Do you need a good DUI lawyer for Virginia Beach, Virginia? Call Montagna & Montagna, P.C., today. Our phone number is 757-625-3500 and our web page is www.montagnalaw.com.
Our lawyers are exceptionally familiar with all the laws involving a DUI. Our lawyers will advise you about the implied consent law, blood alcohol content, possible mandatory jail time, and the filed sobriety tests.
It is important to know that all tests give by a police office to someone who has been stopped for a possible DUI have not been approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The three approved tests are walk and turn, one leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus. Furthermore, the purposes of the field tests are to assist police officers in recognizing clues exhibited by the motorist that may predict alcohol impairment.
If you need a great traffic lawyer for a case in Virginia Beach, Norfolk, or anywhere in Virginia, call our firm. We will provide you with a free 30 minute consultation. Additionally, we welcome all military personnel and civilians as clients.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Selecting a traffic lawyer for Virginia Beach, Virginia
People are always asking, "How do you select a good lawyer for a traffic case in Virginia Beach, Virginia?" Some people select a lawyer for traffic court on word of mouth referrals. Other people select a lawyer from the phone book. Finally, some people select a lawyer from the internet.
It is important that the lawyer you select is known by the judges and the clerks. Furthermore, it is important that your lawyer has extensive experience, is dedicated to you, is hard working, and is successful.
At Montagna & Montagna, P.C., our lawyers have extensive experience, are dedicated to our clients, and are dependable. Finally, our lawyers are successful.
Anthony L. Montagna, III and Anthony L. Montagna, Jr. have tried countless DUI, reckless driving, speeding, and other traffic charges in the Virgina Beach courts. We have represented countless, satisfied clients, who recommend us to their friends and family.
Our lawyers are trial tough and fight for our clients in Virginia Beach, Virginia and all over Virginia.
When you hire a lawyer from Montagna & Montagn, P.C., you can be confident in knowing that we are highly regarded in the community, have a strong presence in the phone book and on the internet, and are well known by the judges and clerk's in the Virginia Beach traffic courts.
If you have questions, we have answers. Give us a call today at 757-625-3500 or visit us on the web at www.montagnalaw.com.
It is important that the lawyer you select is known by the judges and the clerks. Furthermore, it is important that your lawyer has extensive experience, is dedicated to you, is hard working, and is successful.
At Montagna & Montagna, P.C., our lawyers have extensive experience, are dedicated to our clients, and are dependable. Finally, our lawyers are successful.
Anthony L. Montagna, III and Anthony L. Montagna, Jr. have tried countless DUI, reckless driving, speeding, and other traffic charges in the Virgina Beach courts. We have represented countless, satisfied clients, who recommend us to their friends and family.
Our lawyers are trial tough and fight for our clients in Virginia Beach, Virginia and all over Virginia.
When you hire a lawyer from Montagna & Montagn, P.C., you can be confident in knowing that we are highly regarded in the community, have a strong presence in the phone book and on the internet, and are well known by the judges and clerk's in the Virginia Beach traffic courts.
If you have questions, we have answers. Give us a call today at 757-625-3500 or visit us on the web at www.montagnalaw.com.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Presumptions from alcohol or drug content of blood for DUI cases
Section 18.2-269 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, indicates:
"A. In any prosecution for a violation of Section 18.2-36.1 or clause (ii),(iii), or (iv) of Section 18.2-266, or any similar ordinance, the amount of alcohol or drugs in the blood of the accused at the time of the alleged offense as indicated by a chemical analysis of a sample of the accused's blood or breath to determine the alcohol or drug content of his blood in accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.2-268.1 through 18.2-268.12 shall give rise to the following rebuttable presumptions:
(1) If there was at the time .05 percent or less by weight by
volume of alcohol in the accused'd blood or .05 grams or
less per 210 liters of the accused'd breath, it shall be
presumed that the accused was not under the influence of
alcohol intoxicants at the time of the alleged offense;
(2) If there was at that time in excess of .05 percent but less
than .08 percent by weight by volume of alcohol in the
accused's blood or .05 grams but less than .08 grams per
210 liters of the accused's breath, such facts shall not
give rise to any presumption that the accused was or was
not under the influence of alcohol intoxicants at the time
of the alleged offense, but such facts may be considered
with other competent evidence in determining the guilt
or innocence of the accused;
(3) If there was at that time .08 percent or more by weight by
volume of alcohol in the accused'd blood or .08 grams or
more per 210 liters of the accused's breath, it shall be
presumed that the accused was under the influence of
alcohol intoxicants at the time of the offense; or
(4) If there was at that time an amount of the following
substances at a level that is equal to or greater than:
(a) 0.02 milligrams of cocaine per liter of blood,
(b) 0.1 milligrams of methamphetamine per liter of blood,
(c) .01 milligrams of phencyclidine per liter of blood,
or (d) 0.1 milligrams of
3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine per liter of blood, it
shall be presumed that the accused was under the influence
of drugs at the time of the alleged offense to a degree
which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor
vehicle, engine or train safely.
B. The provisions of this section shall not apply to and shall not affect any
prosecution for a violation of Section 46.2-341.24."
"A. In any prosecution for a violation of Section 18.2-36.1 or clause (ii),(iii), or (iv) of Section 18.2-266, or any similar ordinance, the amount of alcohol or drugs in the blood of the accused at the time of the alleged offense as indicated by a chemical analysis of a sample of the accused's blood or breath to determine the alcohol or drug content of his blood in accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.2-268.1 through 18.2-268.12 shall give rise to the following rebuttable presumptions:
(1) If there was at the time .05 percent or less by weight by
volume of alcohol in the accused'd blood or .05 grams or
less per 210 liters of the accused'd breath, it shall be
presumed that the accused was not under the influence of
alcohol intoxicants at the time of the alleged offense;
(2) If there was at that time in excess of .05 percent but less
than .08 percent by weight by volume of alcohol in the
accused's blood or .05 grams but less than .08 grams per
210 liters of the accused's breath, such facts shall not
give rise to any presumption that the accused was or was
not under the influence of alcohol intoxicants at the time
of the alleged offense, but such facts may be considered
with other competent evidence in determining the guilt
or innocence of the accused;
(3) If there was at that time .08 percent or more by weight by
volume of alcohol in the accused'd blood or .08 grams or
more per 210 liters of the accused's breath, it shall be
presumed that the accused was under the influence of
alcohol intoxicants at the time of the offense; or
(4) If there was at that time an amount of the following
substances at a level that is equal to or greater than:
(a) 0.02 milligrams of cocaine per liter of blood,
(b) 0.1 milligrams of methamphetamine per liter of blood,
(c) .01 milligrams of phencyclidine per liter of blood,
or (d) 0.1 milligrams of
3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine per liter of blood, it
shall be presumed that the accused was under the influence
of drugs at the time of the alleged offense to a degree
which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor
vehicle, engine or train safely.
B. The provisions of this section shall not apply to and shall not affect any
prosecution for a violation of Section 46.2-341.24."
Man pleads guilty in two DUI related deaths
A man pleaded guilty today in the Norfolk Circuit Court to two counts of involuntary manslaughter. The defendant was involved in a two car accident at the intersection of Military Highway and Johnstons Road in the City of Norfolk, Virginia. Additionally, the defendant had a blood alcohol level of .18 percent, which is more than two times the legal limit.
The victims were 20 and 21 years old. Additionally, the victims' vehicle was struck by the defendant after he ran a red light.
The victims were 20 and 21 years old. Additionally, the victims' vehicle was struck by the defendant after he ran a red light.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
DUI and Divided Attention Tests
The lawyers at Montagna & Montagna, P.C. practice extensively in Norfolk, Virginia Beach, Portsmouth, and the other cities in Hampton Roads. Thus, we are very familiar with divided attention tests, which are frequently used by the police before placing a person under arrest for DUI.
People, who are sober, may generally be able to focus are multiple tasks simultaneously. However, people, who are impaired by alcohol or drugs, have a difficult time dividing their attention to accomplish multiple tasks at once. Thus, police will utilize divided attention tests to determine whether an individual exhibits clues of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The most effective divided attention tests require the same physical and mental capabilities that an individual uses while driving. For example, the tests judge information processing, short term memory and judgment and decision making, balance, vision, muscle control, coordination, and reactions to stimuli.
Two popular tests approved by the National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) are the walk and turn test and the one leg stand test.
When a police officer has an individual perform the walk and turn test, the officer is looking for eight clues of possible intoxication. The eight clues are lack of balance during instruction stage, beginning the test too soon, stopping while walking, heel to toe more than one inch apart, steps off the line, using one's arms for balance, loss of balance on turns or making a turn incorrectly, and an incorrect number of steps.
The one leg stand test requires an individual to divide his or her attention between two stages, the instruction stage and the balance and counting stage. An individual who has a hard time counting or maintaining balance may be impaired.
Frequently, police officers will ask an individual, who is suspected of driving while intoxicated, to perform other field tests. However, many of the tests have not been approved by NHTSA.
A police officer may ask someone to recite the alphabet from A to Z or from A to K. Other officers will ask someone to recite the alphabet backwards. Additionally, some officers will have someone touch their nose with their index finger or touch their thumb to all the fingers on the same hand as the thumb. The defendant's attorney should vigorously cross examine the police officer about these non approved tests.
The lawyers at Montagna & Montagna, P.C. know how to cross examine police officers involved with a DUI arrest. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your case with us and to assist you in preparing a zealous and complete defense.
People, who are sober, may generally be able to focus are multiple tasks simultaneously. However, people, who are impaired by alcohol or drugs, have a difficult time dividing their attention to accomplish multiple tasks at once. Thus, police will utilize divided attention tests to determine whether an individual exhibits clues of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The most effective divided attention tests require the same physical and mental capabilities that an individual uses while driving. For example, the tests judge information processing, short term memory and judgment and decision making, balance, vision, muscle control, coordination, and reactions to stimuli.
Two popular tests approved by the National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) are the walk and turn test and the one leg stand test.
When a police officer has an individual perform the walk and turn test, the officer is looking for eight clues of possible intoxication. The eight clues are lack of balance during instruction stage, beginning the test too soon, stopping while walking, heel to toe more than one inch apart, steps off the line, using one's arms for balance, loss of balance on turns or making a turn incorrectly, and an incorrect number of steps.
The one leg stand test requires an individual to divide his or her attention between two stages, the instruction stage and the balance and counting stage. An individual who has a hard time counting or maintaining balance may be impaired.
Frequently, police officers will ask an individual, who is suspected of driving while intoxicated, to perform other field tests. However, many of the tests have not been approved by NHTSA.
A police officer may ask someone to recite the alphabet from A to Z or from A to K. Other officers will ask someone to recite the alphabet backwards. Additionally, some officers will have someone touch their nose with their index finger or touch their thumb to all the fingers on the same hand as the thumb. The defendant's attorney should vigorously cross examine the police officer about these non approved tests.
The lawyers at Montagna & Montagna, P.C. know how to cross examine police officers involved with a DUI arrest. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your case with us and to assist you in preparing a zealous and complete defense.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Arizona v. Gant
As the Supreme Court of the United States held, "Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant's arrest only if it is reasonable to believe the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of the arrest."
Examples of Jurisdiction and Modification of Child Support Orders
A. Original order entered in VA with noncustodial parent in VA and child and custodial parent moving out of state: VA only state than can modify and enforce order
B. Original order entered in VA and all parties have moved out of state: VA loses ability to modify order but it can continue to enforce the order until modified by other state
C. Order entered in another state, with custodial parent and child in Virginia and non custodial parent out of state:
1. Custodial parent cannot modify order in VA and must got to noncustodial parent's state.
2. Noncustodial parent could modify order in VA
B. Original order entered in VA and all parties have moved out of state: VA loses ability to modify order but it can continue to enforce the order until modified by other state
C. Order entered in another state, with custodial parent and child in Virginia and non custodial parent out of state:
1. Custodial parent cannot modify order in VA and must got to noncustodial parent's state.
2. Noncustodial parent could modify order in VA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)