12/20/11

Overland Park driver charged with manslaughter following fatal car collision in Douglas County, Kansas

Prosecutors allege that the driver was drunk and speeding when he ran a red light and collided with another driver in a Lawrence intersection

Douglas County district attorneys have filed an involuntary manslaughter charge against a 23-year-old Overland Park, Kansas man, accusing the defendant of killing a 19-year-old Lawrence woman in a 2010 drunken-driving crash in a Lawrence intersection.

The Lawrence Police Department report indicated that Sean Barrett Walkers blood-alcohol content was 0.23, nearly three times the states legal limit, two hours after the crash at the intersection of Clinton Parkway and Inverness Drive. Police have said they beleive that Walkers westbound vehicle struck a southbound car driven by Mary Grace Paez, a 2010 Lawrence High School graduate, killing her at the scene of the accident.

Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said Thursday his office issued an arrest warrant and charged Walker with involuntary manslaughter while driving under the influence of alcohol, plus two traffic infractions: speeding and violating flashing traffic signals. Walker is currently serving a prison sentence in Hutchinson for a probation violation on an unrelated 2006 Johnson County attempted robbery and battery case.

In the DUI involuntary manslaughter charge, prosecutors accuse the Overland Park man of unintentionally killing Paez while driving when his blood-alcohol content was higher than 0.08, the states legal limit to operate a vehicle.

The police report also lists Walkers speeding as contributing to the crash. He was headed west on Clinton Parkway and entered the intersection on a flashing yellow light as Paez was headed south on Inverness Drive and came into the intersection after she had stopped at a flashing red light. The Jeep struck her Nissan car on the drivers side. The law that covers flashing yellow lights says drivers may proceed through an intersection only with caution.

Walker was traveling at least 11 mph faster than the 45 mph speed limit on Clinton Parkway, and Paez was driving at 13 mph in the 30 mph zone, according to the accident report. Paezs toxicology test in her autopsy was negative for alcohol or drugs. Walker, who police said was treated at the scene for a head injury, refused to submit to testing, so officers obtained a warrant for the blood test.

If convicted of involuntary manslaughter, Walker faces from 38 months to 14 years in prison. Earlier this month a judge approved a $100,000 settlement for Paezs parents in a civil lawsuit against Walker. The settlement was reached with Walkers insurance carrier.

12/17/11

A nice example of the dangers of distracted driving and the serious crashes that can or could result:

Missouri and Kansas are criss-crossed by many highways similar to this one, where motorists must pass slower vehicles in the on-coming lane of traffic. In this GIF, we can see that two vehicles try to pass at the same time which leads to an EXTREMELY close call. If the truck had hit the car, there is no doubt that the occupants would be killed or seriously injured.

12/15/11

National Transportation Safety Board ("NTSB") recommends a complete ban on cell phone use while driving

Most personal injury attorneys in Kansas City understand the dangers of "distracted driving," which often comes in the form of some sort of cell phone use, whether talking, texting, or browsing the Internet. Our Kansas City area auto accident law firm has seen dozens of cases where drivers injure or kill others because they were distracted by a cell phone or something else.

Whenever our Olathe/Overland Park auto accident law firm is retained on a personal injury case involving an auto accident, we request the cell phone records of the other driver, inlcluding text message records. Cell phone records can help show that the at-fault driver may have been distracted which led to or contributed to the crash.

There is little doubt that a ban on cell phone use while driving would save lives, thousands of people are killed or seriously injured each year on roads in Kansas City, Leawood, Lenexa, Overland Park, and elsewhere in the metro area and throughout the United States due to distracted driving.

The bigger question is: should the government continue to regulate conduct that endangers lives? Proponents of a ban point to studies which show that distracted driving is as dangerous as drunk driving and will highlight the fact that other bad driving behaviors (such as speeding, running red lights/stop signs, etc) are also illegal.

Opponents to the ban will point out that conduct which does not necessarily injure others was not intended to be banned by the country's "founding fathers" and that giving up a bit of liberty for safety is exactly what the Constitution warns against.

This Kansas City serious injury law office supports a ban on operating a cell phone while driivng, however we do not think this conduct should be punished any more than a simple traffic infraction - we do not think that distracted driving should be a misdemeanor like driving under the influence.

Is a ban on cell phone operation while driving a good form of government's public safety function or simply another example of "big government?"

A federal safety board called Tuesday for a nationwide ban on the use of cell phones and text messaging devices while driving.

The recommendation is the most far-reaching yet by the National Transportation Safety Board, which in the past 10 years has increasingly sought to limit the use of portable electronic devices -- recommending bans for novice drivers, school bus drivers and commercial truckers. Tuesday's recommendation, if adopted by states, would outlaw non-emergency phone calls and texting by operators of every vehicle on the road.

It would apply to hands-free as well as hand-held devices, but devices installed in the vehicle by the manufacturer would be allowed, the NTSB said.

The recommendation would not affect passengers' rights to use such devices.

NTSB members say the action is necessary to combat a growing threat posed by distracted drivers. While distracted driving has been a problem "since the Model T," in the words of NTSB Chairwoman Deborah Hersman, authorities say it has become ubiquitous with the explosion in the number of portable smart phones. At any given daylight moment, some 13.5 million drivers are on hand-held phones, according to a study released last week by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Some 3,092 roadway fatalities last year involved distracted drivers, although the actual number may be far higher, NHTSA said.

"This (distracted driving) is becoming the new DUI. It's becoming epidemic," said NTSB member Robert Sumwalt.

Accident investigators routinely seek protective orders to preserve smart phones for use as evidence in accident investigations, Hersman said.

But because distracted drivers sometimes do not own up to their actions, or because they die during the crash, determining whether distraction was a factor in an accident can be difficult.

That was the case in a 2010 chain-reaction accident near Gray Summit, Missouri. During the 11 minutes prior to that incident, the driver of a pickup truck received five text messages, and sent six, and he was seen leaning over just before the accident, leading investigators to believe the driver was likely distracted when his truck plowed at 55 mph into the rear of a tractor trailer, which had slowed or stopped because of a highway work zone. Two school buses then plowed into the wreckage. Two people -- including the pickup truck driver and a bus occupant -- were killed; 38 other people were injured.

The driver of the pickup truck was 19 years old, and was in violation of a Missouri law prohibiting drivers under the age of 21 from texting while driving. But the safety board focused little on the age of the driver, casting "distracted driving" as epidemic among people of all ages.

The NTSB said cell phone laws alone would not solve the problem, but must be accompanied by aggressive educational campaigns and strict enforcement. The Missouri State Highway Patrol had issued only 120 citations for texting in a two-year-period, the NTSB said.

Currently, a patchwork of laws governs cell-phone usage by drivers. Some 35 states ban text messaging while driving, 30 states ban cell-phone use by novice drivers, and 10 ban all use of hand-held cell phones, according to the NTSB.

The safety board also recommended the electronics industry develop phones that would discourage their use by drivers, but could identify a car occupant's location so that passengers could use the devices.

A Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study of commercial drivers found that a safety-critical event is 163 times more likely if a driver is texting, e-mailing or accessing the Internet.

The NTSB's action is a recommendation only, but the board has been instrumental in leading for changes in other areas of transportation safety.

Chairwoman Hersman said the ban may inconvenience motorists, but would save lives.

"Needless lives are lost on our highways, and for what? Convenience? Death isn't convenient," Hersman said. "So we can stay more connected? A fatal accident severs that connection."

The NTSB's investigation of the August 5, 2010, Missouri crash also exposed numerous other safety shortcomings.

Although Missouri requires school bus inspections twice a year -- one by the highway patrol and a second by a certified inspection station -- an inspection 10 days before the accident did not reveal faulty brakes on one of the buses, the NTSB said. The faulty brakes were not a factor in the accident, the NTSB said, because the driver said she did not hit the brakes before the crash.

But the NTSB criticized the service station that inspected the brakes, the contract owner of the school buses, and the highway patrol. The highway patrol gave the bus company a "Total Fleet Maintenance Award" before the accident because 100% of its buses had passed inspection. In an unannounced inspection following the tragedy, the pass rate dropped to 60%, the NTSB said.

The NTSB said both the inspection station and the highway patrol performed inadequate inspections.

11/22/11

Government website shows pedestrian accident videos

The Department of Transportation has received complaints of the graphic nature of the car-pedestrian accidents, some of which involve seriously or fatally injured pedestrian walkers.

The website http://www.seetheblindspots.com/ shows graphic videos of people walking across streets and/or intersections and being struck by cars. Many of these folks were seriously injured or killed, which has led to complaints.

The DOT has responded that the video is designed to put a vivid image in drivers' and pedestrians' heads to remind them of the need for safe driving in streets where pedestrians may be present.

11/20/11

Driver seriously hurt in accident with train outside of Kansas City, MO.

Missouri Highway Patrol says the motorist lost control of his vehicle and ended stuck on tracks.

A motorist was seriously injured today when his vehicle was struck by a train near Missouri 9 in Parkville, however details of his injuries have not been released. The accident was reported just after 9:30 a.m.

Sgt. Collin Stosberg of the Missouri Highway Patrol said it appeared the driver was southbound on Missouri highway 9 when he lost control of the vehicle and it went off the road and landed on the railroad tracks, where it was struck by an approaching Burlington Northern Santa Fe train, Stosberg said. The Missouri highway patrol is continuing its investigation. and the motorists condition and age were not immediately available, he said.

11/16/11

Driver & child passenger killed when sport utility vehicle (SUV) rolls over after crossing a median on 69 highway in Overland Park, Kansas

SUV collided with two pickup trucks before rolling over, injuring the drivers of both pickups

A driver and child passenger were killed and two children were seriously injured (one critically) this morning in an early rush hour rollover/crossover crash in southern Overland Park this morning, on 69 highway.

Overland Park police received 911 call about the crash near U.S. 69 and West 143rd Street shortly after 6 a.m., said Officer Michelle Koos, an Overland Park police department spokeswoman. When Overland Park officers and Johnson County Sheriff's Deputies arrived at the scene, they investigated and detemined that the SUV, beleived to be a Mercury Mountaineer (sister vehicle of the Ford Explorer) was driving south on U.S. 69 and crossed over into northbound lanes of traffic. The SUV collided with two pickup trucks, rolled over, and came to rest just off the roadway in the northbound ditch.

The driver and child killed in the accident were identified by Overland Park police as Heidi Lynn Adams, 29, and Imogin Grace Adams, 9. Both died at the scene, police said. The other children who were riding in the SUV, ages 4 and 7, were transported to local hospitals for their injuries.

The drivers of the two pickup trucks also were taken to local hospitals by ambulance for injuries that were not considered life-threatening.

Thanks to the KCSTAR for the tip.

11/2/11

Cable barriers to be installed on dangerous sections of K-10 between Lawrence and Johnson County, Kansas

K-10 has seen a large number of serious injury accidents and fatal accidents, often caused by head-on collisions which may be prevented by these cable barriers

11/2/11

Driver nearly killed in rollover accident near 435 and I-35 interchange in Overland Park, Kansas

Ford Expedition rolled over, leading to critical injuries for the driver

A Kansas man is in critical condition at a Kansas hospital after his Ford Expedition SUV rolled several times in a one-vehicle accident early today on Interstate 435 in Overland Park, Kansas.

Police said the driver was the only one in the Expedition when he apparently lost control of his SUV around 1:30 a.m. on westbound I-435 at the ramp to Interstate 35. The Ford Expedition came to rest on its wheels after rolling, suffering significant passenger compartment intrusion.

Rollover accidents are extremely dangerous for drivers and passengers, proving many times more deadly than other accidents. Sport utility vehicles, such as this Ford Expedition, and trucks are often more likely to rollover because they have higher centers of gravity. Newer trucks and SUVs with stability control systems have largely mitigated this danger, however there are still millions of rollover prone trucks and SUVs on the road.

Our Olathe/Overland Park/Shawnee auto accident law firm has experience with rollover auto accidents in Missouri and Kansas. Our law office understands the physics involved and the various vehicle defects which not only make certain trucks and SUVs prone to rollover, but also seriously endanger their occupants once the rollover does occur.

These defects include poor roof crush strength which leads to "passenger compartment intrusion," meaning the roof caves in on the driver and passengers in the truck/SUV. Crushed roofs lead to serious brain injuries, neck and spinal injuries, paralysis, numbness, tingling, and permanent disability in Kansas City Missouri and Kansas rollover accidents. The really sad part is that manufacturing a vehicle with a proper roof structure is not complicated, in fact manufacturers have been found to weakend roof structures to save money.

10/30/11

Driver killed in auto crash after abusing woman while driving

We can think of so many reasons why you should never, ever abuse your wife while she's driving (or engaging in any other activity, really), but here's a very good, common-sense one: You might cause a fatal accident. Fatal to you!

This is exactly what happened to 27-year-old Sandro Michel, who could give us some insights on this subject except that he's dead. Michel would still be with us had he not made the incredibly poor decision to beat on his wife, 33-year-old Catherine Copeland, while she was driving him and their three-year-old daughter around Pembroke Park, Florida. Distracted by her stupid husband, Copeland lost control of the car, the car ended up crashing into a lake, Michel drowned, and the karma police arrived on the scene to haul him to the Afterlife County Jail.

Unsurprisingly, this incident was not the first time Michel beat his wife: the Broward Palm Beach New Times informs us that he had three prior domestic-violence arrests and was on probation based on one of those arrests at the time of his demise. According to WSVN-TV, the couple's fight began at a convenience store, where Copeland screamed for someone to call the cops. Someone did, and as the police car approached Copeland's car, Michel grabbed the steering wheel and steered it into the lake "because he did not want to go back to jail." He will not go back to (earthly) jail.

Thanks to jalopnik for the story!

10/28/11

How does a seriously injured driver, passenger, or pedestrian prove their auto accident injuries were caused by a phantom driver in Kansas & Missouri Courts?

1. Collect as many details as possible at the accident scene:

• Ask the others in your vehicle and everyone who shows up or was involved if they saw the phantom car or truck. Get as many details as possible, preferably the phantom driver's license plate number, or the make/model/color of the phantom vehicle.
  
• Write these details down because you may later forget them or be confused in an interview, deposition, trial, etc. If you have a written record, you can always refresh your memory with your notes.
  

2. Detail the fact that there was a phantom driver in a first interview with paramedics and hospital staff (or your doctor's office):

• If you are treated by ambulance staff or in an emergency room, the medical providers (nurses and doctors) always ask what happened, so let them know about the phantom car that caused the accident.
• Medical professionals will "chart" your statements, so these records can later help show that your auto accident was caused by the phantom vehicle.
  

3. Stress the presence of the phantom vehicle when questioned by police at the scene or following the crash:

• Police officers, Sheriff's deputies, and Highway Patrol Troopers will almost always interview you to get your account of the accident. If a fatality was involved in the car crash, then the investigation will be much more thorough and include investigation of skidmarks, surface traction, the vehicles involved, etc. The sooner you put law enforcement on notice that they need to investigate the phantom car/truck, the better off you will be.
  
• Make sure you (and the others involved in the accident) give police as much detail about the phantom vehicle as possible - they may be able to radio ahead and stop that driver.
  

4. Find and document evidence of contact with the phantom vehicle on your vehicle:

• It is very important that you gather evidence regarding the phantom vehicle as quickly as possible. If contact was made between the cars/trucks, then there could be paint transfers, dents, damage, etc. Even a spot showing that dirt/dust was disturbed could be sufficient evidence to prove that there was a phantom vehicle involved.
• If possible, take pictures of the damage at the scene so you can show that the damage was not caused later by the tow truck driver, at the impound lot, or in another accident.
  

5. Describe the phantom vehicle to your own insurance company to obtain uninsured benefits:

• They will ask you how it happened and you will should about the phantom car, giving as much detail as possible.
  
• While we often recomment against giving a recorded statement shortly after an auto accident, in this instance you may be better off by giving the insurance company a recorded statement. This analysis depends on the unique circumstances of each accident, so we strongly recomment that you consult with an experienced Missouri & Kansas personal injury/auto accident attorney before deciding whether to give a recorded statement.

10/25/11

KDOT warning drivers to look out for deer when driving on roads and highways to avoid serious and fatal car/truck-deer collisions

Deer collisions lead to thousands of serious injury accidents each year and hundreds of fatal car crashes when drivers collide with or swerve to avoid the deer, rolling over or crashing into ditches, medians, trees, or other cars/trucks

If you or a loved one has been killed or seriously injured in an auto accident involving a collision with a deer or a car crash involving a driver swerving and crashing to avoid a deer, you may still be able to file a claim for your or your loved one's injuries. A number of theories of recovery may be applicable in deer auto accidents in Kansas, Missouri, and elsewhere:

1. Coverage for the negligence of a phantom driver via your or the vehicle owner's uninsured motorist insurance policy: If you or a loved one is injured in an accident where a driver in a vehicle swerves to miss a deer and, as a result, causes an injury car accident (whether a rollover, collision with another vehicle, collision with a median, etc.), you may be legally entitled to recover for medical expenses, permanent disability, lost wages, scarring, burns, and permanent injuries. It does not matter whether the uninsured policy is a Kansas or Missouri policy, although policies drawn in different states may be subject to those state's laws regarding uninsured benefits and insurance policies.
   
2. Coverage for the negligence of the driver of the vehicle you were riding in: If you were a passenger in a car in which the driver swerved to miss a deer, causing a rollover, collision with a tree, median, or other type of accident, then you may be able to make a claim against the driver for their negligence. This is true even if the driver was a family member, parent, or spouse. It may seem odd or even wrong to file a claim or lawsuit against a family member, but at the end of the day, the proceeds of the vast majority of auto accident claims are paid solely by an insurance company. No one should feel guilty about asking an insurance company to pay for the medical expenses, lost wages, pain, suffering, and disabilities caused by their negligence. Our law firm has experiene filing claims for one family member against another in a number of Kansas jurisdictions.

According to KDOT representative Steve Swartz, there were 9,109 deer-vehicle collisions reported to KDOT in 2010! Deer can be spotted near the states roadways any time of the year. However, in the fall, motorists should be especially vigilant for deer crossing the highways, the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) said. Deer breeding season peaks in mid-November, and this marks the period when deer-vehicle collisions are highest.

That is why KDOT, the Kansas Highway Patrol and the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism are working together to raise awareness and help drivers avoid collisions with deer. The increase in deer-vehicle crashes is strongly influenced by the deer mating season, called rut, said KDWPT biologist Lloyd Fox. During rut, deer focus on mating. Deer travel more than in other seasons, and pay less attention to hazards such as vehicles.

During the fall, many deer move to new locations as crops are harvested and leaves fall from trees and shrubs, so they are less secure than in their summer habitats. Not only are deer more active during the fall, shorter days mean dusk and dawn when deer are more likely to be on the move occur when commuter traffic is highest.

Deer-vehicle collisions occur in every Kansas county. In most cases, counties with high human populations and high traffic volumes record the most deer-vehicle crashes. Sedgwick County recorded the most crashes with 391, followed by Johnson County with 346 and Butler County with 287.

Motorists in Kansas, Missouri, and elsewhere in deer country should observe the following tips to avoid deer collisions:

Be especially watchful at dawn and dusk when deer are particularly active.

Watch for more than one deer. They seldom travel alone, so if one crosses the road, others may follow.

Reduce speed and be alert near wooded areas or green spaces such as parks or golf courses and near water sources such as streams or ponds.

Dont swerve to avoid hitting a deer the most serious accidents occur when motorists swerve and collide with another vehicle or run off the road and hit an obstacle.

Heed deer crossing signs.

Always wear a seat belt.

Use bright lights and slow down whenever the reflective eyes of deer are spotted.

If a motorist hits a deer, the motorist should pull onto the shoulder, turn on emergency flashers, and watch for traffic before exiting the vehicle, said Technical Trooper Josh Kellerman, of the Kansas Highway Patrol. Dont try to remove a deer from the roadway unless you are certain it is dead, a wounded dear could seriously injure you!

Anyone involved in a vehicle-deer crash that results in personal injury or property damage that totals $1,000 or more is required to immediately report the crash to the nearest law enforcement agency. In Johnson County and elsewhere in Kansas, failure to report any traffic crash is a misdemeanor and may result in suspension of driving privileges (your driver's license).

If a driver is involved in a non-injury crash on an interstate, U.S. highway, or any divided or multi-lane road in the state of Kansas, and if the person isnt transporting hazardous materials, he or she are required by law to move their vehicle out of the lane of traffic. This law is intended to help keep drivers and passengers safe by getting them out of the lane of traffic, and away from oncoming vehicles.

10/25/11

Woman leading cops on high-speed (up to 128 mph!) chase (with a reasonably good reason) is arrested and charged with drunk driving

Perhaps she didn't pull over because she wasn't properly dressed?

Ohio police officers arrested a topless woman after she allegedly led them on a high-speed police chase that saw speeds of more than 120 mph. Police say they were originally just pulling Holdsworth over for speeding, but she refused to pull over.

When the woman did pull over, officers said, they found her wearing nothing but fishnet stockings, g-string panties and a pair of high heels.

Holdsworth pulled over not long after running over the device, with both of her left tires blowing out after the impact. It wasnt until officers approached the stopped car that they noted her revealing outfit.

She was compliant at that point. However, when we had her in custody, she began to get agitated, police chief Jon Bokovitz told CBS Cleveland. She began hitting her head against the wall. Bokovitz added that her insubordination continued when she refused to submit to a blood alcohol test.

The woman was charged in Chardon Municipal court lists Holdsworth as being charged with one count each of OVI, refusing a blood alcohol content test, fleeing and eluding, criminal damaging, driving under a suspended license, speeding and reckless operation.

Thanks to CBS Cleveland and fark.com for the story

10/22/11

Extra State Troopers to perform a saturation patrol after the K-State - KU game

"Sunflower Showdown" fans should make sure they have a designated driver or use public transportation

The matchup between two Kansas schools is expected to bring extra traffic to the Turnpike this Saturday, Oct. 22, and will bring extra fans to Lawrence. The annual Sunflower Showdown between the University of Kansas Jayhawks and the Kansas State University Wildcats brings fans for both teams to the game and to the city it is hosted in. Along with extra travelers, the game will bring extra troopers to the area to assist, as well. Troopers will help with traffic control, and will conduct a post-game saturation patrol.

There are some important traffic reminders to consider. Law enforcement is requesting that westbound I-70 traffic traveling to the game, exit at the West Lawrence exit 202, due to construction of a bridge off the East Lawrence exit 204.

Following the game, the Kansas Highway Patrol will be conducting a RAVE (Roving Aggressive Violation Enforcement) saturation patrol in Lawrence in an effort to help reduce the number of impaired drivers on the roads and encourage safe driving practices. A RAVE is a saturation patrol that occurs when troopers converge on a specific area with the primary focus on the detection of impaired drivers. The RAVE deployment will be funded by an Impaired Driving Deterrence Program (IDDP) grant, courtesy of the Kansas Department of Transportation.

Travelers should be prepared for delays, and patience will be key as the additional traffic navigates into Lawrence. If you plan on celebrating before, during, or after the game, make sure you designate a sober driver beforehand. Don't forget to buckle your seatbelts, and to secure children in the appropriate child safety seats, they are your best defense if you are involved in a crash.

10/15/11

Cass County man killed in car crash on Missouri Highway 7

Driver apparently overcorrected, leading to a head-on collision in Cass County, Missouri

The Cass County Sheriffs Office released the name of a Harrisonville man killed in a car crash Sunday evening on 7 Highway. The driver, Edward W. Carter Jr., 31, was heading South on Missouri Highway 7 in Cass County when his car went into the ditch on the west side of the road and then crossed back over the center line into the path of a pickup truck.

Carter, the car driver, was pronounced dead at the scene by EMTs who responded to the 911 call. The other driver was flown to a hospital by helicopter in critical condition.

10/6/11

Driver killed after crashing while fleeing police

A man driving a white Pontiac in Kansas City, Kansas around 12:20 AM refused to stop when police tried to pull him over. He eventually crashed when he swerved to miss "stop sticks" thrown out by police and crashed into a building.

The driver, who was in his 20s, was ejected from the vehicle and died at the scene. The crash remains under investigation by the Kansas Highway Patrol.

10/5/11

New study indicates that texting while driving doubles a driver's reaction times, leading to serious car crashes and injuries

Texting and cell phone use by drivers is a major cause of traffic accidents in Kansas City, Jackson County, Johnson County, and Wyandotte County Kansas

Our metro Kansas City personal injury law firmhas seen this scenario dozens of times - a distracted driver causes a collision that leads to an ambulance ride, hospitalization, surgery, rehabilitation, lost wages, permanent disability, or major brain injury.

In one such auto accident in Overland Park, a driver ran a red light and t-boned our clients' vehicle in an intersection. Several witnesses behind the red-light-runner told investigators that they did not observe any braking from the driver, meaning that they did not even know they were running a red light. This simple mistake led to emergency surgery and months of rehabilitation for our clients who will never have the same level of activity that they once had, even after multiple surgeries.

In fact, it has become clear to our Olathe personal injury law office's staff and lawyers that texting while driving may be more dangerous than drunk driving. This does not mean that we condone driving under the influence, rather it is an observation based on the fact that we would rather see drivers with the slightly delayed reaction times that drunks have over drivers who may not have any reaction time at all, such as drivers who are texting instead of watching the road.

Researchers at the Texas Transportation Institute have determined that a drivers reaction time is doubled when distracted by reading or sending a text message. The study reveals how the texting impairment is even greater than many experts believed, and demonstrates how texting drivers are less able to react to sudden roadway hazards.

The study the first published work in the U.S. to examine texting while driving in an actual driving environment consisted of three major steps. First, participants typed a story of their choice (usually a simple fairy tale) and also read and answered questions related to another story, both on their smart phone in a laboratory setting. Each participant then navigated a test-track course involving both an open section and a section lined by construction barrels. Drivers first drove the course without texting, then repeated both lab tasks separately while driving through the course again. Throughout the test-track exercise, each participants reaction time to a periodic flashing light was recorded.

Reaction times with no texting activity were typically between one and two seconds. Reaction times while texting, however, were at least three to four seconds. Worse yet, drivers were more than 11 times more likely to miss the flashing light altogether when they were texting. The researchers say that the study findings extend to other driving distractions that involve reading or writing, such as checking e-mail or Facebook.

The study, sponsored by the Southwest Region University Transportation Center, was managed by Christine Yager, an associate transportation researcher in TTIs Center for Transportation Safety. 42 drivers between the ages of 16 and 54 participated in the research.

In addition to the reaction-time element, researchers also measured each drivers ability to maintain proper lane position and a constant speed. Major findings further documented the impairment of texting when compared to the controlled driving conditions. Drivers were less able to:

safely maintain their position in the driving lane when they were texting and their swerving was worse in the open sections of the course than in barreled sections.
maintain a constant speed while texting, tending to slow down in an effort to reduce the demand of the multiple tasks. By slowing down, a driver gains more time to correct for driving errors (such as the tendency to swerve while texting). Speed variance was also greater for texting drivers than for non-texting drivers.
The fact that the study was conducted in an actual driving environment is important, the researchers say. While simulators are useful, the dynamics of an actual vehicle are different, and some driver cues cant be replicated in a simulator. By using a closed course, researchers can create an environment similar to real-world driving conditions while providing a high degree of safety for the participants.

Most research on texting and driving has been limited to driving simulators. This study involved participants driving an actual vehicle, Yager says. So one of the more important things we know now that we didnt know before is that response times are even slower than we previously thought.

The total distance covered by each driver in the study was slightly less than 11 miles. In the interest of safety for both participants and the research staff, researchers minimized the complexity of the driving task, using a straight-line course that contained no hills, traffic or potential conflicts other than the construction zone barrels. Consequently, the driving demands that participants encountered were considerably lower than those they would encounter under real-world conditions.

It is frightening, the researchers wrote, to think of how much more poorly our participants may have performed if the driving conditions were more consistent with routine driving.

Federal statistics suggest that distracted driving contributes to as much as 20 percent of all fatal crashes, and that cell phones constitute the primary source of driver distraction. Researchers point to two numbers to illustrate the magnitude of the texting while driving problem: an estimated 5 billion text messages are sent each day in the United States, and at least 20 percent of all drivers have admitted to texting while driving.

The Texas Transportation Institute, headquartered in College Station, Texas, is an agency of The Texas A&M University System

Thanks to the Texas Transportation Institute for the story.

9/20/11

Lawrence motorcycle club warns drivers to keep an eye out for motorcycle riders

Recent fatal accidents have demonstrated the need for vigilence to avoid car-motorcycle collisions

As he rides his motorcycle daily from his Lawrence apartment to his job in De Soto, Kyle Robbins doesnt believe most drivers are looking for motorcycles.

I almost get hit every day, he said. People are not paying attention, especially pulling out of places.

Robbins of the Lawrence Sport Bike Association said the club is working to spread awareness about motorcycle safety after the tragic Aug. 31 death of club member Josh Skipton, 23, who was killed on Iowa Street near University Drive while riding his motorcycle home from his job as a salesman at Briggs Auto Group.

Lawrence police are still investigating how Skiptons accident occurred, but so far police said it appeared he tried to stop suddenly in northbound traffic and someone went into the southbound lane where he was struck by a van in oncoming traffic.

According to the Kansas Department of Transportation, 12 fatality accidents in Douglas County have involved motorcycles between 2006 and 2010. Skiptons accident was the first motorcycle accident involving a fatality in 2011.

But Robbins said there have been other recent injury accidents involving motorcycles in the area, and he said drivers should expect to see riders on streets and highways in nice weather this fall.

The sport bike association and Kansas Highway Patrol offer these safety tips to help keep motorcyclists safe:

Always allow a motorcyclist a full lane and always check your mirrors and blind spots before changing lanes or entering an intersection to make sure a motorcyclist is not nearby.

Use your signals before changing lanes.

Allow more distance, three to four seconds, when following a motorcycle to give the motorcyclist enough time to maneuver or stop in an emergency.

Motorcyclists should always wear a helmet and protective gear and turn their headlights on.

Motorcyclists should avoid driving near of the center lane where debris and oil from vehicles can build up.

Lawrence police Capt. Dan Ward who has ridden a motorcycle since he was a teenager said motorcyclists no matter their level of experience should frequently work on honing their skills by taking safety courses.

Riding is dangerous because often what could be a normal fender-bender collision between vehicles can be more serious when it involves a motorcycle because the motorcyclist is less protected compared to the drivers of a car, van or truck.

You have to drive defensively 100 percent of the time, Ward said, and be in control.

9/12/11

Kansas' texting law leading to lots of traffic tickets in Mission, Overland Park, Leawood and elsewhere in Johnson County

Law makes it illegal to text while driving and allows police officers to pull drivers over if they observe the offense

Kansas recently passed a law making it illegal to text while driving. This law makes sense, but enforcement will prove more difficult. It is not illegal to use a cellphone, perhaps to check directions or look at other information, it is only illegal to send and receive messages. Since the State or City will have the burden to show that texts were being sent, not that a map was being checked, etc., a good traffic lawyer can help you challenge a texting ticket in Olathe, Lenexa, Shawnee, or any other cities in Johnson County, Kansas.

As of July 1, Kansas law made it illegal to write, read or send a written communication using a wireless device while driving. Additional restrictions apply for young drivers. The girl involved in Saturdays accident also was cited for driving without a valid drivers license, but all Kansas licenses for drivers under 17 include a ban on any use of a wireless communication device while driving.

Its a good law that should be more vigorously enforced. There is no doubt that drivers of all ages are dangerously distracted by talking on their phones; those risks are multiplied when drivers attempt to send text messages. Its true that many other activities also can distract a driver, but the new state laws address one of the worst offenders.

9/7/11

Citizen efforts underway to rid Kansas City of red light cameras

Cameras mail tickets to drivers who are then forced to fight for their rights.

KANSAS CITY, MO. --

A citizen-led petition is taking place in an effort way to end the era of red light cameras in Kansas City, Missouri. The red light cameras were installed in 2009 and have taken thousands of photographs of red-light runners, mailed them tickets, and has brought in millions of dollars for the city.

This effort mirrors dozens, if not hundreds of similar efforts around the country. Some governments have abandoned their red-light cameras over class-action lawsuits from those ensnared by the cameras, politics, or not enough funding problems which arise when the rosy projections by the companies running the cameras don't materialize.

According to Kansas City government records, the number of red light camera tickets has been cut in half over the past two years, suggesting the cameras also have kept people from running red lights. "We're getting a false sense of security, thinking these cameras are dealing with that problem," said Sean O'Toole said in a recent interview.

O'Toole also said the cameras violate the constitution, ticketing vehicles without offering any proof about who was driving them."Go back to the traditional system of having traffic engineers set the lights according to how they should be set, so that we have less accidents," he said. "There's no doubt there's a lot of red-light running, but as I've said, there's way of dealing with that at the signal level."O'Toole said that making red and yellow lights stay on for a little longer will also give cars more time to pass through an intersection and decrease the chances of people running them.The city said it has taken in $9.7 million from the cameras, but it has also had to pay American Traffic Systems $3.1 million to run the program. The city's contract with the company runs until 2012.

9/5/11

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rules that traffic violations cannot justify a warrantless entry into a home

The "exigent circumstances" doctrine was often used in Johnson County (Olathe, Overland Park, Lenexa, etc) to justify police entering a home after observing or receiving information about traffic violations

Our Olathe traffic defense firms experienced Lenexa & Overland Park traffic lawyers have consistently been opposed to police entering peoples homes over minor traffic matters. This usually occurs at night, when the Johnson County police officers believe that the driver may have been under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Our law firm believes that drunk driving laws in Mission, Leawood, and elsewhere in Johnson County, Kansas should be enforced, however we do not think that the sanctity of peoples homes should be compromised in efforts to find and arrest drunk drivers.

Most of these traffic violations home entries take place before a Johnson County or Mission drunk driving enforcement officer has done a DUI investigation, although they may have observed a traffic violation or received a call from a citizen who had done so. This alone should not be enough to allow an unwarranted entry into a citizens home.

Much of Fourth Amendment search and seizure law is based upon courts interpretations of the Fourth Amendment and how it should be applied in a given situation, however the Amendment clearly states that peoples homes should be secure against government intrusion.

Prosecutors in Overland Park and elsewhere in Johnson County have often argued that the doctrine of exigent circumstances allowed police entry into a home without a warrant. The argument usually centered on the fact that a typical drunk drivers blood alcohol level would deteriorate during the time it took to get a warrant, so there was not enough time to do so. This argument is deeply flawed.

First, the argument ignores the fact that only felony crimes have been held by courts to allow exigent circumstances exceptions to apply to home searches, the idea being that homes are one of our most sacred areas and thus deserve additional protection from government intrusion. Second, the argument ignores the fact that time may actually make a persons blood alcohol content go up, not down, especially if they are drinking in their home or if they were drinking shortly before getting behind the wheel.

A police officers observation of a missed stop sign in Leawood, Lenexa, or speeding in Olathe or elsewhere in Johnson County should never provide a reason to discard the Fourth Amendment and allow police access into private homes. These violations should be treated as the minor matters they are and police officers should be held to the proper standard.

Police Officers in Johnson County or elsewhere have no right to pursue a minor traffic stop into a home, according to a ruling handed down Wednesday by the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals (which presides over the District of Kansas, among others) considered what happened after police in Sulphur, Oklahoma saw a suspect allegedly driving with faulty taillights on July 23, 2007. This case was a civil 42 U.S.C. 1983 claim alleging that the police officers violated the defendant's civil rights by entering his home.

In United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38 (1976), the Supreme Court concluded the exigent circumstances, based in part on hot pursuit of a suspect, were sufficient to rebut the presumption of unreasonableness generally attending the warrantless entry into a
home. The officers entered Santanas home immediately following a controlled drug transaction when she retreated into her house, still in possession of the drugs, after the officers identified themselves and attempted to arrest her. Santana, 427 U.S. at 42-43.

Again addressing the question of warrantless entry, in Welsh v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court noted the Court in [Payton] explicitly refused to consider the sort of emergency or dangerous situation, described in our cases as exigent circumstances, that would justify a warrantless entry into a home for the purpose of either arrest or search. 466 U.S. at 742 (quotation omitted). Officers arrested Welsh in his home for a drunk driving offense after he left his vehicle at the scene of an accident. Id. at 740. The underlying exigency in Welsh was not pursuit, but preservation of evidence based on the need to collect blood and breath samples before alcohol dissipated from Welshs system. Id. at 753. The Court decided the officers violated the Fourth Amendment by entering
Welshs home at night without a warrant to arrest him for a noncriminal traffic offense.

The facts were as follows: Murray County (OK) Deputy Sheriff Craig A. Billings signaled Joshua Burchett, who was driving a car, to pull over based upon a taillight violation. Burchett continued on for two blocks, parked in the driveway of his parents' three-bedroom home, ran inside and hid in the bathroom. Billings called for backup and Sulphur Police Officers Steve Watkins and Tony Simpson arrived at the scene. Billings began kicking the door, which woke the parents, Jose and Christina Mascorro. Jose Mascorro opened the door and Billings pointed a gun at his head, yelling, "On your knees [expletive]. Where is he? Where is he?" When Christina Mascorro asked whether Billings had a warrant, she was blasted in the mouth with pepper spray. Billings then sprayed the other residents, including Mascorro's 14-year-old son. Christina Mascorro retreated to a back bedroom and called 911. Officer Watkins pulled her outside, again without a warrant allowing him to remove her from her home, while Deputy Billings kicked in the door to the bathroom, gun drawn, to retrieve Burchett. The officers did not attempt to get a warrant to arrest the driver.

Jose and Christina Mascorro, after being treated at the hospital, were arrested and charged with obstructing a police officer in the performance of his duty. The district court judge described the state of their home as "ransacked" after the officers left. The Mascorros sued, claiming the officers made an illegal entry, used excessive force and made a false arrest. The law enforcement officers moved to dismiss the case based on their qualified immunity from prosecution. They argued that their actions were justified because they had been in "hot pursuit" of a fleeing suspect.

The appeals court considered US Supreme Court precedent on the question to determine whether "exigent circumstances" authorized their entry into a home without a warrant. They found only felony cases allowed such entry in extreme cases.

"We do not find the circumstances here amount to the kind of exigency excusing an officer from obtaining a warrant before entering a home," Judge Terrence L. O'Brien wrote for the court. "The intended arrest was for a traffic misdemeanor committed by a minor, with whom the officer was well acquainted, who had fled into his family home from which there was only one exit. The risk of flight or escape was somewhere between low and nonexistent. Moreover, there was no evidence which could have potentially been destroyed and there were no officer or public safety concerns."

Police officers lose their qualified immunity if their on-duty actions violated a constitutional right. The panel found these officers could be sued because they violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

"No reasonable officer would have thought pursuit of a minor for a mere misdemeanor traffic offense constituted the sort of exigency permitting entry into a home without a warrant," O'Brien concluded.

9/2/11

Heavy truck breaks through wall and ends up hanging from building

Driver of the crashed commercial vehicle was very scared but survived uninjured

A NYC salt-spreading truck crashed through the wall of a Queens Sanitation Department repair shop. It might've been kinda neat if the truck weren't on a top floorwith a driver inside, screaming his lungs out.

Talking to theNew York Post, nearby repair shop owner Frank Almona described the situation:

I heard a loud bang and turned and I saw this truck sticking out of the side of the building. The driver was screaming like crazy, he was saying, 'Help, help, help.' He was hanging on. He looked like he was in shock. I couldn't believe what I was looking at.

9/1/11

Jalopnik.com rates America's 10 worst driving cities

Kansas City, Overland Park, Olathe, and Johnson County do not make the list

10. Alexandria Virginia

9. San Fransisco

8. Jersey City, NJ

7. Hartford, CN

6. Philadelphia

5. Providence, RI

4. Newark, NJ

3. Glendale, CA

2. Baltimore, MD

1. Washington, DC

See the original story here:

http://jalopnik.com/5837052/americas-ten-worst-driving-cities/gallery/1

8/25/11

Speeding SUV misses a turn, loses control, and crashes into the roof of a Kansas City home

Driver of the Chevy Blazer missed a turn and flew through the air landing on the roof of a home - then tried to put the vehicle in reverse!

Kansas City, MO Police told local news stations that a SUV was speeding north on Kensington (in Kansas City, Missouri) when the driver lost control on a hill by the home and missed a turn at a "T intersection." The sport utility vehicle then drove through a yard at high speed, which acted like a ramp, launching the SUV off the ground with enough force to crash through the roof of a home.

The car never tried to stop, never tried to do anything, said Harold Hagans, a neighbor who witnessed the crash happen from across the street. And then, he said, the driver tried to put the SUV into reverse, without success.

Two passengers in the SUV were injured in the crash and taken to hospitals via ambulance, but their injuries were not considered life threatening.

The residents of the home were inside at the time of the crash, but a delayed bedtime for two little girls may have saved their lives because they were watching TV in another part of their home instead of being in their bedroom where they might have been injured.

This SUV crash is rather unique. Our Kansas City personal injury law firm has handled our fair share of auto & SUV accidents, however we have never seen a case where a SUV ends up on the roof of a home. Details are still fuzzy, but it appears that the SUV driver must have been traveling at an extremely high rate of speed to launch the two-ton vehicle high enough to end up on a roof.

In accidents like this, a good personal injury attorney will immediately think "what was that driver on?" While the facts of the case certainly suggest impairment via alcohol or drugs, nothing of that sort has been reported. It will be interesting to see if that ends up being the case.

8/22/11

California considering limiting the use of DUI/sobriety checkpoints - check lanes - roadblocks

Legislators realizing that DUI checkpoints are a poor use of police resources and are ineffective at combating drunk driving

Our Olathe law firm's drunk driving defense lawyers have long argued that DUI checkpoints should be banned because they are a poor use of police resources and unnecessarily burden the vast majority of drivers caught up in them. The average Johnson County DUI checkpoint stop "seizes" 99 drivers for every driver who is tested for driving under the influence. Of those tested, half are released, meaning that 199 drivers are seized without probable caused and released. This cannot stand in a country which claims to pride itself on minimal government intrusion into private lives.

Our law office's Johnson County DUI lawyers are currently appealing a case involving an Overland Park DUI checkpoint to the Kansas Supreme Court. During the court proceedings, it was revelaed that a typical Johnson County checkpoint ties up 50 (FIFTY!) police officers and leads to 8-10 drunk driver arrests, a 5:1 officer to arrest ratio. A saturation patrol, on the other hand, typically involves a 1:1 officer to arrest ration. Clearly saturation patrols are a more effective use of police resources.

"Under current California law, cities and counties run sobriety checkpoints funded almost entirely by $30 million in federal grant money and pushed by MADD. The drunk-driving (DUI) roadblocks catch comparatively few drunk drivers, so officers often focus on issuing as many tickets as possible for minor violations while cars are stopped, a scheme designed to increase the revenue flowing into city coffers. California Assembly Bill 353 separates vehicle inspection checkpoints from DUI roadblocks and prohibits impounding of vehicles unless the alleged offense meets certain criteria.

Cars will be impounded from anyone suspected of driving while drunk or on a suspended license, unless the driver or a police officer can safely park the vehicle until a properly licensed driver can take it away. Some lawmakers see racial motivation behind current practice: "Despite their original intent, sobriety checkpoints are increasingly being used to target drivers that are ineligible to obtain licenses in order to increase local revenue," the bill's sponsor, Assemblyman Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), explained. "Frequently these checkpoints are set up in the areas that do not have a high correlation of DUI arrests or accidents; instead, they are placed in neighborhoods and, or locations where there are higher populations of low-income families and communities."

Cedillo cited the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California, Berkeley which calculated that at 3200 roadblocks in the past two years, 61 percent took place in locations with a heavy Hispanic population. "While impoundments for DUIs are usually overnight, impoundment for driving without a license typically last for a term of 30 days," Cedillo said. "Often, this effectively results in the forfeiture of the vehicle because the towing and impoundment fees may well exceed the value of the vehicle, which is apart from the fines already paid to local governments."

Municipalities collect $150 from license fines imposed at roadblocks plus receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees from towing companies. Out of 24,000 vehicle impounds at DUI roadblocks in 2009, a mere 13 percent were related to drunk driving."

Hopefully Kansas and other states will follow suit in outlawing or severely limiting the practice of DUI checkpoints/check lanes/roadblocks.

8/17/11

Court upholds the use of license plate scanners to make traffic stops

Several cities' police departments in Johnson County, KS use these scanners to look for drivers with suspended licenses, including Lenexa, Olathe, and Overland Park

Police in Texas have the right to stop motorists if a license plate recognition camera system suspects the vehicle's owner lacks automobile insurance. In an unpublished ruling last Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the Texas Court of Appeals refused the attempt by Kenneth Ray Short to have a March 2010 traffic stop declared illegal.

Officer Daniel McGrew's patrol car had been equipped with an automated license plate recognition system (ALPR, also known as ANPR in the UK) that photographed and recorded the identity of every passing vehicle. When Short drove past, an instantaneous computerized database search returned a result that Short's insurance coverage was "unconfirmed for 45 days or more and expired." Sometimes, when the system returns just that the plate is "unconfirmed" it means the Department of Insurance database is unable to say whether or not the vehicle is insured, and it is the police department's policy not to stop such vehicles. In this case, the system claimed Short's car had not been insured since December 6, 2009, so McGrew conducted a traffic stop.

Short appealed, citing an appellate decision last year that found a traffic stop could not be based on a report that insurance information for a vehicle was unavailable. The three-judge panel disagreed with Short because the information returned was far more complete and Officer McGrew testified that he believed the system was "very accurate.

"It is our opinion that the trial court could reasonably conclude that a reasonably objective officer could form a reasonable suspicion based on the evidence provided from the database inquiry in this case, and from that information, the officer could have formed a reasonable belief that the car Short was driving was not covered by an insurance policy," Justice Hollis Horton wrote. "Because the trial court, on the facts before it, could reasonably choose to believe Officer McGrew's testimony and decide to deny Short's motion to suppress evidence, we overrule Short's sole issue on appeal."

The Texas Department of Insurance set up the TexasSure Vehicle Insurance Verification database in June 2008. Kansas has a similar system which is utlized by several Johnson County police departments to look for drivers with suspended licenses, incuding Lenexa, Overland Park, and Olathe.

8/15/11

The most dangerous cities to drive in are ranked, Kansas City does not make the list!

No Kansas or Missouri cities are listed as the "most dangerous to drive," but Florida and the South are very well represented.

This list may come as a surprise to drivers in Kansas City, Overland Park, Olathe, Leawood, and elsewhere in Johnson, Wyandotte, and Jackson counties, but none of these areas made the top 15 list of dangerous cities to drive in. Surprisingly (or not), most of the cities seem to be in the South.

Here are the 15 cities that ranked the most dangerous to drive in:

15. Oklahoma City, Okla.
Population: 551,789
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 13.41
Total fatalities: 74
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 13.5

14. Birmingham, Ala.
Population: 228,798
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 13.55
Total fatalities: 31
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 15.2

13. Tulsa, Okla.
Population: 385,635
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 14.00
Total fatalities: 54
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 18.5

12. St. Petersburg, Fla.
Population: 245,314
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 14.27
Total fatalities: 35
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 28.6

11. Jacksonville, Fla.
Population: 807,815
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 14.36
Total fatalities: 116
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 13.8

10. Lubbock, Texas
Population: 220,483
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 14.97
Total fatalities: 33
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 15.2

9. Memphis, Tenn.
Population: 669,651
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 15.08
Total fatalities: 101
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 11.9

8. Jackson, Miss.
Population: 173,861
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 15.53
Total fatalities: 27
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 18.5

7. Chattanooga, Tenn.
Population: 170,880
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 16.39
Total fatalities: 28
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 17.9

6. Salt Lake City, Utah
Population: 181,698
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 16.51
Total fatalities: 30
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 26.7

5. San Bernardino, Calif.
Population: 198,580
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 17.12
Total fatalities: 38
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 15.8

4. Little Rock, Ark.
Population: 189,515
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 17.94
Total fatalities: 34
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 26.5

3. Augusta-Richmond Co., Ga.
Population: 194,149
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 19.57
Total fatalities: 38
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 15.8

2. Orlando, Fla.
Population: 230,519
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 19.95
Total fatalities: 46
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 10.9

1. Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
Population: 183,126
Total fatality rate per 100,000 population: 22.39
Total fatalities: 41
Percentage of fatalities that were pedestrians: 24.4

7/20/11

Stolen car crashes into a fire hydrant, leading to serious damage to other vehicles

Suspect was fleeing from police when he crashed into the Hydrant

Two homes were evacuated Tuesday in California after a carjacking suspect crashed a car into a fire hydrant and sent water streaming into the air for more than two hours.

A black sedan, which officials later learned was stolen at knifepoint, crashed into a white pick-up truck and then hit the hydrant, sending more than 100 feet of water into the air and onto the roofs of two homes. Both homes were flooded and residents were evacuated. The water was shut off by 8:25 p.m. after DWP officials were called in to help, according to Fire spokesman Matt Spence.

One home was red-tagged over fears that the retaining wall would collapse, sending mud and debris into the residence. The Red Cross was helping the residents find shelter. Authorities say they ran the sedan's license plate and discovered the vehicle was reported stolen. The driver, who was being treated for injuries at a hospital, was expected to be arrested.

Thanks to KTLA for the story: http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-el-sereno-sheared-hydrant,0,1026063.story?track=rss

7/8/11

Kansas Court of Appeals makes decision in checkpoint case affirming the Overland Park driving under the influence checkpoint

The strong dissent by Justice Atchenson may provide a road map for relief from the Kansas Supreme Court or for future challenges of DUI checkpoints in Overland Park and elsewhere in Kansas

Today the Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed a Johnson County District Court Judge's ruling regarding the Constitutionality of a driving under the influence checkpoint in Overland Park, KS. DUI checkpoints are used several times per month in Johnson County alone and are utilized by police departments throughout Kansas. These checkpoints necessarily stop innocent motorists, however courts have justified the Constitutional violation by "balancing" the "need" to apprehend drunk drivers. Our Olathe law firm's DUI defense lawyers have fought against DUI checkpoints in Mission, Overland Park, and elsewhere in Johnson County, arguing that they are not being set up in a Constitutional manner.

The Court of Appeals glossed over the facts in this case, likely because they were not at all supportive of the Court's argument. The dissent, however, accurately addressed the facts. Justice Atchenson went on to write:

"Based on the City of Overland Park's representation that its primary purpose for conducting the motor vehicle checkpoint entailed publicizing particular opinions and views about driving and alcohol use, I would find the exercise violated the First and Fourth Amendment rights of Defendant Kelly Rhodes and the 600 other drivers who were waylaid. A state or local government cannot use its police powers to create captive audiences as a means of educating or advocating on particular subjects or issues no matter how popular or benignthe message. The implications of a contrary rule would be both stunning and disturbing. Accordingly, the trial court should have granted the motion to suppress."

Essentially what Justice Atchenson was saying was that the purpose of a DUI checkpoint can only be for apprehending drunk drivers, not for "educating" the public about the dangers of drunk driving. While I disagree with the assertion that DUI checkpoints are in any way an effective means of apprehending drunk drivers (most other methods are much more successful), I do agree that "education" is not a permissible purpose for violating Constitutional Rights.

In applying his argument to the facts, Justice Atchenson looked at an exhaustive history of case law and wrote in reference to Sitz, Brown, Lidster, and Martinez-Fuerte:

"Those cases collectively establish that motor vehicle checkpoints may be used in conformity with the Fourth Amendment as a means to detect and arrest drunk drivers, to inquire about leads in a particular crime when there is some reason to believe motorists in the vicinity might have relevant information, and, at least near the national borders, to interdict undocumented aliens. Those checkpoints must be operated in a way that substantially curtails or eliminates the ability of law enforcement officers to selectively detain drivers, minimizes the delay, and guards against causing undue anxiety or unease on the part of those stopped. The common element to those checkpoints is a carefully circumscribed investigatory function. In the DUI and immigration stops, that investigation is aimed at a particular systemic problemeither drunk drivers or (again, near border crossings) the influx of undocumented aliensand identifying persons engaged in those illegal activities. The other permissible investigatory function seeks to identify witnesses to a specific crime based on articulable reasons to believe motorists traveling through the checkpoint might have such information. A properly configured checkpoint to determine if drivers have valid licenses also probably comports with the Fourth Amendment. See Edmond, 531 U.S. at 47 n.2....

The majority here upholds the checkpoint that snared Rhodes because it satisfies the Deskins standards for an acceptable DUI detection operation. But that analysis and the checkpoint's conformity with Deskins bypasses the more fundamental constitutional issue. The propriety of the purpose for the checkpoint presents a threshold determination in the Fourth Amendment inquiry. Edmond, 531 U.S. at 46; William, 603 F.3d at 68. The Overland Park checkpoint was not set up with the principal goal or "programmatic purpose" of interdicting drunk drivers. It was established primarily to fulfill an educational function. That is, the main objective entailed communication of a set of ideas the City of Overland Park concluded would benefit those drivers and their passengers seized and detained in the checkpoint process. There is no exception to the Fourth Amendment that allows government agents to effect seizures of individuals for that reason. A government entity may not exercise its police powersspecifically its authority to detain citizens otherwise going about their businessas a means of publicizing a viewpoint on a given issue. Such a constitutional limitation would seem to follow ineluctably from Edmond: If law enforcement officers cannot use a motor vehicle checkpoint to investigate crime generally, they cannot step out of the investigatory sphere altogether to use a checkpoint for some entirely different purpose." (emphasis added).

Justice Atchenson then went on to apply 1st Amendment law to the checkpoint, a very novel approach. He explained that a government agency cannot force citizens to "listen" to it, which was done in this case.

There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from this case, the best of which is that there is now a new avenue by which Johnson County DUI defense lawyers can challenge drunk driving checkpoints.

7/1/11

New Kansas DUI laws effective today, July 1, 2011

Law change drastically affects Johnson County DUI defense cases and administrative hearings re: driver's license suspensions

The attorneys in our Olathe driving under the influence defense firm have been studying changes to Johnson County & Kansas DUI law which are effective today. These changes will dramatically alter our firm's lawyers' approach to defending DUI/DWI cases in Overland Park, Leawood, Gardner, Merriam, DeSoto, and elsewhere in Johnson County. The changes are highlighted below:

1. $50 fee to request an administrative hearing to challenge driver' license suspensions: Nearly every Kansas drunk driving case will involve two components - a criminal case in a district court (such as Johnson County District Court) or municipal court (such as Shawnee Municipal Court) and an proposed administrative driver's license suspension. The proposed driver's license suspension will automatically be applied unless an administrative hearing is requested within 14 calendar days of the date of the driver's DUI arrest (unless the 14th day is on a weekend or holiday in which case the driver has until 5:00 on the next business day). Requesting an administrative hearing did not previously involve a fee, so our firm's DUI lawyers expect the number of hearings to drop significantly.

Example: A driver is pulled over in Gardner for driving under the influence. If their Gardner DUI attorney (or them personally) does not request an administrative hearing within the 14 day time period, then their driver's license will automatically be suspended for 30 days, followed by a 180 or 360 day restriction, 1 year, or longer.

2. Driver's license suspensions for breath test failures and refusals to be shortened: One of the best aspects of the new Kansas DUI laws concerns the shorter length of administrative driver's license suspensions.

For first time breath test failures between .08 and .15, the penalty will be a 30 day driver' license suspension followed by a 180 or 360 days of restriction, depending on the person's driving history. The restriction will include an ignition interlock requirement. Example: A driver is pulled over for DUI in DeSoto and they either lose or do not request an administrative hearing. The KDR will suspend their driver's license for 30 days and then restrict it for 6 months or a year depending on whether they have ever been convicted of a "habitual violator" offense or have 3 or moving violations on their record.

For first time breath test failures over .15, the penalty is a one year driver's license suspension. This is also true for subsequent breath test failures, however those will carry a varying license restriction period as well.

All breath test refusals will be punished by a one year driver's license suspension, followed by a 1, 2, 3, or 10 year driver's license restriction, with the restriction requiring an ignition interlock device. Example: A person is arrested for driving under the influence in Overland Park and suffers an administrative driver's license suspension. Previous Kansas DUI law could have them suspended for 3 years, 10 years, or even life. The new DUI law would result in the driver's license suspended for 1 year due to the Overland Park DUI arrest. A driver's license restriction period would then follow the suspension.

3. Restricted driver's licenses after 45 days of suspension: This is perhaps the best portion of the new DUI law. Previous Kansas law privided "hard" suspensions of 1, 2, 3, 10 years or even lifetime! This simply ruined lives as folks lost their jobs and couldn't take care of their families when faced with these suspensions. The new Kansas DUI law allows drivers to apply for a restricted (with ignition interlock) driver's license after 45 days of suspension. The new law is retroactive to drivers previously suspended for driving under the influence in Johnson County or elsewhere in Kansas!

Example: A person was administratively suspended for driving under the influence in Merriam in 2010 and slapped with a 10 year suspension. They can now apply for a restricted driver's license!

4. Fines for DUI convictions going up $250 first all offenses: The minimum fine for a first time DUI conviction in Olathe, Leawood, or elsewhere in Johnson County will be $750. The minimum fine for a second time DUI conviction in Lenexa, Prairie Village, or elsewhere in Kansas will be $1250. The minimum fine for a third time DUI conviction in Johnson County District Court will be $1750.

5. "Prior convictions" to be redefined, making certain cases that used to be felonies misdemeanors: This is also a very important and helpful part of the new DUI laws in Johnson County and Kansas. Prior Kansas law counted every conviction or DUI diversion in a person's lifetime as a "prior conviction" for purposes of sentencing. The new law only counts convictions occurring after July 1, 2001 as "prior convictions." The result will be that many cases that used to be treated as felony DUI charges in Johnson County or elsewhere in Kansas will now be classified as misdemeanors, dramatically reducing drivers' potential penalties.

Example: A person is arrested for driving under the influence in Overland Park and the arresting officer or prosecutor discovers the person has prior drunk driving convictions in 1998 and 2005. Under the old laws, the case would have been sent to Johnson County District Court as a felony DUI charge because of the two prior convictions. The new law will keep the case in Overland Park Municipal Court where our firm's Overland Park DUI attorneys can get much better plea offers for a misdemeanor conviction.

6/28/11

Supreme Court broadens the confrontation clause of the Constitution, providing possible help to those charged with driving under the influence

Court's ruling in Bullcoming v. New Mexico extends protections previously provided by Melendez-Diaz

In a decision that has wide-ranging implications for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI/DWI) defense in Johnson County and elsewhere in Kansas, the United States Supreme Court yesterday reconfirmed the Sixth Amendment right to confront one's accuser (called the "confrontation clause") applies to analysts who claim to have certified evidence from a machine. The Supreme Court concluded that "stand-in" expert witnesses are not a substitute for the individuals who actually conducted the tests. The decision broadens the applicability of the landmark Melendez-Diaz ruling from 2009.

The decision could provide relief to folks charged with driving under the influence and have blood or urine samples taken for analysis by law enforcement. In the past, our Olathe DUI defense firm has run into cases in Johnson County where the prosecutor attempted to admit evidence without calling the actual lab technician who performed the analysis. This ruling gives ample support to the proposition that a drunk driving case in Johnson County cannot be based upon bootstrapped testimony.

The high court considered the case of Donald Bullcoming whose vehicle rear-ended a truck. The other driver went to exchange insurance information with Bullcoming and noticed that the man smelled of alcohol. Bullcoming fled the scene on foot before police arrived, but Officer Marty Snowbarger caught up to him and arrested him for DUI. After a breath test was refused, Snowbarger obtained a warrant to take Bullcoming's blood. Forensic analyst Curtis Caylor's test of this sample showed a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.21.

Blood testing in Johnson County DUI cases is performed by a gas chromatograph machine but remains subject to human error. The court noted a "fairly complex" Colorado lab mistake systematically produced high BAC readings for 206 defendants. Caylor did not testify at trial because he had been put on unpaid leave from his job for an unspecified reason. Instead, another lab tech testified regarding the results which he had neither observed nor reviewed.

The Supreme Court examined the question of whether a lab report could be introduced as evidence by an "expert" who did not actually conduct the tests in question. The prosecution argued that the gas chromatograph machine was the accuser in the case and that Caylor simply wrote down the result without exercising independent judgment. For that reason, Razatos was an equivalent substitute. The court disagreed.

"Suppose a police report recorded an objective fact -- Bullcoming's counsel posited the address above the front door of a house or the read-out of a radar gun," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the majority. "Could an officer other than the one who saw the number on the house or gun present the information in court -- so long as that officer was equipped to testify about any technology the observing officer deployed and the police department's standard operating procedures? As our precedent makes plain, the answer is emphatically 'No.'"

The court majority noted that using a surrogate witness would conceal any lapses or lies on the part of the certifying analyst. It also noted that the burden on the prosecution from the requirement of live testimony could have been cured by having Razatos retest the blood sample, which was preserved in accordance with New Mexico law.

"As a rule, if an out-of-court statement is testimonial in nature, it may not be introduced against the accused at trial unless the witness who made the statement is unavailable and the accused has had a prior opportunity to confront that witness," Ginsburg concluded.

6/21/11

Speed limit on several Kansas highways to be increased to 75mph

Highway safety groups and some law enforcement groups oppose the move. Everyone else is just happy to get there a bit faster...

Beginning July 1, the speed limit on the Kansas Turnpike from the Oklahoma border to Kansas Highway 7 in Wyandotte County will increase to 75 mph from 70 mph, the Kansas Department of Transportation announced Tuesday. The other Kansas highways which will increase their speed limits to 75 mph were:

Interstate 70, from the Colorado state line to just west of Topeka in Shawnee County.

Interstate 135, from a half-mile north of the 85th Street interchange in Harvey County to I-70 near Salina.

Interstate 35 from U.S. Highway 50 just east of Emporia to a mile east of the Sunflower/Edgerton Interchange in Johnson County.

U.S. Highway 81 from I-70 near Salina north to Kansas Highway 106.

U.S. 69 Highway from just north of the north junction of U.S. 54 in Bourbon County to the 199th Street Interchange in Johnson County.

6/20/11

I-70 in Kansas and Missouri to be the subject of "enhanced enforcement period"

Kansas Highway Patrol and Missouri Highway Patrol to saturate the road in effort designed for motorist safety

Make sure you are driving carefully on I-70 for the forseeable future. Highway patrols in Kansas and Missouri announced Monday they will conduct a one-day enhanced enforcement period on Interstate 70.

Interstate 70 is one of the busiest interstates in the nation, especially when families take to the road on vacation, said Deb Miller, Kansas Secretary of Transportation. Kansas Highway Patrol Supt. Col. Ernest Garcia said, This special enforcement enhances our traffic safety mission, and our goal is to reduce deaths and injuries.

I-70 in Kansas carries anywhere from 7,600 vehicles a day near the western border to more than 72,000 in the Kansas City area, according to state travel statistics.

In 2009, the latest year for which figures are available, nearly 2,000 crashes occurred on I-70 in Kansas, resulting in 20 fatalities and 579 injuries.

Officials didnt specify a date for the enhanced enforcement effort but said it will be conducted toward the end of June.

6/13/11

Amish buggy driver cited with driving under the influence

NEW CASTLE, Pa. Police said two people in a horse-drawn buggy were each arrested on a driving under the influence charge after they pulled into the path of a car in western Pennsylvania.

State police said 21-year-old Andy Byler and an unidentified 17-year-old female were both in control of the reins at the time of the crash Sunday night in Wilmington Township, Lawrence County.

Neither the buggy drivers nor the driver of the car were hurt. Police said the buggy drivers were taken to a hospital for a blood test.

The horse was injured but expected to survive.

6/3/11

Driver runs into a group of bicycle riders, sending 11 to hospitals with injuries

Car-bicycle collisions often lead to devastating injuries for the bicycle riders due to the massive weight and speed differences between cars/trucks and bikes

Our law firm's personal injury lawyers have experience representing bicyclists struck by passenger vehicles such as cars or trucks. We understand the serious and lasting injuries that can result from bicycle riders being run over by cars and trucks. This story demonstrates the dangerousness of car-bike collisions...

See more at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_bicyclists_struck/print

A driver plowed into a group of bicyclists on a midnight ride Thursday in a suspected drunken driving crash that injured 11 riders, at least one critically, police said.

A group of about 100 cyclists were on a ride about 8 miles south of downtown Los Angeles when they were struck by a Honda Civic shortly before 2 a.m.

Some bicyclists told KTTV a woman driving the car appeared to be using a cell phone before the crash. They said she slowed down then sped up and slammed into the group, sending some riders flying into the air and dragging at least one under her car.

Some witnesses said the car didn't stop as it mowed down a row of riders.

Television reports showed the car's smashed front end and shattered windshield.

Christine Elizabeth Dahab, 27, of Los Angeles was booked for investigation of driving under the influence and remained jailed on $15,000 bail, according to a Sheriff's Department website.

An email message to Dahab from The Associated Press was not immediately returned, and no message could be left at a phone number listed on her Facebook page.

The crash injured 11 riders, including at least one person who was hospitalized in critical condition and expected to survive, said Officer Jacquelyn Abad.

The car turned from a blind corner and hit riders who had stopped in a traffic lane to wait for others to catch up, said Sgt. David Krumer, the LAPD's bicycle liaison.

There were no skid marks so it was difficult to determine how fast the car was moving, Krumer said.

He could not confirm reports that a streetlight in the area was out.

"It appears that they were stopped in traffic" and some who had dismounted to chat with friends technically were pedestrians, Krumer said.

Bicyclists have a legal right to use the right traffic lane unless they impede traffic, and pedestrians are barred from traffic lanes, Krumer said. Violators potentially could be cited, he added.

However, drivers have a legal responsibility to exercise caution regardless of the circumstances, Krumer said.

"They're not at fault simply for being out there in the roadway," he said of the cyclists.

The riders were taking part in a weekly midnight ride starting in Koreatown that was advertised on the urban cycling website Midnight Ridazz. Night rides by loose confederations of riders have become increasingly popular in congested Los Angeles.

"There's no traffic so you can more easily get a group of 50 to 60 riders together and stay together as a group," Krumer said.

However, it is not necessarily safer than daytime rides.

"If you're driving at 2 in the morning, that's when all the DUI drivers are likely to be out," he said.

Some rides have reputations for being rowdy or quirky while others attract more straightforward riders, Krumer said.

Krumer said he hasn't seen an increase in reported accidents involving cyclists, but there can be tense relations with motorists on the crowded Los Angeles streets.

"Everybody wants their particular real estate on the roadway," he said. "Some drivers see bicyclists as taking away space and slowing them. Cyclists sometimes see drivers as maniacs going at unsafe speed."

5/20/11

Speeding & traffic ticket crackdown in Johnson County, Kansas

Kansas Highway Patrol and Missouri Highway Patrol are also participating in aggressive driving enforcement efforts

Our Olathe traffic law firm's attorneys have seen a large increase in the number of traffic tickets (speeding, red light, stop sign, following too closely, etc.) written in Johnson County lately, so the latest news came as no surprise.

Johnson County is made up of over 30 different municipalities which have their own police forces and own municipal courts. In tough economic times like these, Johnson County cities such as Leawood, Mission, Overland Park, Shawnee, Merriam, etc. have had a tough time with falling revenues due to falling or stalled property values and tax collection. This leaves the municipal courts as the only means to increase revenue, thus the increase in traffic enforcement.

Our firm's Leawood speeding & traffic ticket attorneys have noticed a large increase in the number of Leawood speeding tickets issued as well as a significant uptick in Leawood DUI arrests, especially at night near bars. Our law office has also noticed increased traffic enforcement in Overland Park, Merriam, Shawnee, Gardner, and throughout Johnson County. For instance, Prairie Village seems to be writing speeding and red light tickets at a much higher pace than before. Fortunately, our firm's traffic attorneys can amend tickets in Prairie Village and elsewhere in Johnson County. Certain cities will even allow amendments for speed of more that 20mph over the limit or in school and constructions zones.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/05/20/2889079/hundreds-of-citations-issued-during.html :

The Missouri and Kansas highway patrols announced that they and area police agencies participated in the special enforcement initiative on May 6, 8, 12 and 14 that targeted hazardous moving violations.

Each day, approximately 40 officers in Missouri and numerous officers in Kansas targeted motorists driving their vehicles in a hazardous manner.

Heres a breakdown of the violations:

7 driving while intoxicated.

698 speed violations.

184 other hazardous moving violations.

16 stop sign violations.

16 failed to signal violations.

9 failed to yield violations.

12 careless and imprudent driving violations.

123 seat belt violations.

9 child restraint violations.

488 non-hazardous moving violations.

1 misdemeanor resisting arrest by eluding.

1 felony arrest (resisting arrest by eluding.)

Also during the operation, two motorcycles were seized and one stolen vehicle recovered.

The operation was funded by Destination Safe /Missouri Department of Transportation and the Kansas Department of Transportation.

In addition to the two highway patrols, the other agencies involved were sheriff departments from Jackson, Johnson and Platte counties and the police departments from Kansas City, Gladstone, Grandview, Independence, North Kansas City, Olathe, Overland Park, Parkville, Platte City and Shawnee.

5/16/11

Learn more about the new Kansas DUI laws which dramatically change Kansas DUI criminal and driver's license suspension laws

Changes coming to driver's license suspensions and criminal DUI charges

Changes to driving under the influence (DUI/DWI) law in Johnson County, Kansas

The Kansas legislature recently passed a bill which overhauls major parts of driving under the influence law in Kansas. The changes include increasing the fines for DUI convictions, altering administrative drivers license suspensions for blood, breath and urine test refusals and failures, changing Kansas lifetime lookback to a 10 year lookback, altering some 3^rd time DUI charges from felonies to misdemeanors, and a number of other changes. The bill would also create a new database of DUI convictions to be maintained by the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI).

The most important thing to remember with DUI arrests in Overland Park, Prairie Village, elsewhere in Kansas and most other states is that there are two proceedings initiated in nearly every case. The two proceedings are related as far as the facts are concerned, but they are separate proceedings for every other purpose. You can with one and lose the other. First there is the criminal case in either a municipal court or in district court. Then there is also the drivers license administrative suspension with the Kansas Department of Revenue.

For instance, if a driver was arrested in Lenexa for DUI, then they (or their DUI attorney) would not only have to appear in Lenexa Municipal Court to answer the criminal drunk driving charges. There would also be a separate proceeding with the Kansas Department of Revenue to determine whether their drivers license should be administratively suspended for a chemical test (blood, breath, or urine) refusal or failure. The driver (or their DUI attorney) must request an administrative hearing with 14 days of their arrest or the suspension will automatically be enforced.

Drivers license suspension hearings from Johnson County drunk driving arrests to cost $50:

Kansas law allows drivers arrested for DUI (or their DUI defense lawyer) to request an administrative hearing to determine whether the proposed license suspension is appropriate. Once a request is timely made (within 14 days of arrest or service of a DC-27), the drivers license remains valid (assuming it was not already suspended or revoked) pending a hearing. Kansas DUI law currently makes these hearings free.

Under the new Kansas DUI bill, drivers arrested for DUI in Leawood, Shawnee, Mission, or elsewhere in Kansas will still be able to request an administrative hearing with the Kansas Department of Revenue to challenge their proposed drivers license suspension. The cost to hold an administrative hearing will now be $50, a change from the prior procedure which required was free.

The arestee's drivers license will remain valid pending a hearing, which can currently take 6-12 months to hold, although the $50 fee will likely slow the backlog of cases currently waiting an administrative hearing, leading to faster hearings.

Restricted drivers licenses to be available for drivers suspended for driving under the influence (DUI/DWI) in Johnson County or elsewhere in Kansas:

Kansas law does not currently allow for restricted drivers licenses for any purpose, unless specifically authorized by statute (meaning a .08 to .149 breath test on a first time DUI). The new Kansas DUI bill will allow drivers to petition for a restricted drivers license after a 45 day suspension period and if they install an ignition interlock on their vehicle.

The restricted driver's license will allow drivers to go back and forth to school, work, alcohol treatment, court, and ignition interlock appointments once the driver has installed an ignition interlock device on their vehicle. This restriction is new in Kansas and will help those arrested for or convicted of driving under the influence in Johnson County or elsewhere in Kansas to get to work, school, etc. without violating the law.

These restricted drivers licenses will also be retroactively available, so anyone whose drivers license was previously suspended based on a Johnson County or Kansas DUI arrest for 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 10 years, or life may now apply for the restricted drivers license after 45 days of suspension.

Our Leawood DUI defense firms attorneys believe that the best part of the new DUI bill concerns restricted drivers licenses available after 45 days of suspension. Studies have shown that 80% of suspended drivers continue to drive anyway, regardless of the consequences for driving while suspended. This means that the license suspensions, for the most part, are ineffective at keeping drunk drivers from getting behind the wheel. A better solution was certainly needed.

A car and a drivers license are necessary for the vast majority of Kansans to live daily life because public transportation is either limited or unavailable for most Kansans. Thus, our Olathe DUI defense firms attorneys have seen countless examples of lives and families being severely effected by drivers license suspensions as drivers lose jobs, custody, etc. The new restricted drivers licenses on Kansas DUI suspensions will allow folks to function and limit the effects on those who had nothing to do with the arrest.

Drivers license suspension reductions for those arrested and charged with driving under the influence in Overland Park, Mission, Shawnee, Merriam, or elsewhere in Johnson County, Kansas:

The DUI bill will dramatically change the administrative license penalties for those arrested and charged with driving under the influence in Leawood, Lenexa, or elsewhere in Johnson County, Kansas. These changes include shorter drivers license suspensions, restricted licenses, and procedural changes. The time changes are outlined on the chart below:

The lawyers in our Shawnee DUI defense firm believe that the drivers license suspension period changes are largely beneficial to Kansas drivers, especially when compared to the old penalties. More importantly, we think that the ignition interlock requirements will lead to fewer drunks getting behind the wheel which will provide a benefit to all of society.

5/13/11

Kansas DUI reform bill passed by Kansas Legislature, headed to Governor's desk

Bill will require ignition interlocks for more drivers arrested for DUI, will alter driver's license suspensions, change the jail sentences and fines for felony DUI convictions, and create a DUI conviction database.

The lawyers in our Johnson County DUI defense firm strongly support several of the measures in this bill, although it is not 100% positive by any means. Our Prairie Village driving under the influence attorneys have long argued that long driver's license suspensions serve little purpose other than to clog courts with DWS charges, prevent offenders from getting back on their feet, and don't keep most people from driving anyway.

This bill will allow folks who, under the current laws would have a suspended driver's license, to get licenses with ignition interlock devices. This will allow Johnson County drivers arrested for DUI/DWI to get to work, school, and to take care of their kids. Our law firm has long argued that punishing drivers with license suspensions was counter-productive and only led to more problems for society.

The House and Senate unanimously adopted Thursday a bill requiring installation of an ignition interlock device in the vehicle of all motorists convicted of driving under the influence in Kansas.

In addition, Senate Bill 6 establishes a $2.5 million central computer repository operated by the Kansas Bureau of Investigation to track DUIoffenses throughout the state. The program will be financed with Kansas Department of Transportation funds.

"Often the judge or prosecutor doesn't know how many times a person has been convicted of drunk driving. They don't know if it is the second time or the fifth,"said Rep. Pat Colloton, a Leawood Republican who helped draft the bill's components.

Sen. Tim Owens, an Overland Park Republican who led Senate negotiations on the DUIbill, said the legislation would make the state's roads and highways safer for motorists.

"Law enforcement is vigorously behind this bill," said Sen. Jeff King, R-Independence.

Under the DUI bill, interlock devices must be installed for six months on a first conviction. The devices preventing a car from starting if the driver failed a breath test for alcohol will be required for one year on a second conviction, two years for a third violation and three years for a fourth offense.

Fifth-time DUIoffenders will no longer have drivers licenses revoked. The rationale was that an estimated 80 percent of these offenders continue to drive illegally, and under the new rule they will only be allowed to drive in the next 10 yearswith an interlock device.

Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, said the fifth-time offenders deserved to lose driving privileges.

"Can we trust him to not get around the interlock device? I think we're moving backwards in that area," he said.

The Legislature should revisit the punishment for people who repeatedly violate DUIlaws in Kansas, said Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe. He predicted motivation for reconsideration of the issue would be fatalities caused by brazen offenders who refused to quit driving while intoxicated. "It is a mistake to get rid of revocation provisions,"Kinzer said.

The legislation mandates fines for DUIoffenders would increase by $250 and the interlock fee would climb by $100 to provide a funding for community corrections programs required to monitor for one year anyone guilty of a third or fourth DUI.

For the first time, DUIoffenses could be expunged after 10 years. Currently, there is no provision to delete a DUI.

Penalties related to first-time offenders would sunset in June 2015 unless renewed by the Legislature. This mechanism is often used to compel lawmakers to review the validity of policy.

5/12/11

What do your firms Overland Park DUI defense lawyers recommend if I am being investigated for driving under the influence in Johnson County or elsewhere in Kansas?

1. Do you know why I pulled you over? When the officer asks if you know why you were pulled over, what he really means is please admit violating the law I think you violated or tell me about other law violations that I did not witness. Unless you are a mind reader, you cant possibly know what the officer is thinking, so our Olathe law offices DUI defense attorneys recommend that you tell the officer that you do not know why he pulled you over. There is no reason to help the police issue you a traffic citation or strengthen a case that you are too drunk too drive.
2. How much have you had to drink tonight? Almost every DUI investigation in Johnson County involves the police officer asking the driver to admit to drinking. If the officer asks you if you have been drinking, you do not want to lie. Few things upset a Johnson County judge or jury more than dishonesty, so you dont want to hurt your credibility.
   1. The Fifth Amendment provides you with the right to remain silent, and our Overland Park drunk driving arrest defense lawyers recommend that you exercise your right not to incriminate yourself. If you have been drinking, politely tell the officer that you are declining to answer any questions that might incriminate you. If you have not been drinking, then by all means, tell the officer that you have not been drinking. DUI enforcement officers will often persist when a person refuses to answer questions, so plan on being firm and consistent with your refusal to answer questions.
3. Can you step out of the car? Johnson County drunk driving enforcement officers will almost always follow up an admission of drinking or any other evidence of drinking (slurred speech, odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, confusion, etc.) with a request that the driver exit the vehicle to perform field side sobriety tests. The lawyers in our Olathe DUI defense firm have handled hundreds of DUI cases in Johnson County, including the municipal courts in Overland Park, Lenexa, Mission, etc. and we recommend that you comply with the police officers request, but politely make it clear that you are submitting to his authority, not voluntarily getting out of your vehicle.
   
4. Will you take some tests to make sure youre safe to drive? A police officer focused on DUI arrests will usually follow up a command to youre your vehicle with a request to take some tests to make sure you are safe to drive. This request sounds innocent enough, but rest assured, if you are asked to take these tests, the police officer already thinks you are too drunk too drive and is simply hoping to pile up the evidence against you. Our firm's Merriam DUI defense lawyers recommend that you do not agree to perform any tests supposedly designed to be indicators of intoxication such at the walk and turn, 1 leg stand, etc. and other field side sobriety tests requested by a Johnson County Kansas police officer. You are required to obey lawful commands given by a police officer, however you are not required to perform the any tests, such as the alphabet test, counting test, finger test, or the standardized field side sobriety tests.
1. We all took tests in grade school and high school, but we rarely took tests designed to be failed, subject to the biases of the grader, without being told what we were graded on, and without even being told when the grading started. Yet, this is exactly how the field side sobriety tests work, in fact most drivers fail the walk and turn test before they even start walking!
2. The field side sobriety tests are extremely difficult to pass unless you have been prepped on what the investigating officer is grading you on, when the grading starts, and how to easily pass them. The conditions of the test also matter, it can be difficult to perform these on a roadway with traffic driving by or during poor weather conditions. Our law firms Shawnee DUI attorneys believe that 95% of sober people will fail the SFSTs the first few times they take them, even when sober. We also believe that once you know what the parameters of the test are, a person can pass them even when highly intoxicated.
   
5. Will you take a preliminary breath test (PBT)? The lawyers in our Johnson County DUI defense firm do not believe it is in a drivers best interests to take a preliminary breath test unless the driver is absolutely sure they will not blow over the legal limit. It is extremely important to keep in mind that the preliminary breath test on the side of the road is completely different from the Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test that is offered at a police station or in a mobile DUI can (usually at a checkpoint). Our law firms Johnson County DUI lawyers almost always recommend that a driver submit to an Intoxilyzer 8000 test, but we seldom recommend that a driver submit to a preliminary breath test.
1. Kansas law permits police officers to request that a driver submit to a preliminary breath test whenever the police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe they have been operating a vehicle after drinking. The preliminary breath test is a handheld breath alcohol instrument that is often carried by Johnson County traffic enforcement and DUI enforcement officers. Officers in some cities such as Shawnee and Mission always seem to carry a PBT regardless of whether they are DUI enforcement officers or not. Preliminary breath tests are often offered to drivers who have already done the field side sobriety tests, regardless of whether they passed or failed those tests. The investigating officer can make an arrest regardless of what the results of the preliminary breath test are, or whether the driver even submits to the PBT.
2. The penalty for refusing a preliminary breath test is a traffic ticket that is a non-moving violation, with a fine between $100 and $150, thus it will not be reported to insurance companies or show up as a mark on your drivers license. A speeding ticket is actually a more severe infraction.
3. The failure or refusal to take a preliminary breath test cannot be used as an evidence in a criminal trial, unless used only to show that a person refused the PBT. It can also be used at a probable cause hearing such as a preliminary hearing or motion to suppress hearing. In most cases, a valid PBT failure will result in the court finding that the police officer had probable cause to make an arrest.
6. I am placing you under arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol. If you are listening to a statement such as this, it is important that you keep your wits and to not make things worse for yourself. You are likely being recorded by the police cars in-car camera on the side of the road and in the car, anything you say or do can be used against you as evidence of intoxication. Once again, you have the right to remain silent, our firms aggressive and experienced Mission DUI/DWI/OWI defense attorneys recommend that you use that right. Our firms drunk driving defense lawyers have handled numerous cases where our client has a good case until they are arrested and make all types of admissions in the back of the police car. Statements such as, I guess I shouldnt have had those last 3 shots, Man, you got me, Im drunk, I didnt think 5 drinks would get me that drunk, etc. can turn a good DUI case into a loser.
7. I gave a breath test over the legal limit (.08) after I was arrested for drunk driving, what do I do now? In Kansas, drivers have the right to request an independent blood test after they have taken a blood, breath, or urine test requested by a police officer. The key here is that the driver must first take the test requested by law enforcement before requesting the independent blood test. If the police officer will not take you to get an independent test, then the original blood, breath, or urine test results cannot be used against the driver! This puts most drivers in a no-lose situation if they request a blood test following a failure because the result cannot get worse, if can only get better. Our law firms DUI defense lawyers recommend that all drivers who have failed a blood, breath, or urine test request an independent blood test.
8. I was arrested for DUI in Johnson County, now I am out, what do I do now? The first thing to do once you are released is to make sure that you comply with all of your bond conditions. Once youve taken care of bond conditions, you need to find an attorney who knows who to properly evaluate and challenge Johnson County driving under the influence charges and the associated administrative hearings regarding drivers license suspensions.
1. This analysis is also valid at the police station. Most police stations , such as Overland Park, Merriam, Lenexa, Leawood, Mission, and Shawnee have cameras throughout the station that are constantly recording folks who have been arrested for drunk driving. Any actions, statements, or tests will likely be recorded.
   
   

5/07/11

5/5/11

Advice for avoiding traffic and speeding tickets in Merriam, Overland Park, Leawood, Mission, Prairie Village, elsewhere in Johnson County and throughout Kansas.

The lawyers in our Olathe traffic law firm are often asked what drivers can do to avoid speeding and other traffic citations - the following is a short, and incomplete guide.

First, it should be noted that these are simply guidelines and are not intended to be legal advice. This information does not create an attorney-client relationship - you have to hire us for that!

1. Don't speed or commit the traffic violation in the first place: This goes without saying, but it is important to remember that the easiest way to avoid a ticket is to avoid committing the traffic violation in the first place.
2. Know where traffic enforcement officers like to hide or patrol: This is a big key and can be accomplished by (1) getting a radar detector; (2) learning patterns of your local law enforcement; and (3) being aware of your surroundings and places highway patrolmen or police officers like to hide their patrol cars and motorcycles.
1. A radar detector is a great way to learn where police officers are patrolling or where they are sitting. These detectors work by emitting their own radar which will interact with police radar and return a signal to the detector, which then alerts the driver. Radar detectors come in various qualities, in general the more you spend, the better the detector. Our firm's traffic attorneys recommend the Valentine 1 (V1) because it seems to give our firm's traffic clients the best chance of detecting police officers using radar, especially on Kansas highways such as I-70 and I-35. Keep in mind that a detector can give you a false sense of security and should not be used as an excuse to speed. Laser detection is not as helpful as radar detection because the nature of laser (LIDAR) speed detectors limits the "scatter" that could be detected by vehicles not being targeted by the traffic officer using it. Drivers should keep this in mind, especially in cities such as Olathe, Prairie Village, Leawood, Overland Park, etc. where there are lots of places for traffic cops to hide.
2. Learning law enforcement's traffic enforcement patterns can be extremely helpful. Traffic cops in Johnson County often have favorite spots to patrol or to set up and run stationary radar or laser speed detection. Police officers will also watch intersections for drivers who run red lights, especially in Overland Park or Olathe. Pay attention to where you see law enforcement and then be extra vigilant in those areas.
1. Prairie Village traffic officers often check speed and monitor red lights at (1) the intersection of 75th and Mission; (2) the bottom of the hill on State Line road near 103rd St.; (3) 83rd and State Line; (4) 87th between Mission and Metcalf.
2. Mission police officers often run radar and look for traffic infractions on (1) I-35 near Lamar; (2) Shawnee Mission Parkway, especially around Nall and Roe; (3) neighborhoods around 67th street.
3. Kansas Highway Patrol troopers have statewide jurisdiction, but tend to focus their attention on highway speeding on I-35, 435 especially between State Line and I-35; I-70, K-7, etc.
   
4. Overland Park traffic enforcement officers often monitor red lights and check speed at (1) Metcalf and 103rd; (2) Metcalf and 95th; (3) I-69; (4) along 435 between Roe and I-35; (5) 87th and Switzer; (6) 95th and Switzer.
5. The Johnson County Sheriff's office patrols K-10; areas around Bonita Flats; 435; Kansas Avenue near the Johnson County courthouse. Sheriff's deputies have county-wide jurisdiction, meaning they can set up and issue tickets anywhere.
   
6. Lenexa police usually patrol (1) I-35; (2) K-10 along the "corridor"; (3) 69 highway; 87th street; Shawnee Mission Parkway.
7. Olathe traffic enforcement officers focus a tremendous amount of attention on (1) school zone speeding throughout Olathe; (2) they run radar and laser on I-35 especially near Old 56 highway, Santa Fe near Kansas City road, K-7, Old 56 highway, etc.
   
3. Figure out where traffic cops generally like to hide. Policeman in Johnson County and elsewhere in Kansas often use similar tactics to catch speeders. You will find them stationed around obstacles that allow them to hide, especially at night. Shadows are often a preferred location on local highways such as 435 and I-35, especially for Olathe traffic enforcement officers at night who tend to use the shadow created by overpasses. Johnson County Sheriffs and Kansas Highway Patrol troopers will often run radar while parked in highway medians along 435, I-70, I-35, etc., usually at the top of a hill or following a curve or bridge.
   
3. Don't use your cell phone or otherwise look distracted: Studies have shown that folks on cell phones, whether talking, texting, or emailing are extremely distracted and may be more "impaired" than drivers at the .08 legal limit for alcohol. Our firm's Kansas & Missouri personal injury lawyers have handled a number of cases where cell phone use played a part in an auto accident that resulted in serious injuries or death. Traffic cops in Johnson County get tired of responding to accidents where drivers and passengers are killed or sent to the hospital and they know the dangers of cell phone use while driving - I have had several tell me that they really like to stop drivers on cell phones - and they pull them over to give people a lesson on distracted driving. If you have to use a cell phone, use a hand's free system.
4. Don't stand out from the rest of traffic: Most drivers commit several traffic violations on every drive, which is evident for anyone who has ever driven through Johnson County or Kansas City during rush hour! For instance many drivers don't signal when entering or exiting ramps, drivers speed in packs, etc. Our Johnson County traffic lawyers often get calls from drivers who were the only car pulled over from a pack of 10 or 12 cars. Sometimes it is bad luck, but often they were driving a car that caught the attention of the police officer.
1. Don't drive a sports car. Corvettes, Porsches, Camaros, Mustangs, and anything else that looks fast is often more appealing to a traffic cop than a beige Camry. I understand that you may not want to drive an inconspicuous car, but understand that you're more likely to be ticketed in a sports car.
2. Don't drive a modified car. Nothing catches more attention than aftermarket modifications. The list of equipment that will get you pulled over in Overland Park, Prairie Village, Leawood or elsewhere in Johnson County, KS includes aftermarket (louder) exhaust systems, larger or wider aftermarket wheels, aftermarket lights (tail lights, blue or purple headlights, especially windshield sprayer lights), lowered vehicles, raised vehicles, body kits, deep window tint (whether illegal or not), etc.
3. Don't drive a bright colored car. Studies have shown that yellow and red cars are stopped at a higher percentage than other colored cars. The lawyers in our Johnson County traffic law office also think that cars with custom paint jobs get pulled over at a disproportionate rate.
   
5. Drive with your lights on to limit the effective range of Laser speed measurement: The current trend in traffic enforcement in Johnson County is to use lasers (LIDAR) to measure speed, rather than radar. Laser is especially used in Leawood by motorcycle traffic officers, in Olathe police cars, in Overland Park patrol cars, and by the Johnson County Sheriff. Lasers have advantages and disadvantages for police officers. The advantage is that a laser allows for more precise speed measurement in traffic, where radar units are not as effective at determining the speed of specific vehicles. Lasers do not have the effective range of radar, however, and are more difficult to aim at vehicles. Additionally, lasers can only be used by stationary units, while radars can be used on moving patrol cars.
   
6. Brake if you pass an officer while speeding: I have spoken to police officers in Johnson County who stated that if they're not sure whether to pull you over or not, but they can see that you're braking, they're more likely to let you go or give you a warning. The logic is essentially that you're showing them you were aware enough to see them.

5/1/11

What should you do when pulled over by a police officer in Olathe, Overland Park, or elsewhere in Kansas?

Advice from law enforcement and our law firm's traffic lawyers about how to handle a traffic violation stop.

The Kansas Highway Patrol offers the following tips for drivers when they encounter an emergency vehicle or are stopped for a traffic infraction.

• Do not panic. Use your turn signal, and pull over to the right as far as possible, allowing other traffic to pass and an officer to safely walk to your vehicle.
• Attorney comment: We recommend pulling over normally. The key is normally. If you pull over too quickly, then you might receive a ticket for that (often failure to signal or failure to yield). If you pull over too slowly, you may aggravate the police officer who is attempting to stop you. In either case, it could be used as "an indicator of intoxication" that the officer uses to justify a DUI investigation or arrest.
• If you are being pulled over, stop and turn off the ignition. If it is dark, turn on the interior light.
• Attorney comment: This is also good advice. We also recommend that you take the keys out of the ignition and place them on the dash.
• Keep your hands in plain view, and do not make any sudden movements. The officer does not know you or your intentions. Reaching for your insurance information in the glove box may look like you are reaching for something else.
• Attorney comment: The driver should keep their hands on the wheel, except to roll down the driver and passenger side front windows. Passengers should sit still with their hands on their legs. These actions let the officer know that no one is attempting to hide contraband such as marijuana or alcohol, and that no one is holding a gun.
• Ask any passengers in your vehicle to remain calm and comply with the officer's instructions. Instruct them to keep their hands in plain view and not make any sudden movements.
• Wait for the officer to park the patrol car and approach. He or she may ask for your driver's license, vehicle registration, and proof of insurance. If you do not understand why you have been stopped, politely ask the officer.
• Attorney comment: If the officer asks if you know why he pulled you over, we recommend that you tell him that you don't know. What this question means is "admit to violating the law I think you violated" and "please tell me about other law violations that I did not witness." Unless you're a mind reader, you cannot possibly know why the officer pulled you over, so do not take the bait. Just respond politely and calmly, do not do anything that might escalate the situation.
• If it is dark, the officer is likely to use a bright spotlight or flashlight to illuminate you and your vehicle.
• Stay in your vehicle unless the officer asks you to get out. Most of the time, the entire exchange will occur without you having to leave your vehicle. However, court rulings permit the officer to decide whether you should step out of the vehicle. If you are asked to exit the vehicle, keep your hands in plain view and watch for traffic.
• If you receive a traffic citation, a polite and cooperative attitude will make the event easier for everyone. Feel free to ask any questions, but a courtroom is the place to debate the issue, not the side of the road.
• Attorney comment: This is very good advice. Just respond to questions or a citation politely and calmly, do not do anything that might escalate the situation. This is not the time to argue with the officer. If you feel the officer is wrong, your traffic lawyer can bring up the issue in front of a judge.
• Once the traffic stop is finished, cautiously merge into the flow of traffic.