More focus and scientific research is proving that preoccupied driving behavior leads to injuries and fatalities across U.S. roadways. Using cell phones while driving have become the center of attention for public health efforts and public debate because using cell phones while driving has become so common and texting. Based on National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, through the day almost 660,000 motorists are using their cell phones while driving. Campaigns urging motorists to put down their cell phones also to concentrate on simply driving are being brought to the forefront by cell phone carriers, car manufacturers, vehicle insurance providers, public health organizations and more. However while the messages of texting while driving are common and motorists have become more alert to the dangers connected with using cellphones and texting behind the wheel, behavior are not necessarily revealing any change. Especially as it pertains to the youngest drivers, the newly licensed and inexperienced teenage drivers in the nation. Many result in accidents that take experienced parkland car accident lawyers to handle.
A survey performed by the AAA Foundation in conjunction with Seventeen magazine found that 94 percent of teen drivers know that texting while driving is not safe. Nevertheless, even with such a higher percentage of adolescents knowing the dangers, 35 percent of teenagers still text behind the wheel. While the recently licensed motorists were more prone to put down the phone when driving, mature teenaged motorists were grown with by the speeds of texting while driving. The USA government’s distraction.gov website states that 11 percent of drivers between 18-20 were sending or receiving text messages when involved in a car accident.
“We represent people who have been injured by distracted drivers, and feel it’s significant our company help raise awareness in spreading the message of the dangers of teen distracted driving.”
Together with these other organizations are creating positive change by raising awareness of the risks of texting while driving. Each of these organizations has programs and helpful hints on their websites on your adolescent as well as to help prevent distracted driving customs for you:
The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution necessitates that searches and seizures be reasonable, and warrants should be based on probable cause. State actors such as the police are hence required to show probable cause before seizing a person. This is applicable to when a police is stopping a driver and the passenger. Therefore, it is unconstitutional to seize a driver or a passenger if there is no probable cause that the driver or the passenger was involved in wrongdoing during the time of the stop.
When you are in the car it is more rational that you are not completely out in public, but you are away from your home and in a plain view of the general public, police and other by-standers. Due to this fact the right of the fourth amendment is not absolute when it comes to seizing and searching cars. In various occasions, the courts have pointed out that when one is in the car there is a lack of privacy. It is due to this facts that the fourth amendment rights might not be applicable in some occasions.
The fourth amendment right to the driver and passenger during a police stop is valid when a driver is pulled over for a minor traffic infraction. The police officer will only have the right to search the car if he possess a valid search warrant, valid arrest warrant, and a belief of probable cause’ that the driver or the passenger has committed a crime. When one is arrested due to a traffic violation, the police have no mandate to search the car. The police can only search a vehicle after an arrest of a recent occupant unless the police officers have unreasonable doubt that the evidence of an offense is in the car. Contrary to this, it is a violation of the fourth amendment.
If the police find probable cause that a car is transporting illicit items such as drugs they are only required to produce a search warrant if the car is stationary. A search will be permissible without a search warrant if the car is moving. The rationale behind this is the fact that the car can drive off and evidence can be lost before the police secure a search warrant. The fourth amendment right is not therefore violated if the police have unreasonable doubt that a moving car possess illegal goods.
The fourth amendment right does not prevent any warrant less searches of personal belonging of passengers in a car that has been legally stopped. Passengers are in close proximity to the driver and can engage in joint activities that can cover evidence or items that could put police officer’s safety at risk. Therefore, the police have the mandate to order the passengers out the car. Lawmakers and courts have ensured that there are legal safeguards that law enforcement officers can only interfere with person’s fourth amendment under a particular circumstance.
After a DUI arrest, your first step is to hire an attorney, but how do they challenge the state’s case against you? Well there can be a number of defenses that an attorney will work towards, however it is most common to find an error made by the arresting officer to help win a DUI case. There are numerous process that must be followed from the time the officer turns on his lights to the final moment of the arrest when you are handed over to corrections. With the help of a DUI attorney in Orlando, we broke down the 5 most common mistakes made by police during a DUI arrest.
The Officer Writes a Poor Report
Whether it’s because of poor note taking or a lack of intellectual capacity or whether they wait to long to do it or whether its the fact that they don’t accurately take the information down as it occurs, this is the number one mistake officers make. A good DUI attorney will explore these issues and and often times win DMV hearings and court cases as a result.
Improper Collection of Evidence at the Scene
Officers almost never interview passengers in car who could establish a drinking timeline. They may have a different story than the driver, thus creating inconsistencies which can be used to the driver’s advantage. They also fail to look in the car for evidence, open containers things of that nature that would be useful information.
Improper Collection of Chemical Tested Evidence
In order for a test to be validated there needs to be a 15 min observation period where the officer observes the defendant. Often times these chemical tests are being taken at a station and when the officers get to the station or jail they have to secure their weapons which they do before they take the defendant out. With the defendant in the car, the officer no longer sees him, the trunk is blocking him. they take about a minute to secure the weapons then they walk them right into the jail and the chemical test will take about 10 minutes to happen, so we have a break in that 15 min window which makes it a violation. if that can be shown in testimony, it shifts the burden back to the department of motor vehicles. When that happens they now have to call upon an expert to fix that problem and they never want to have to call experts.
The Officer Fails to Properly Collect Blood Evidence
After you get taken to the station. the officer is usually not really watching what the nurse is doing and rather filling out paperwork. Most attorneys know this and will cross examine the arresting officer and ask them what the nurse did after the test. What they miss by not paying attention is the inversion of the blood vile so that the preservative mixes properly with the blood. When no inversion takes place fermentation occurs and can be used to the defendants advantage.
Conduct Non-Standardized Field Sobriety Tests
Officers have basic training in this, but often times they improperly instruct and demonstrate and actually record how the person performs the test. There are 3 standardized field sobriety tests, but many officers do not have a good understanding of these. Instead they use the finger count test or finger to nose test, but these are subjective there is no way to really quantify performance. They also do a poor job of picking good location for the test and they normally don’t factor in fatigue or physical abnormality. This is one of the most fertile areas of cross examination, significantly helping a lawyer win their clients case at a hearing or in court.
While millions of claims are filed each year, not all of them result in tickets. Even if you did not receive a ticket, you may be at fault for the accident. One of the most common concerns people have when getting into an automobile accident is receiving a ticket. Individuals who are looking to file an accident report may become apprehensive. Generally speaking, a ticket from an accident will go on the accident report and can result in points being added to one’s driver’s license.
When Is a Ticket Issued?
Tickets are typically only issued after a thorough investigation of the causes of the accident. After interviewing witnesses, evaluating traffic conditions, and studying the positions of the vehicles, the officer will then make a judgement as to whether or not a traffic ticket should be issued. If the officer has found that a driver has violated a traffic law, then most likely the insurance company will agree with the officer that the responsibility of the accident belongs to the driver to whom the ticket was issued. However, this applies only if negligence is the reason for the accident occurring in the first place. Sometimes, both drivers in an accident have been cited for violations of traffic laws.
Wrongly Issued Tickets
Many have been wrongly issued citations for moving violations for which they were not responsible. In this case, the defendant of a traffic ticket should fight the ticket. Hire an attorney and plead not guilty when the ticket goes to traffic court. There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence often required in order for there to be a solid proof of the factors which contributed to the damage to the other vehicle. Also, insurance companies are not willing to pay for claims without investigating the cause of the accident first. Keep in mind that the officer whom issued the citation must testify in court, and there must be direct evidence which would put a driver at fault for an accident. Tickets are not always issued justly, so there are plenty of reasons in which they can be contested in court. Thus, it is usually worth the extra time and hassle to fight a ticket in court which comes as a direct response to an accident.