Graeme Edge, drummer for the British rock band Moody Blues, had the charge of Florida DUI dismissed by jurors after a two-day trial.

On February 25, 2006, Edge, a resident of Bradenton since 1998, played with his bandmates in Sarasota. He was thrilled for the opportunity to “show off in front of all my friends.” After the concert, Edge went to a local bar and purportedly had one drink. As he returned home he was stopped at a sobriety checkpoint. Edge reportedly failed a field sobriety test and two breath tests showed a blood alcohol content above the legal limit.

His DUI defense attorneys cited an injury to Edge’s neck that resulted in slight paralysis on the left side of his body. Police did not question Edge, 66-years old, about any physical disabilities at the time of the arrest. Edge did poorly with the field sobriety tests while reconstructing them in his doctors’ offices. His attorneys also questioned the accuracy of the Breathalyzer. The machine used on the night of Edge’s arrest was 16 years old.

The jury deliberated for two hours before returning a not-guilty verdict. In response to the verdict, Edge said, “I fought this case mostly because I am against the police going on fishing expeditions. I think people should commit a crime before being arrested.”

Edge formed the Moody Blues with Justin Hayward and John Lodge in Birmingham, England in 1964. The band has had 18 platinum records that propelled them to over 55 million album sales worldwide. Their hits include Nights in White Satin and I’m Just a Singer (in a Rock and Roll Band).

Newport Beach, California – Leigh Steinberg, the sports agent considered the inspiration for the movie ‘Jerry Maquire’, crashed into three parked cars and a fire hydrant on Pacific Coast Highway. The 58-year old Steinburg was charged with California DUI.

St. Paul, Minnesota – St. Paul law student Abbie Raymond rear-ended the city-issued car occupied by Mayor Chris Coleman while he was stopped at a red light. According to police, even after being told repeatedly, the 22-year old had no idea who she had hit.

Polk County, Florida – A sheriff’s deputy was conducting a routine traffic stop when Charles Keeney III plowed his Chevy pick-up into the parked patrol car. The deputy received minor injuries and the truck driver was charged with Florida DUI and careless driving. Other charges may be pending.

Huntington, West Virginia – Malcolm Wenz, 43, sideswiped a marked police cruiser around 6:00 pm and then drove off. He was located shortly after and charged with driving while intoxicated, resisting arrest and leaving the scene of an accident.

Gifford, Florida – Brittany Brunson, 20, was arrested for drunk driving after running into the back of a Florida Highway Patrol car that had its emergency lights flashing. Brunson said she thought the patrol car was pulling off the highway.

Waynesville, Ohio – Robert Hoskins sideswiped two cars prompting calls to police dispatch. Even with identifying DUI offender license plates, Hoskins avoided police for 12 miles and hit five additional cars. Despite a group of angry car owners who gathered after he was finally stopped, Hoskins had no clue as to what was going on, simply stating he was heading to work. Hoskins was charged with his fourth Ohio OVI/DUI and sent to Warren County Jail, where he had just been released two days earlier after serving 10 days in jail.

This week Arizona state legislators sent a bill to Governor Janet Napolitano that would make Arizona DUI laws among the toughest in the country. Included in the measure is a requirement for all those convicted of drunk driving in Arizona to install an ignition interlock device in their vehicles. That includes first time offenders.

The legislation is modeled after a New Mexico ignition interlock law that contributed to a 12 percent drop in alcohol related traffic fatalities.

While it is widely accepted that an ignition-interlock requirement is needed for repeat offenders and chronic alcohol abusers, there are concerns over its application to those arrested for their first DUI. Citing the fact that the majority of those charged with DUI never have an additional offense, opponents of the Arizona law feel it is an excessive penalty for otherwise socially responsible drinkers.

The Arizona Motor Vehicle Division predicts 14,000 first time DUI offenders will be required to have an interlock device installed in their vehicle. Monitoring compliance will be difficult, as already seen in New Mexico where 40% of offenders say they do not own a vehicle and do not plan to drive, thus exempting them from the court requirement for a device. The Arizona law would require those convicted of a DUI to have an ignition interlock device on every vehicle they drive, which raises questions company owned vehicles.

The Arizona DUI legislation also creates a category of extreme drunken driving for motorists with a blood-alcohol content in excess of 0.20 percent. Such offenders would be required to spend 45 days in jail with no time suspended. The governor of Arizona recently signed into law a measure that requires anyone arrested with a BAC over 0.15 percent to spend 30 days in jail.

The new Arizona bill was widely passed both the state House and Senate before being sent to the governor for her signature.

An Alaskan state legislator has crafted a bill that would require a mark to be placed on driver’s licenses and state-issued identification cards of some DWI offenders. House Bill 14 would apply to those convicted of drunk driving whose court mandated terms of probation or parole prohibit consumption of alcohol.

Representative Harry Crawford said, “We are working to keep Alaskan families safe from drunk drivers. This law will prevent carnage caused by drunk drivers by stopping repeat offenders from buying alcohol.”

Crawford’s bill was unanimously approved by the Alaska House of Representatives and it has been rolled into an omnibus crime bill being prepared by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

A toast from Decatur, Alabama – Police responded to a Lincoln Navigator that had run off the road and was submerged up to its windows in a branch of the Tennessee River. From the water’s edge police witnessed Jorge Osori Taverez, 21, drinking a can of beer. He then proceeded to stick the beer can out of the window to apparently toast the police. Taverez turned on the car stereo but water soon shorted out the electrical system. When he finished his beer, Taverez tossed the can out of the window and opened another. After being rescued by firefighters, Taverez was arrested for Tennessee DUI, having an open container and littering.

Two DUI arrests in five hours in New Hampshire – Laurie Congley, 48, was stopped just before 9:00 pm for New Hampshire DUI. She was booked and released on a personal recognizance bond. Then at 1:28 am she was stopped again and charged with a second drunk driving offense. Prosecutors said, “She went out and apparently drank some more.”

Not starting off on the right foot in Germany – A 27-year old man from Bendorf, Germany arrived at 8:30 am to take a driving test. The examiner smelled alcohol, though he agreed to start the test after the young man denied having touched a drop. The man’s erratic driving however lead the examiner to unknowingly direct the driver to the nearest police station. Once there, police tested him for alcohol and found the driver to have a blood alcohol content over three times the legal limit. A statement from the Rhineland Pfalz police said, “Needless to say, the driving test was at an end. It will be difficult for the young man to acquire a driving license for a few years.”

Stopped for DUI on way to DUI hearing in Pennsylvania – Anthony R. Lilly, 74, of Susquehanna Township was arrested for Pennsylvania DUI after hitting a guardrail. At the time of the accident, he was driving to a court hearing for a February DUI arrest when he struck a car in an Arby’s parking lot and drove off. He said he does not remember any details of the latest accident. Lilly described himself as a drinker but said after the latest drunk driving arrests he will probably have to stop sitting with the bartender until the early morning hours.

Former Tennessee Titans quarterback, now with the Baltimore Ravens, was arrested in Nashville for driving under the influence – even though he was not driving. It was his vehicle, but it was his brother-in-law who was drunk behind the wheel. Under Tennessee law though, the owner of a vehicle can be charged if he or she is the passenger when the driver is arrested for DUI.

Police said McNair was a passenger in his silver pickup truck when police pulled the driver over for speeding early Thursday morning. It is not clear if McNair was impaired, and police reportedly did not test his blood alcohol content. Tennessee state law says that a vehicle owner is responsible for the condition of the driver and public safety. The Tennessee DUI charge against McNair is a misdemeanor.

McNair was arrested for drunk driving and illegal gun possession in Nashville in 2003, though the charges were dismissed after a judge ruled police had insufficient reason to pull him over.

Ted Mondale, former Minnesota state senator and son of Vice President Walter Mondale, was charged with drunk driving in Hennepin County.

Mondale, 49, was stopped by the Minnesota State Patrol early Wednesday morning for suspicion of DWI. Mondale, who lives in the Minneapolis suburb of St. Louis Park, had attended a Minnesota Twins baseball game and then had dinner with friends downtown. He was stopped for speeding and, when asked by the patrolman, admitted to having consumed alcohol. He took a field sobriety test and was then taken at the Hennepin County jail. On the advice of his DWI defense attorney, Mondale refused to submit to a Breathalyzer test, which, according to state law, will result in the automatic suspension of his driver’s license.

Mondale said he did not dispute the state trooper’s suspicion of impairment. “I’m guilty,” he said later. “Whatever the punishment, I’m going to obviously accept it and never do that again.”

Mondale is due in Hennepin County court on May 23 to face the Minnesota DWI charge. He has no previous arrests.

Last Friday, a visibly shaken and crying Paris Hilton was sentenced to to 45 days in jail by a judge who ruled that she had knowingly violated the terms of her probation. Hilton was ticketed for driving without a license, which had been suspended after a California DUI incident last year.

Hilton’s spokesperson Elliot Mintz told the court Friday that he was responsible for telling the 26-year old socialite and party girl that she could drive for “work-related” purposes. The judge rejected that attempt to divert responsibility and cited a form signed by the Hilton during a traffic stop in January where she acknowledged she was not to drive. Hilton fired Mintz on Saturday.

She is scheduled to enter the Century Regional Detention Facility for Women in Lynwood, California on June 5, though her defense attorney is planning an appeal.

Hilton said, “I feel that I was treated unfairly and that the sentence is both cruel and unwarranted. I don’t deserve this.”

Paris’ parents, Kathy and Rick Hilton, are thought to be exploring connections to keep her out of jail or get the sentence reduced. Others speculate that Kathy Hilton may try to capitalize on the event by offering an exclusive interview or even angling for a new reality show on Paris’ time in jail.

California DUI defense attorneys find Hilton’s jail sentence not out of the ordinary for someone who had been arrested for DUI and was subsequently stopped multiple times driving with a suspended license. What was slightly unusual is that the judge ordered Hilton to serve the entire 45-day sentence recommended by the city attorney, but perhaps that was in response to the perception that Hilton had not taken her arrest seriously and was trying to see what she could get with.

The Ohio legislature is considering a bill that would require the installation of an alcohol ignition interlock devices in vehicles owned by those convicted of drunk driving. The idea is receiving a generally favorable response from the public, though DUI defense attorneys want to make sure everyone knows the downside of the equipment. Specifically the possibility of false readings that could result in an innocent motorist being jailed for probation violation.

Columbus DUI lawyer Brad Koffel has successfully challenged the accuracy and reliability of ignition interlock devices in court. Koffel states, “these small machines are not specific for alcohol, are too sensitive to outside temperature changes, are not compatible with new electronics in newer car models, are easily tricked, provide more false positives than true positive results, and that is before you get around to the lack of training for the folks who are installing them for the courts.”

DUI defense lawyer Koffel recently represented a businessman who was ordered to install an ignition interlock device in his vehicle after being convicted of an Ohio DUI. The client had dutifully used the equipment for 10 months before attempting to start his SUV. The company that installed and monitors the device then sent a letter to the courts saying that Koffel’s client had failed two times. That suggested the motorist had consumed alcohol before attempting to start his vehicle. Despite his denials of drinking and driving, he faced almost six months in jail for violating the terms of his probation.

An investigation conducted by Koffel showed the interlock device had actually recorded 35 ‘failures’, not two, indicating persistent, questionable readings from the equipment. The president of the interlock company admitted that many foods, other than alcohol, can cause false positives. Fortunately, one of the ‘failures’ was recorded when the accused motorist was documented as being in Koffel’s office.

As a result of Koffel’s findings, the presiding judge in the case ordered the immediate removal of the ignition interlock device from the defendant’s vehicle. In his summary, the judge questioned the science and legitimacy of the devices.

The unreliability of ignition interlock devices is resulting in unusual actions on the part of motorists. Koffel says, “We are learning that clients are simply leaving their vehicles on with the doors locked instead of turning off the vehicle and running the risk that it will take 15 – 90 minutes for the interlock to permit them to start the vehicle again.” Koffel and other Ohio DUI defense attorneys hope that legislatures fully investigate the reliability of the equipment and question the claims of manufacturer’s before passing a law that could result in people being wrongly accused of violating their probation and being sent to jail.

Brad Koffel limits his practice to DUI defense. He is a member of the Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers DUI / OVI Task Force. Mr. Koffel can be contacted through dwi.com/ohio/franklin-county.

The Los Angeles attorney’s office has recommended that heiress Paris Hilton be jailed for 45 days for violating terms of her probation from a drunk driving incident. In addition, prosecutors want Hilton to be prohibited from consuming alcohol for 90 days, wear a monitoring device to ensure she complies and have her license suspended for an extra four months.

Last January Hilton pleaded no contest to reckless driving in a case stemming from a September California DUI arrest. She was sentenced to 36 months probation, required to attend alcohol education classes and fined $1,500.

Two additional traffic stops eventually led to the charge of probation violation. Hilton was stopped by the California Highway Patrol in January and informed that she was driving on a suspended license. Records show she signed a document acknowledging she was not to drive. Then in February she was stopped at 11:00 pm for speeding with her vehicle’s headlights off.

Though both Hilton and her spokesperson claim that she did not know her license was suspended, prosecutors point to the document signed in January. Attorney’s for the city also state that Hilton has yet to enroll in court mandated alcohol education classes.

The LA attorney’s office filed its recommendations in Superior Court, which will be reviewed by a judge during a probation violation hearing on Friday. Hilton will be required to be in the courtroom. The judge can accept the recommendations or impose a different penalty. The judge would also be able to decide where Hilton would be incarcerated if a jail sentence is meted out. Hilton has the legal option of requesting the jail of her choice and, if accepted by the judge, paying the costs associated with her incarceration.

The city attorney said that Hilton is not getting special treatment. The maximum jail penalty for this type of probation violation is 90 days.