Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI Excessive Force Arrest
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI Excessive Force Arrest
Johnson v. United States
Facts:
Plaintiff arrestee filed an action against defendant officer asserting claims for assault and battery in connection with an arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts DUI
Issue:
- Whether the officer used excessive force in arresting defendant?
Discussion:
The officer stopped the arrestee’s vehicle and charged him with driving while under the influence of liquor and other motor vehicle offenses. The arrestee claimed that the officer used excessive force in arresting him. The officer claimed that the arrestee resisted arrest and attempted to escape and that the force used was reasonably necessary to restrain him. The court charged the jury that (1) the arrestee had the burden of proving that he was injured, (2) the officer had the burden of proving that he was privileged to use force because the arrestee resisted and attempted to escape, and (3) the arrestee had the burden of proving that, notwithstanding any privilege the officer may have had, the force used was excessive. The trial judge submitted the case to the jury.
The SRIS Law Group Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your criminal case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your criminal case
Our Massachusetts lawyers defend clients charged with a criminal federal charge before the following federal courts:
Boston
Boston, Massachusetts 02210
(617) 748-9152
Worcester
Worcester, Massachusetts 01608
(508) 929-9900
Springfield
300 State Street
Springfield, Massachusetts 01105
(413) 785-6800
Our Massachusetts lawyers have a thorough understanding of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Criminal Laws.
Our client meeting location in Cambridge, MA. Our firm has over 5 experienced federal criminal defense attorneys to defend you if you are charged with a federal crime. Contact us to help you through every phase of representation, starting from a Rule 5 hearing, to a detention hearing, to an arraignment, to a plea negotiation and all the way up to a jury trial if necessary.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct False Arrest Malicious Prosecution
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct False Arrest Malicious Prosecution
Graham v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Plaintiff motorist filed a civil rights action against defendant police officers, claiming that they violated his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, § 11J, and committed battery, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, infliction of emotional distress, and libel. The officers filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Disorder Conduct
Issue:
- Whether the defendant’s rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act were violated?
Discussion:
A police officer stopped a vehicle the motorist was driving after he saw the vehicle roll through a stop sign and noticed that a registration sticker on the vehicle had expired. After the officer told the motorist that his vehicle would have to be towed, the motorist began arguing with the officer, he disobeyed the officer’s instruction to remain in his vehicle, and he followed the officer to his police cruiser, where he stood in a lane of traffic and continued the argument. The officer called for backup and when other officers arrived, they arrested the motorist and charged him with disorderly conduct and driving under the influence of alcohol. The motorist took two breathalyzer tests at the police station which showed that he was not under the influence of alcohol, and he was subsequently acquitted of disorderly conduct. The district court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the motorist for disorderly conduct and the evidence he presented in the complaint he filed against the officers failed to show that they violated his rights under the U.S. Constitution, the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, or the common law. The court dismissed the motorist’s complaint.
The SRIS Law Group Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your criminal case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your criminal case
Our Massachusetts lawyers defend clients charged with a criminal federal charge before the following federal courts:
Boston
Boston, Massachusetts 02210
(617) 748-9152
Worcester
Worcester, Massachusetts 01608
(508) 929-9900
Springfield
300 State Street
Springfield, Massachusetts 01105
(413) 785-6800
Our Massachusetts lawyers have a thorough understanding of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Criminal Laws.
Our client meeting location in Cambridge, MA. Our firm has over 5 experienced federal criminal defense attorneys to defend you if you are charged with a federal crime. Contact us to help you through every phase of representation, starting from a Rule 5 hearing, to a detention hearing, to an arraignment, to a plea negotiation and all the way up to a jury trial if necessary.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Money Laundering Conviction
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI Money Laundering Conviction
United States v. Peter John
Facts:
Defendant pled guilty to money laundering. Defendant raised issues with his presentence report, to wit: he challenged the criminal history points assigned for his prior convictions for operating a snowmobile under the influence (OUI) and for his conviction for violating a condition of his release, and he challenged the reduction given for his role in the offense, arguing that he was a minimal participant. The court addressed the issues.
Federal Lawyer Massachusetts OUI
Issue:
- Whether the snowmobile OUI was properly characterized as motor vehicle OUI?
Discussion:
Defendant argued that a snowmobile OUI conviction should be characterized as a fish and game violation, which was not counted under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 4A1.2. The court, however, found that the offense compared more closely to driving under the influence. The snowmobile OUI and motor vehicle OUI were virtually identical. The dangers posed by both offenses were similar, as were the penalties. Thus, the prior convictions for snowmobile OUI would count in calculating defendant’s criminal history. Defendant sought to compare his condition of release violation to contempt of court, which was exempt under § 4A1.2(c)(1). However, a comparison between the elements of the crimes revealed that while having some similarities, the crimes were distinct, particularly since a violation of a release order was a strict liability crime. The penalties also differed. The exemption was not warranted. Defendant’s participation in the offense was not minimal, but essential, for purposes of a reduction under USSG § 3B1.2. Finally, defendant raised the issue but proffered no evidence to show that one of his prior convictions was constitutionally infirm. The court found that: defendant’s two convictions for operating a snowmobile under the influence and his conviction for violating a condition of release would count in his criminal history calculation; defendant was not a minor participant; defendant failed to show that one of his prior convictions was constitutionally infirm.
The SRIS Law Group Massachusetts lawyers will do their best to help you with your criminal case. Contact a Massachusetts lawyer from our firm to discuss your criminal case
Our Massachusetts lawyers defend clients charged with a criminal federal charge before the following federal courts:
Boston
Boston, Massachusetts 02210
(617) 748-9152
Worcester
Worcester, Massachusetts 01608
(508) 929-9900
Springfield
300 State Street
Springfield, Massachusetts 01105
(413) 785-6800
Our Massachusetts lawyers have a thorough understanding of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Criminal Laws.
Our client meeting location in Cambridge, MA. Our firm has over 5 experienced federal criminal defense attorneys to defend you if you are charged with a federal crime. Contact us to help you through every phase of representation, starting from a Rule 5 hearing, to a detention hearing, to an arraignment, to a plea negotiation and all the way up to a jury trial if necessary.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
§ 636.3 Suspension or revocation of driving privileges.
§ 636.3 Suspension or revocation of driving privileges.
In addition to the requirements of § 634.10 of this subchapter:
(a) Administrative suspension or revocation of installation driving privileges applies to the operation of a motor vehicle on Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Airfield.
(b) Installation driving privileges will be suspended for up to 6 months for drivers who accumulate 12 traffic points within 12 consecutive months, or 18 traffic points within 24 consecutive months.
(c) The Garrison Commander and Deputy Garrison Commander are designated as suspension/revocation authorities for:
(1) Suspension of driving privileges should the evidence indicate that a charge of driving under the influence is warranted or;
(2) The suspension/revocation for accumulation of 12 traffic points within 12 months or 18 points within 24 consecutive months.
23 U.S.C.A. § 161 Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors
23 U.S.C.A. § 161 Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors
(a) Withholding of apportionments for noncompliance.–
(1) Fiscal year 1999.–The Secretary shall withhold 5 percent of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) on October 1, 1998, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.
(2) Thereafter.–The Secretary shall withhold 10 percent (including any amounts withheld under paragraph (1)) of the amount required to be apportioned to any State under each of paragraphs (1), (3), and (4) of section 104(b) on October 1, 1999, and on October 1 of each fiscal year thereafter, if the State does not meet the requirement of paragraph (3) on that date.
(3) Requirement.–A State meets the requirement of this paragraph if the State has enacted and is enforcing a law that considers an individual under the age of 21 who has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent or greater while operating a motor vehicle in the State to be driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence of alcohol.
(b) Period of availability; effect of compliance and non-compliance.–
(1) Period of availability of withheld funds.–
(A) Funds withheld on or before September 30, 2000.–Any funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment to any State on or before September 30, 2000, shall remain available until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized to be appropriated.
(B) Funds withheld after September 30, 2000.–No funds withheld under this section from apportionment to any State after September 30, 2000, shall be available for apportionment to the State.
(2) Apportionment of withheld funds after compliance.–If, before the last day of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are to remain available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State meets the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall, on the first day on which the State meets the requirement, apportion to the State the funds withheld under subsection (a) that remain available for apportionment to the State.
(3) Period of availability of subsequently apportioned funds.–Any funds apportioned pursuant to paragraph (2) shall remain available for expenditure until the end of the third fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the funds are so apportioned. Sums not obligated at the end of that period shall lapse.
(4) Effect of noncompliance.–If, at the end of the period for which funds withheld under subsection (a) from apportionment are available for apportionment to a State under paragraph (1), the State does not meet the requirement of subsection (a)(3), the funds shall lapse.
Here are some of the charges you could face for a traffic violation on federal property.
23 U.S.C.A. § 164 Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence
23 U.S.C.A. § 164 Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence
(a) Definitions. –In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Alcohol concentration. –The term “alcohol concentration” means grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood or grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
(2) Driving while intoxicated; driving under the influence.–The terms “driving while intoxicated” and “driving under the influence” mean driving or being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while having an alcohol concentration above the permitted limit as established by each State.
(3) License suspension.–The term “license suspension” means the suspension of all driving privileges.
(4) Motor vehicle.–The term “motor vehicle” means a vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public highways, but does not include a vehicle operated solely on a rail line or a commercial vehicle.
(5) Repeat intoxicated driver law. –The term “repeat intoxicated driver law” means a State law that provides, as a minimum penalty, that an individual convicted of a second or subsequent offense for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence after a previous conviction for that offense shall–
(A) receive a driver’s license suspension for not less than 1 year;
(B) be subject to the impoundment or immobilization of each of the individual’s motor vehicles or the installation of an ignition interlock system on each of the motor vehicles;
(C) receive an assessment of the individual’s degree of abuse of alcohol and treatment as appropriate; and
(D) receive–
(i) in the case of the second offense–
(I) an assignment of not less than 30 days of community service; or
(II) not less than 5 days of imprisonment; and
(ii) in the case of the third or subsequent offense–
(I) an assignment of not less than 60 days of community service; or
(II) not less than 10 days of imprisonment.
Massachusetts Federal DUI/DWI Reckless Driving Suspended License Speeding & Traffic Offense Defense
The Massachusetts federal traffic defense attorneys of SRIS, P.C. who practice in Federal Court ensure that they stay current with the Federal Traffic Laws and Federal Criminal Procedure.
The SRIS Law Group Massachusetts federal traffic ticket defense attorneys primarily concentrate on defending those clients who are charged with DUI, DWI & other serious traffic offenses such as Reckless Driving & Driving on Suspended offenses on property designated as federal land.
If you wish to consult a SRIS, P.C. Massachusetts Federal DUI, DWI or traffic lawyer in Massachusetts please contact us
A Massachusetts federal traffic ticket attorney of SRIS, P.C. will discuss your case and advise you as to your options.
To make an appointment to speak with a SRIS, P.C. Massachusetts Federal DUI & DWI lawyer or traffic attorney, please call, send an e-mail or complete the on-line form.
If you would like to have a better understanding of some of the Federal Traffic Laws, please feel free to read following information:
- Laws of States adopted for areas within Federal jurisdiction
- Minimum penalties for repeat offenders for driving while intoxicated or driving under the influence
- Implied consent for certain tests
- Operation of motor vehicles by intoxicated minors
- Speed Limits
- Unsafe operation
- Operating under the influence of alcohol or drugs
- Suspension or revocation of driving privileges
For more information or to make an appointment with SRIS, P.C. Massachusetts federal traffic defense lawyer, please call, send an e-mail or complete the on-line form.
Our Massachusetts federal attorneys and staff who provide federal DUI/DWI & serious federal traffic violation representation in Massachusetts speak the following languages in addition to English: Spanish, French, Arabic, Hindi, Tamil, Telugu, Cantonese, Mandarin & Malaysian.
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
Massachusetts Federal Criminal Lawyer
