N.Y. DA says no more plea bargains in DUI cases

Amen to that. Stop coddling these killers.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/15602504.htm

Posted on Mon, Sep. 25, 2006

Rookie N.Y. DA goes after drunk drivers

FRANK ELTMAN Associated Press

MINEOLA, N.Y. - Kathleen Rice's eyes begin to well up when she talks
about the victims of drunken driving.

She cannot fathom why so many people - more than 4,100 arrested in her
community last year - turn the ignition after having a few drinks.
More troublesome, she said, is that one-third have been caught before.

Rice, however, can do something about it: As Nassau County district
attorney, she has launched an aggressive assault on drunken driving in
one of the nation's busiest traffic corridors.

She does not allow plea deals in DWI cases. She put a man on trial for
murder in a horrific drunken-driving crash. And she plans to slap
alcohol-sensors on the ankles of admitted alcoholics.

Rice's office is currently prosecuting a 25-year-old insurance
salesman on murder charges - a rarity in drunken-driving cases -
following an accident that killed a 7-year-old flower girl and the
chauffeur who was driving her family home from a wedding.

While the murder case is getting national media attention, Rice said
it's only one part of an effort to get drunks off Long Island
highways.

Plea deals in DWI cases are no longer acceptable, she said, and this
summer her office obtained a warrant for a blood sample from police
inspector who was later charged with drinking and driving after
crashing his unmarked police cruiser into a utility pole while off
duty.

She said while getting blood samples is standard practice in other
jurisdictions, it is something new in Nassau County. She also intends
to use a $110,000 state grant to purchase high-tech alcohol-detecting
ankle bracelets for DWI offenders who, as part of their probation, are
required to stay sober.

(snip)

Denna Cohen, president of the Long Island chapter of Mothers Against
Drunk Driving, enthusiastically endorses Rice's efforts.

"She's absolutely correct that there's an epidemic of drunk driving on
Long Island," said Cohen, whose 21-year-old daughter Jodi was killed
in a DWI-related accident in 1989. "There's not a day that you can
open the paper and not read about another DWI crash. I am so proud of
the way she is handling the situation."

Not everyone is so happy.

Defense attorney Thomas Liotti held a news conference in August
claiming Rice's refusal to yield on plea bargains is too stringent.
"She's basically looking at this as a black-and-white issue," he said.
"People need some degree of hope, and under Kathleen Rice's policies,
they're not getting it."

I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.

No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

On 25 Sep 2006 18:17:47 -0700, " > wrote:

>No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

No guns, either...

In article .com>,
" > wrote:

> I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
> drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
> or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
> hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
> having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
> in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
> you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.

There's no mandatory minimum for a first-arrest DWI in New York state.

On 25 Sep 2006 18:17:47 -0700, "
> wrote:

> I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
>drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
>or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
>hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
>having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
>in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
>you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.
>


Unlike you, most americans don't believe in coddling killers.

Larry quoted me:
> > I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
> > drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
> > or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
> > hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
> > having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
> > in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
> > you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.

and replied:
> There's no mandatory minimum for a first-arrest DWI in New York state.

A high percentage of drunk-driving prosecutions involve repeat
offenders - for whom a guilty plea on original charge means mandatory
jail or other big consequence. They would have every incentive to hold
out for trial and get decent lawyers if no plea bargain was possible.
And don't forget that many cases are lousy from prosecutor's
viewpoint, too. A memorable one here involved a grossly-overweight
officer who had arrested a woman for drunk driving. Defense attorney
made officer demonstrate in court the field-sobriety test he'd made the
woman do on roadside; officer couldn't - in a brightly-lit courtroom -
do in flat shoes what he had woman in high heels do on a dark roadside.
Acquittal. In that case, no plea bargain meant the prosecutor got all
of nothing - instead of some of everything.

No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

In article om>,
" > wrote:

> Larry quoted me:
> > > I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
> > > drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
> > > or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
> > > hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
> > > having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
> > > in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
> > > you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.
>
> and replied:
> > There's no mandatory minimum for a first-arrest DWI in New York state.
>
> A high percentage of drunk-driving prosecutions involve repeat
> offenders - for whom a guilty plea on original charge means mandatory
> jail or other big consequence.

Where do you get this from?

I happen to be a prosecutor in NY. I can tell you that first-arrest
DWIs do not have a mandatory minimum. They're misdemeanors. And the
majority of DWI cases are first-time offenders.

A second DWI within 5 years is a class E felony, for which up to 4 years
in jail is possible, but probation is also a legal sentence, and
obviously a no-jail option.

> They would have every incentive to hold
> out for trial and get decent lawyers if no plea bargain was possible.

Not necessarily. Sentencing would be more lenient pre-trial if the
defendant admitted responsibility for his actions.

And the best defense lawyer in the world will have a tough time beating
a BAC test of 2 or 3 times the legal limit.

> And don't forget that many cases are lousy from prosecutor's
> viewpoint, too. A memorable one here involved a grossly-overweight
> officer who had arrested a woman for drunk driving. Defense attorney
> made officer demonstrate in court the field-sobriety test he'd made the
> woman do on roadside; officer couldn't - in a brightly-lit courtroom -
> do in flat shoes what he had woman in high heels do on a dark roadside.
> Acquittal. In that case, no plea bargain meant the prosecutor got all
> of nothing - instead of some of everything.

I'll give the DA the benefit of the doubt and presume she took these
risks into account.

Though I think she's already achieved her goal. Rather than take the
risk, people are (hopefully) having second thoughts before they get
behind the wheel after drinking.

Larry wrote: <brevity snip/groups adjusted

> I happen to be a prosecutor in NY. I can tell you that first-arrest
> DWIs do not have a mandatory minimum.

§ 1193. Sanctions.

1. Criminal penalties.
(a) Driving while ability impaired. A violation of subdivision one of
section eleven hundred ninety-two of this article shall be a traffic
infraction and shall be punishable by a fine of not less than three
hundred dollars <snip> http://www.nysgtsc.state.ny.us/alco-vt.htm

I'd provide a link to the "actual" law but NY seems unwilling to
provide it.
-----

- gpsman

Larry quoted me:
> > I guarantee "no plea bargains" won't work. It will make every
> > drunk-driving arrestee whose prior record has him facing mandatory jail
> > or other harsh mandatory punishment hold out for a trial - and make him
> > hire a lawyer specializing in all-out defenses of such cases. And -
> > having both prosecuted and defended criminals from my law-school days
> > in the early 1980s through lawyer days in the late 1990s - I can tell
> > you that the defense always has the advantage in that situation.
<and>
> > A high percentage of drunk-driving prosecutions involve repeat
> > offenders - for whom a guilty plea on original charge means mandatory
> > jail or other big consequence.

and replied:
> Where do you get this from?

Personal experience as intern in local prosecutor's office here in
North Carolina, early 1980s, while in law school - and as trial lawyer
defending cases of all kinds, including drunk-driving-related, plus
being in courtroom where such cases were tried, from 1968 through end
of 1990s.

> I happen to be a prosecutor in NY. I can tell you that first-arrest
> DWIs do not have a mandatory minimum. They're misdemeanors.

Same here.

> And the majority of DWI cases are first-time offenders.

Maybe - but the docket here is FULL of repeat offenders. Some are
charged with drunk driving - and MANY others with related stuff
(driving while license suspended for drunk driving conviction, driving
while license revoked, driving while license permanently revoked). In
this state, driving while license permanently revoked generally is only
after repeat drunk driving convictions.

> A second DWI within 5 years is a class E felony, for which up to 4 years
> in jail is possible, but probation is also a legal sentence, and
> obviously a no-jail option.

> > They would have every incentive to hold
> > out for trial and get decent lawyers if no plea bargain was possible.

> Not necessarily. Sentencing would be more lenient pre-trial if the
> defendant admitted responsibility for his actions.

Absent some explicit plea bargain, that's a hell of a crapshoot for
the defendant - and he lacks any incentive to bet it.

> > And don't forget that many cases are lousy from prosecutor's
> > viewpoint, too. A memorable one here involved a grossly-overweight
> > officer who had arrested a woman for drunk driving. Defense attorney
> > made officer demonstrate in court the field-sobriety test he'd made the
> > woman do on roadside; officer couldn't - in a brightly-lit courtroom -
> > do in flat shoes what he had woman in high heels do on a dark roadside.
> > Acquittal. In that case, no plea bargain meant the prosecutor got all
> > of nothing - instead of some of everything.

> I'll give the DA the benefit of the doubt and presume she took these
> risks into account.

Every prosecutor's office knows some officers are problems for
trying their cases - for one reason or another. No plea bargaining in
their cases has substantial risk of acquittal in their cases.

> Though I think she's already achieved her goal. Rather than take the
> risk, people are (hopefully) having second thoughts before they get
> behind the wheel after drinking.

Get real. I guarantee you that no plea bargaining in that New York
county will invite defendants and their attorneys to hold out for
trials if the officer is one of the (too) many in the National Guard
being called up for Iraq or Afghanistan. What are you going to do if
your sole prosecution witness is in Iraq for a year?

No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

> Rice, however, can do something about it: As Nassau County district
> attorney, she has launched an aggressive assault on drunken driving in
> one of the nation's busiest traffic corridors.

Sounds like somebody is up for re-election.