Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> JAABlog

Criminal Law

: JAABlog

CASES

By Jeffrey Ivashuk

Criminal law -- Driving under influence -- Discovery -- Intoxilyzer source code -- Certiorari challenge to order requiring Intoxilyzer manufacturer to disclose source codes fails where trial court did not err in holding that production of source codes is material and reasonably necessary to defendants' cases, manufacturer cannot demonstrate material injury because it has already agreed to disclose source codes if protective order and non-disclosure agreement are executed, and trial court's requirement that manufacturer submit to its jurisdiction by executing non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements does not result in miscarriage of justiceCriminal law -- Driving under influence -- Search and seizure -- Arrest -- Probable Cause -- Evidence -- Accident report privilege does not bar state from using investigating officer's observations of defendant's physical appearance, general demeanor, slurred speech or scent of alcohol on breath in establishing probable cause for arrest  -- Accident witness's identification of defendant as driver of vehicle involved in accident is admissible to establish probable cause at suppression hearingLicensing -- Driver's license -- Revocation -- Permanent -- Fourth DUI conviction -- Prior convictions -- Evidence -- Microfilm copy of uniform traffic citation showing plea and disposition of licensee for DUI is sufficient proof of prior DUI convictionCriminal law -- Possession of paraphernalia -- Jury trial -- Waiver -- Where defendant made express waiver of jury trial and did not move to withdraw waiver before trial court, issue of voluntariness of waiver was not preserved for appeal -- Continuance -- Denial -- Where public defender was appointed five minutes prior to trial, had no time to conduct discovery on state's witnesses and had no prior trial experience or prior contact with defendant, trial court erred in denying motion for continuance despite defendant's role in shortening preparation time by failing to secure attorney before day of trial, fact that issues in case were not complex, and adequacy of public defender's representation -- Requiring defendant to proceed to trial with counsel appointed five minutes earlier is tantamount to violation of right to counsel and presumptively prejudicialcontinue to full post

Full post as published by JAABlog on July 21, 2008 (boomark / email).