We've been seeing more reckless driving cases lately. Maybe summer does that. So I added a page on that topic to the firm website. Often the reckless driving charge comes from a high speed alone, which should not be enough for that offense (VTL 1212).
We have been getting a fair number of cases with AUO - Aggravated Unlicensed Operation, so I added a page on that too.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Albany DWI Crackdown Coming
Today's Times Union reports there will be a crackdown on DWI for 10 days around July 4th, running from Friday through July 8th.
We're already busy, getting a lot of DWI cases in the Albany area recently. Due to what we've been seeing lately, and with the latest changes in DWI laws, I added two pages to our website, one on Aggravated DWI and the other on DWAI.
We keep winning DWI cases. Just got a case dismissed, for a reason I didn't even anticipate. The officer was testifying at a suppression hearing. I was being my usual difficult self, objecting everywhere I could (and appropriately so - as it turns out). The officer was testifying about the place where they stopped our client, and the town judge began inquiring further about the specific location. Turns out they stopped our client in the village. Judge said the village had primary jurisdiction and dismissed the case. My objection had triggered this line of inquiry.
But that wasn't what I was going for. This was a low BAC case involving a checkpoint. The checkpoints are often unconstitutional, and the low BAC makes it much tougher for the prosecution to prove a DWI case. Also, our client had passed two out of three of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs). I had a lot of ammo, but never got to use most of it. The location issue was related to a problem with the paperwork I was aware of - and this was why I had objected - but I was not aware that the village lines were near the stop.
Lately I've been thinking we need a slogan for our DWI practice. Hmm. Keeping Drunks on the Road Since 2003 ? Nah. Making the World Safe for Dangerous Drivers Since 2003 ?? The latter is more inclusive of the speeders, you see. But no. Still doesn't sit right. In all seriousness, I don't believe either is what we really do. Partly this is because many of our clients are actually innocent, and partly it's because I believe our traffic and DWI laws are just wrong. Speed limits are generally inappropriate on Interstate Highways, and they're certainly too low. And I do not like the "per se" DWI laws where a BAC over a certain number is illegal in and of itself. I've now seen several cases where defendants with a BAC between 0.08 and 0.12 were very clearly not intoxicated.
We're already busy, getting a lot of DWI cases in the Albany area recently. Due to what we've been seeing lately, and with the latest changes in DWI laws, I added two pages to our website, one on Aggravated DWI and the other on DWAI.
We keep winning DWI cases. Just got a case dismissed, for a reason I didn't even anticipate. The officer was testifying at a suppression hearing. I was being my usual difficult self, objecting everywhere I could (and appropriately so - as it turns out). The officer was testifying about the place where they stopped our client, and the town judge began inquiring further about the specific location. Turns out they stopped our client in the village. Judge said the village had primary jurisdiction and dismissed the case. My objection had triggered this line of inquiry.
But that wasn't what I was going for. This was a low BAC case involving a checkpoint. The checkpoints are often unconstitutional, and the low BAC makes it much tougher for the prosecution to prove a DWI case. Also, our client had passed two out of three of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs). I had a lot of ammo, but never got to use most of it. The location issue was related to a problem with the paperwork I was aware of - and this was why I had objected - but I was not aware that the village lines were near the stop.
Lately I've been thinking we need a slogan for our DWI practice. Hmm. Keeping Drunks on the Road Since 2003 ? Nah. Making the World Safe for Dangerous Drivers Since 2003 ?? The latter is more inclusive of the speeders, you see. But no. Still doesn't sit right. In all seriousness, I don't believe either is what we really do. Partly this is because many of our clients are actually innocent, and partly it's because I believe our traffic and DWI laws are just wrong. Speed limits are generally inappropriate on Interstate Highways, and they're certainly too low. And I do not like the "per se" DWI laws where a BAC over a certain number is illegal in and of itself. I've now seen several cases where defendants with a BAC between 0.08 and 0.12 were very clearly not intoxicated.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
New Jersey Traffic Courts to enforce a new law
As you can read about in the following link, New Jersey Assembly has found a new way to make traffic courts busier without accomplishing much. In short, they want a new law requiring new residents to register their vehicles in NJ right away. I'm sure that will solve all New Jersey's problems. Phew!
Meanwhile, the busy New Jersey traffic courts, such as Jersey City Municipal Court will take care of this and make life better for all.
Meanwhile, in news about our traffic court database, we have now added an attorney advertiser in New Jersey. His name is Thomas Carroll Blauvelt, and he seems like a nice fellow. Based in Middlesex County, one of his busiest courts (and closest to his office) is Edison Municipal Court. I think the place was named for a lesser known Portuguese explorer, but others say it was some inventor guy.
I was talking to Blauvelt today and he mentioned a few other busy courts in New Jersey, like Newark, Woodbridge, and Trenton Municipal Court. Nice thing about our traffic court directory project is that I'm learning quite a bit about other places.
Meanwhile, the busy New Jersey traffic courts, such as Jersey City Municipal Court will take care of this and make life better for all.
Meanwhile, in news about our traffic court database, we have now added an attorney advertiser in New Jersey. His name is Thomas Carroll Blauvelt, and he seems like a nice fellow. Based in Middlesex County, one of his busiest courts (and closest to his office) is Edison Municipal Court. I think the place was named for a lesser known Portuguese explorer, but others say it was some inventor guy.
I was talking to Blauvelt today and he mentioned a few other busy courts in New Jersey, like Newark, Woodbridge, and Trenton Municipal Court. Nice thing about our traffic court directory project is that I'm learning quite a bit about other places.
Avvo - Lawsuit over Attorney rating website
There's an interesting lawsuit going on right now for those who are interested in lawyers and the web. A website called Avvo offers ratings of lawyers. As the San Jose Mercury News and the Wall Street Journal blog explain, some lawyers who didn't like their ratings are suing to shut down the website.
I'm particularly interested in this because I was thinking about creating a site, or sites, like that. I had registered the following web addresses as part of my plans: my-lawyer-sucks.com, my-doctor-sucks.com, review-lawyers.com, review-doctors.com. My mom told me I couldn't use the first two, so that was out. We actually started working on a site. I hired a programmer and we had a first draft, but we never figured out exactly what we wanted to do with it, and then our traffic court directory site took over and we dropped the idea. If we had stuck with it, we would have beaten Avvo to the punch, and then gotten sued like this. :-)
Basically, some lawyers are complaining that the site misrepresents the quality of the lawyers rated. There is a big difference between what Avvo does and what we were planning. Avvo makes its own assessment and rating of the lawyers, based on various factors it reviews. We were just going to allow "consumers" to rate the lawyers they had dealt with (I think . We weren't going to offer our own ratings. And we had plans for strong and prominent disclaimers, as well as a process for lawyers to challenge ratings. We even had some ideas about how to make money doing it.
Having looked at the ratings for some local lawyers (go to the site and enter a local zip code), I can say that the ratings are very much junk. A very prominent local attorney, who is widely considered the best DWI lawyer in the state (no, not me), is rated 7.2 out of 10. Their profile of him says his practice is 50% criminal defense - if I'm not mistaken, his practice is 100% criminal defense. His rating apparently suffers for a lack of "recognition." A number of other prominent lawyers in the community have similarly low ratings.
Two lawyers in the area are rated as 10s. One is pretty well known in his narrow field and deserves a very high rating in my opinion. The other, who I like and respect, and is a very good lawyer, benefits in part from a top rating for experience. This despite having one less year than me (I get 2 out of 5 for experience and a 6.2 overall). Aha, but this second lawyer has claimed the profile -- signed up with an account with Avvo and provided more information. I don't fault the lawyer for this at all. But if Avvo's system increases a lawyer's rating based on the lawyer signing up and providing more information, that's an unreliable method, and essentially a mild form of blackmail. We had a more sinister form of blackmail in mind for my-lawyer-sucks.com actually, but that's water under the bridge. :-)
Of course I'm now in the process of claiming my profile - wonder if it will help my rating? :-) Another interesting flaw I noticed in the process is the terms of use contain a very thorough disclaimer about the quality of their ratings, but that disclaimer is either not obvious or invisible on the actual ratings pages. If they need that kind of disclaimer in the registration process, why isn't it posted with the ratings?
Next in the process, I had to enter a credit card. Well, in the interest of journalism (what's happened to me?) ....
So I went through the registration process and now I'm rated 7.4. I should add some publications. That would probably help. :-)
Okay people. Form your own conclusions now.
I'm particularly interested in this because I was thinking about creating a site, or sites, like that. I had registered the following web addresses as part of my plans: my-lawyer-sucks.com, my-doctor-sucks.com, review-lawyers.com, review-doctors.com. My mom told me I couldn't use the first two, so that was out. We actually started working on a site. I hired a programmer and we had a first draft, but we never figured out exactly what we wanted to do with it, and then our traffic court directory site took over and we dropped the idea. If we had stuck with it, we would have beaten Avvo to the punch, and then gotten sued like this. :-)
Basically, some lawyers are complaining that the site misrepresents the quality of the lawyers rated. There is a big difference between what Avvo does and what we were planning. Avvo makes its own assessment and rating of the lawyers, based on various factors it reviews. We were just going to allow "consumers" to rate the lawyers they had dealt with (I think . We weren't going to offer our own ratings. And we had plans for strong and prominent disclaimers, as well as a process for lawyers to challenge ratings. We even had some ideas about how to make money doing it.
Having looked at the ratings for some local lawyers (go to the site and enter a local zip code), I can say that the ratings are very much junk. A very prominent local attorney, who is widely considered the best DWI lawyer in the state (no, not me), is rated 7.2 out of 10. Their profile of him says his practice is 50% criminal defense - if I'm not mistaken, his practice is 100% criminal defense. His rating apparently suffers for a lack of "recognition." A number of other prominent lawyers in the community have similarly low ratings.
Two lawyers in the area are rated as 10s. One is pretty well known in his narrow field and deserves a very high rating in my opinion. The other, who I like and respect, and is a very good lawyer, benefits in part from a top rating for experience. This despite having one less year than me (I get 2 out of 5 for experience and a 6.2 overall). Aha, but this second lawyer has claimed the profile -- signed up with an account with Avvo and provided more information. I don't fault the lawyer for this at all. But if Avvo's system increases a lawyer's rating based on the lawyer signing up and providing more information, that's an unreliable method, and essentially a mild form of blackmail. We had a more sinister form of blackmail in mind for my-lawyer-sucks.com actually, but that's water under the bridge. :-)
Of course I'm now in the process of claiming my profile - wonder if it will help my rating? :-) Another interesting flaw I noticed in the process is the terms of use contain a very thorough disclaimer about the quality of their ratings, but that disclaimer is either not obvious or invisible on the actual ratings pages. If they need that kind of disclaimer in the registration process, why isn't it posted with the ratings?
Next in the process, I had to enter a credit card. Well, in the interest of journalism (what's happened to me?) ....
So I went through the registration process and now I'm rated 7.4. I should add some publications. That would probably help. :-)
Okay people. Form your own conclusions now.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Binghamton City Court and the rest of Broome County
I noticed we get very little going on in Binghamton City Court. We do get a lot of speeding tickets from other traffic courts in Broome County, like Kirkwood, Barker, Dickinson, and Windsor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)