City of Cincinnati OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. 07/TRC/35268: Client was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI), notwithstanding the fact that the Client blew under the legal limit at .077(BAC). After being stopped at a sobriety check point the arresting officer stated the client admitted to drinking, that he noticed an odor of alcohol and bloodshot watery eyes. The officer had the Client perform three standardized field sobriety tests, the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, which the officer noted 4 out of 6 clues, the One Leg Stand which the officer noted 1 out of 4 clues, and the Walk and Turn Test, which the officer noted 1 out of 8 clues, and still arrested the Client. Counsel filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging the admissibility of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests as they were not done in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) student manual, and challenging the lack of probable cause to arrest the Client. After a hearing on the Motion to Suppress, the Court suppressed the results of all three standardized field sobriety tests finding they were not administered in the prescribed manner, and found the officer lacked probable cause to arrest the Client. The City of Cincinnati appealed the case to the First District Court of Appeals, and the Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the trial court, and the case was dismissed.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case no. 06TRC42047: Client was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with ORC 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle under the influence of alcohol and ORC 4511.202, Failure to Control. It was alleged that the Defendant ran her vehicle into a woman exiting her vehicle in a small alley, after the police arrived the Defendant admitted to consuming a couple glasses of wine and the officer performed standardized field sobriety tests, namely the Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand, and Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus tests, as well as non-standardized field sobriety tests, namely the Alphabet and Finger Count tests, and the Defendant refused a breath test. At a Motion to Suppress, counsel for Defendant was able to have the results of the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test suppressed from evidence, and the matter proceeded to trial where the Defendant was found not guilty.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. 07/TRC/65336: Client was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer stated the client admitted to drinking, that he noticed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The officer had the Client perform one standardized field sobriety test, the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, which the officer noted 6 out of 6 clues, and two non-standardized field sobriety tests, namely the alphabet test and numbers test. Counsel filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging the constitutionality of the stop, the admissibility of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test as it was not done in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) student manual, and challenging the lack of probable cause to arrest the Client. The morning of the hearing, the City Prosecutor’s office offered a reduced charge of Reckless Operation which was accepted.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. 07/TRC/41994: Client was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer stated the client admitted to drinking, that he noticed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot watery eyes, and slow and slurred speech. The officer had the Client perform two standardized field sobriety test, the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, which the officer noted 6 out of 6 clues, and the Walk and Turn Test, which the officer noted 6 out of 8 clues, and two non-standardized field sobriety tests, namely the finger to nose and finger to thumb tests. Counsel filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging the constitutionality of the stop, the admissibility of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests as it was not done in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) student manual, and challenging the lack of probable cause to arrest the Client. After a hearing on the Motion to Suppress, the Court suppressed the results of the HGN test finding it was not administered in the prescribed manner, and the matter was set for jury trial. The morning of the jury trial, the City Prosecutor’s office offered a reduced charge of Reckless Operation which was accepted.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. 06/TRC/46477: Client was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(h), Operating a Motor Vehicle with a concentration of greater than .17 of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his breath (BAC), which was measured by at the Cincinnati Police Department at District Five at .218 as measured by an Intoxilyzer 5000 breath machine. Client was also charged with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer had the Client perform the Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand, Finger to Nose, and Finger Count, among other field sobriety tests. Counsel filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging the constitutionality of the stop, the admissibility of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests as they were not done in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) student manual, and challenging the lack of probable cause to arrest the Client. After a hearing the trial court found the stop constitutional (speeding), but agreed with Counsel, and found the officer lacked probable cause to arrest the Client at the scene, and dismissed the charges.

Hamilton County OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/17476: Client was charged by Colerain Township Police with a marked lanes violation and 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer had the Client perform the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand field sobriety tests, which the officer indicated were performed poorly. Client refused to provide a breath test. The matter was set for Motion to Suppress the results of the standardized field sobriety tests, and after successfully finding flaws in the administration of the standardized field sobriety tests, counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge of Reckless Operation.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/07/TRC/38446: Client was charged by Ohio Highway Patrol with 4511.19(A)(1)(d), Operating a Motor Vehicle with a concentration of greater than .08 of one gram or more but less that .17 of one gram by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his breath (BAC), which was measured by at the Lebanon, Ohio post at .09. Client was also charged with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). Counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge of Reckless Operation.

Hamilton County Juvenile OVI/DUI

Juvenile client, age 16, was charged by City of Cincinnati Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(d), Operating a Motor Vehicle with a concentration of greater than .08 of one gram or more by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his breath (BAC), which was measured by at the Cincinnati Police Department at District One at .149 as measured by an Intoxilyzer 5000 breath machine. Client was also charged with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer had the Client perform the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand field sobriety tests. Counsel filed a Motion to Dismiss the case after the client was not given a hearing within 5 days of his arrest to object to the Administrative License Suspension (ALS). At said hearing, counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge of Reckless Operation, a minor misdemeanor. Client was fined $50.00 and costs, and the ALS was terminated. No further suspension imposed.

Colerain Township OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/17476: Client was charged by Colerain Township Police with a marked lanes violation and 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI). At the scene the arresting officer had the Client perform the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), Walk and Turn, One Leg Stand field sobriety tests, which the officer indicated were performed poorly. Client refused to provide a breath test. The matter was set for Motion to Suppress the results of the standardized field sobriety tests, and after successfully finding flaws in the administration of the standardized field sobriety tests, counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge of Reckless Operation.

Norwood OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/39560: Client was charged by Norwood Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI) and failing to use a turn signal. The State of Ohio presented testimony of a bartender who indicated that he had served young ladies alcohol that morning, and another eyewitness who called 911 for a possibly intoxicated driver leaving the same bar, testified that the client was falling down in the parking lot before getting into her car and drove. Norwood Police responded to the bar and followed the client and waited until she failed to use a turn signal to pull her over. At the scene the arresting officer stated the client admitted to drinking earlier in the evening, that he noticed a strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, and slurred speech. The officer asked the client to exit the vehicle and the client refused. She was arrested and refused any field sobriety tests, and a breath test. After unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge, a bench trial commenced, where the Court found the client not guilty of the OVI.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/32676: Client was charged by Norwood Police with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drug of abuse (OVI/DUI), 4511.19(A)(1)(h), Operating a Motor Vehicle with a prohibited level of alcohol in his blood (BAC) testing .187 as tested by Norwood’s BacDatamaster, and a marked lanes violation, all as a second offense OVI as the Client had a prior conviction within 6 years. Counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a 1st offense, low tier OVI avoiding the minimum of 20 days in jail. Counsel was able to obtain minimum treatment by the Court for a first offender.

Madeira OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/07/TRC/44443: Client was charged by Madeira Police Department with 4511.19(A)(1)(d), Operating a Motor Vehicle with a concentration of greater than .08 of one gram or more but less that .17 of one gram by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of his breath (BAC), which was measured by the Indian Hill Police Department at .166. After counsel reviewed the breath testing device, and finding errors in its operation, counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a lesser charge of Reckless Operation.

Springdale OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/51784: Client was charged by Springdale Police Department with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol being a second offense in six years, 4511.19(A)(2) a refusal with a prior conviction in 20 years, speeding and marked lanes violations. The officer administered two Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, namely the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test (HGN) and the one-leg stand. The client refused to perform any further tests, including the portable breath test (PBT) and the breath test at the station. Counsel then filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, and the matter was set for motion. The client was looking at a minimum of 20 days in jail, and an lengthy suspension if convicted. The morning of the motion, Counsel was able to negotiate a plea to a 1st time OVI with minimum treatment, 3 day in a driver’s intervention program, a 6 month license suspension, no party plates and minimum fine.

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. M/08/TRC/6938: Client was charged by Springdale Police Department with 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol after a single car accident into the City’s monuments.. Springdale police attempted to take a breath sample, which produced invalid samples, and treated it as a refusal. Counsel appealed the Administrative License Suspension (ALS) and after a hearing, the Court found that it was not a refusal and terminated the ALS. Counsel then filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, and after a hearing the Court Suppressed the results of all of the field tests, finding they were not administered in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The matter was set for trial when Counsel was able to negotiate a reduced charge of Reckless Operation.

Reading OVI/DUI

Hamilton County Municipal Court, Case No. C/08/TRC/56001: Client was charged by Ohio State Patrol in Reading, Ohio with 4511.12, failing to stop properly at a stop sign, 4511.19(A)(1)(a), Operating a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and with 4511.19(A)(2) refusing a breath test with a prior conviction within 20 years. Client had three prior DUI/OVI convictions, non in the last six years. Counsel then filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the only Standardized Field Sobriety Test given, namely the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test, and after a hearing the Court Suppressed the results of the field test, finding it was not administered in compliance with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The matter was set for trial, and the Client was found not guilty on both OVI charges. He was found guilty of failing to properly stop at a stop sign.

Law Office of James S. Arnold
Hamilton County OVI/DUI Defense Attorneys
(513) 984-8313

For further examples of how hiring an aggressive defense attorney
can help protect your rights, visit our court cases overview page