client was under the influence of alcohol.  On the day the case was set for a jury trial, the prosecution reduced the felony to a misdemeanor.  Our client was ordered to serve two days in jail and was given credit for the two days already served.

JANUARY, 2025

Second-Offense DUI/OVI with High Test and Accident Reduced.  Our client crashed into a house, and police responded to the scene.  The officers noticed the odor of alcohol, and our client acknowledged drinking beer.  The officers administered field sobriety tests and observed clues on the tests.  Our client took a breath test, and the result was .184.  Our client was charged with a high-test OVI, and our client had a prior OVI conviction within ten years, so our client was facing at least 20 days in jail, a license suspension up to seven years, vehicle immobilization, yellow license plates, and an ignition interlock device.

We entered a Not Guilty plea and requested discovery from the prosecution.  The discovery showed our client did not have noticeable problems with mental processing or physical coordination.  The records for the breath-testing machine showed the machine was not properly purging ambient alcohol, so the breath test was likely inadmissible.  The prosecution reduced the second-offense high-test OVI to a charge of Physical Control.  Our client’s sentence included no jail term, a one-year license suspension, and no vehicle immobilization, yellow license plates, or ignition interlock.

Felony Charge of Improperly Handling Firearms Reduced.  Our client was stopped for speeding on the freeway.  The officer smelled alcohol and had our client perform field sobriety tests.  The officer arrested our client, and our client submitted to a breath alcohol test.  The result was .143.  The officer found a loaded handgun in our client’s car, so our client was charged with Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle.  That charge is a fifth-degree felony.

We contested the case.  After several court appearances, the prosecution reduced the charge to a misdemeanor, and the judge imposed a sentence of three days in jail, which our client served in a three-day driver intervention program.  Our client will be eligible to have the case records expunged in one year.

Expungement Granted.  Our client was convicted of a felony Passing Bad Checks offense and wanted to have the case records expunged because the conviction was affecting his ability to obtain better employment.  We filed an application to have the records expunged.  At the hearing, we articulated our client’s interest in expunging the records and explained how he had been satisfactorily rehabilitated.  The judge granted the expungement, so our client can now pursue career opportunities which were previously not available.