Top 40 Under 40
Top 50 DUI Attorneys
Top 100 Trial Attorneys
Teen drivers are considered risky investments for insurance companies due to their inexperience and lack of maturity. This inexperience often causes young drivers to overestimate their ability to control their vehicles in order to avoid collisions with other cars or objects. After one tragic collision, a Tennessee teen now faces several charges, including one for vehicular homicide, stemming from a 2013 accident.
Blood Evidence Admissible by Implied Consent
Circumstances under which evidence from a warrantless blood draw of a person suspected of driving under the influence (DUI) have been the subject of much legal argument since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely (2013), finding that exigent circumstances do not always justify warrantless blood draws in DUIcases. Tennessee law mandates a blood draw under certain circumstances. But, when that blood draw occurs without first obtaining a warrant, it still must occur pursuant to a constitutional exception to the warrant requirement. Tennessee has an implied consent law. Though it appears that implied consent may be withdrawn before a blood draw occurs, the recent Tennessee case of State v. Reynolds, E2013-02309-CCA-R9-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 11-12-2014) determined that when implied consent is not actively withdrawn and the blood draw not specifically refused, it can occur pursuant to the consent exception to the warrant requirement.
Blood Evidence Admissible by Implied Consent
Circumstances under which evidence from a warrantless blood draw of a person suspected of driving under the influence (DUI) have been the subject of much legal argument since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely (2013), finding that exigent circumstances do not always justify warrantless blood draws in DUIcases. Tennessee law mandates a blood draw under certain circumstances. But, when that blood draw occurs without first obtaining a warrant, it still must occur pursuant to a constitutional exception to the warrant requirement. Tennessee has an implied consent law. Though it appears that implied consent may be withdrawn before a blood draw occurs, the recent Tennessee case of State v. Reynolds, E2013-02309-CCA-R9-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 11-12-2014) determined that when implied consent is not actively withdrawn and the blood draw not specifically refused, it can occur pursuant to the consent exception to the warrant requirement.
How does one challenge a failed sobriety test effectively?
There are three tests that are generally used to attempt to gauge whether a driver may be impaired by alcohol or other substances. These three tests are the ones most widely accepted by the criminal justice system, and they are generally allowed to be submitted as evidence, though every case is different. If you have been charged because of an allegedly failed sobriety test, how do you effectively challenge the results in a Tennessee court?
Driver charged with drunk driving in fiery Tennesee wreck
Having a DUI conviction on one's record can negatively impact one's ability to drive a car or obtain desired employment. However, multiple drunk driving convictions can end in a prison sentence and significant fines. One man who was recently arrested in Tennessee, who now faces his fifth DUI charge, is likely awaiting his court date with hopes for a strong defense.
Court Reverses Exclusion of Confession
A confession can be important evidence in a criminal case. But a confession from the accused is only admissible if it is voluntary. A statement from the accused which a court determines has been coerced by law enforcement authorities will be excluded from evidence. In the recent Tennessee case of State v. Woods, M2014-00194-CCA-R9-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-31-2014), the trial court had determined a confession to have been coerced by promises of leniency. That ruling was reversed on an interlocutory appeal by the state. The Court of Criminal Appeals determined the finding to be in error and reversed the ruling, thereby allowing the state to use the evidence at the upcoming trial.
Court Reverses Exclusion of Confession
A confession can be important evidence in a criminal case. But a confession from the accused is only admissible if it is voluntary. A statement from the accused which a court determines has been coerced by law enforcement authorities will be excluded from evidence. In the recent Tennessee case of State v. Woods, M2014-00194-CCA-R9-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-31-2014), the trial court had determined a confession to have been coerced by promises of leniency. That ruling was reversed on an interlocutory appeal by the state. The Court of Criminal Appeals determined the finding to be in error and reversed the ruling, thereby allowing the state to use the evidence at the upcoming trial.
Court Reverses Exclusion of Confession
A confession can be important evidence in a criminal case. But a confession from the accused is only admissible if it is voluntary. A statement from the accused which a court determines has been coerced by law enforcement authorities will be excluded from evidence. In the recent Tennessee case of State v. Woods, M2014-00194-CCA-R9-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 10-31-2014), the trial court had determined a confession to have been coerced by promises of leniency. That ruling was reversed on an interlocutory appeal by the state. The Court of Criminal Appeals determined the finding to be in error and reversed the ruling, thereby allowing the state to use the evidence at the upcoming trial.
Tennessee politician has trial date for drunk driving charges
A man who has filed for a seat as an alderman in one Tennessee community is scheduled to first face a jury before the voters have a say. He was charged with a third drunk driving offense, along with possession of controlled narcotics. His trial was scheduled for late October, right before the November 4th election day.
