News, updates, resources, stories, and help from an Ohio attorney through a Blog.
The 10th District agrees with the Defendant that the trial court completed several errors in its evidentiary rulings that prevented a fair trial.
Read MoreFifth District substitutes its decision on a suppression motion for that of the trial court, reasoning that the trial court substituted its decision for the police officer, thus eliminating review of the the police officer's actions.
Read MoreA traffic stop initiated for a marked lanes violation is without reasonable suspicion when video fails to show a tire crossing the line by more than a tire width.
Read MoreThe 9th District concludes that the State had probable cause to arrest for a marijuana OVI, despite the defendant passing the field sobriety tests and the officer smelling only raw marijuana.
Read MoreThe Fifth District upholds conviction when officer claimed the defendant went back and forth across a marked center line but video did not show the same, and when conviction required an alcohol content of 0.238 and defendant's alcohol content ranged between 0.21 and 0.27 based on the test and margin of error.
Read MoreThe 1st District relies on its legal theory of a "Shotgun Motion to Suppress," to reduce the state's burden to merely "general and slight" when showing substantial compliance with field sobriety tests.
Read MoreThe 8th District holds that it is still an OVI refusal when a person refuses a breath test but offers to take a urine test because, "it was not her option to decide which test would be administered."
Read MoreTestimony From Out-Of-Uniform Officer Admissible - DUI News - 6/9/2016
Read MoreFourth District confirms that, for an OVI based on a prescription medication, the State must show a nexus between the prescription and impairment through "(1) the testimony of an expert who is familiar with the potential side effects of the medication" or (2) the testimony of a layperson (such as a friend or family member) who witnesses the effect of the particular drug on the defendant-driver."
Read MoreThe 11th District holds that the OVI repeat offender specification is Constitutional and the only grounds to challenge prior convictions must be based on a lack of counsel, while the 12th District holds that the speedy trial clock for subsequent OVI charges based on chemical tests does not begin to run at the time of the original OVI charge.
Read MoreI am an attorney with Sivinski Law Offices, providing legal representation for labor and employment issues, criminal defense, DUI defense, and family law. I am admitted to practice in the State of Ohio, the United States District Court for the Northern and Southern Districts of Ohio, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
I am also a father ofthree lively children, a member of St. Peter's Catholic church in Huron, and we enjoy all opportunities to get outdoors to cycle, hike, fish, play catch with our redbone coonhound Duke, barbecue, and to explore my enjoyment of photography.
by Brian J. Smith, Esq
The Law Offices of Brian J. Smith, ltd.
20545 Center Ridge Road, Suite 215, Rocky River, Ohio 44116
800-641-1970
https://www.BrianSmithLaw.com
Criminal Defense - DUI Defense - Unemployment Appeals - Union Labor Law
Unemployment Appeals and Union Labor Law service areas include the State of Ohio.
Criminal and OVI services areas include: Cuyahoga, Erie, Huron, Ottawa, Lorain, Lake, Medina, Sandusky and Geauga Counties
Disclaimer / Privacy Policy
© Brian J. Smith, all rights reserved.
