Especially not at the same time. This young lady was shooting up heroin while she was driving down the street. She didn’t even stop when she pulled up next to a cop, who promptly turned her over. You can get a DUI for driving under the influence of controlled substances, but that’s not as bad as the felony for DOING the substances (and/or possessing them). She’s clearly got a substance abuse problem, and hopefully this will be a wakeup call to get her help.
I got some feedback from friend of the firm Christopher Brown, now a Defense attorney in SWFL. While he was an intern with the prosecutor’s office several years back, a DUI on a horse landed on his desk. That means some hotshot cop arrested some guy on a horse and threw him in jail for a night. Probably took his driver’s license, too. Chris did the right thing and dropped the case, but I now have my confirmation that there are cops who will arrest somebody for it, regardless of the law.
Chris reports his reasoning was that a drunk driver points a car into traffic and potentially trouble. But a horseback rider, if he points that horse at traffic, that horse just ain’t gonna go. I’m paraphrasing, but you get the point. Since that case didn’t go anywhere, I am still unaware of any published case law on the issue. I don’t know if there’s any law against riding a drunk horse…
Man sitting on a dead horse
Update: More from Chris: “Now that my memory has been refreshed I think I called the cop to tell him I was dumping it and he was okay with it. He said the guy was so drunk he was just afraid he would fall of the horse into the street or somehow cause and accident and he just wanted to take him off the street that night. Cops need more training on Marchment… they are always finding reasons to arrest drunks for their own protection.” The cop’s heart may have been in the right place, but not on the right side of the law!
Charles Cowart mug shots
Yesterday I posted a story about Charles Cowart, who was riding around in the middle of a major highway on his horse absolutely schmammered. That’s a legal term. He proceeded to lead police on a 30 minute chase, including down railroad tracks, which caused the police to stop a train. He ultimately fell off his high horse, tried to run, and was arrested and charged with a variety of crimes, including felonies for fleeing and animal cruelty. It does not appear that he was charged with DUI.
In Florida, you can be arrested for operating any “vehicle” if your normal faculties are impaired by alcohol or a controlled substance. It does not have to be a motor vehicle: I personally prosecuted a guy who was arrested for DUI on a tricycle back when I worked at the state. And this guy was just recently arrested for DUI on a lawnmower. A vehicle is defined as a “Device” that can be used or be drawn to transport persons (or property) on a highway. Rail cars are specifically excluded. This definition appears to me to exclude horses: it would be a stretch to call a horse a “device”. I did some cursory research and could not find any published cases where an individual had been charged with DUI on a horse. Attorney Gary Potts has addressed this on his blog, and come to a similar conclusion, though as he points out, a horse-drawn cart would probably qualify.
Keep in mind, I haven’t found anything that says they can’t try to charge you with DUI on a horse. The last thing you want to do is test it, and run into the cop who thinks a horse is a vehicle. In Florida, almost anything else is a vehicle, including bikes, tricycles, lawnmowers, airplanes, golf carts, roller blades and even a segway. Anything that rolls, like a motorized bar stool or cooler, and even the occasional couch have generated DUIs. I am reminded of the scene in “Mystery, Alaska” where the guy got arrested on a Zamboni: life imitates art.
I watched the trial of Amanda Knox, “Foxy Knoxy” as she was dubbed by the tabloids closely, and posted on it frequently on my Facebook page back before I started Crimcourts. Mr. Solecito was the man she had a relationship with prior to her roommate being murdered. The two were both charged and railroaded through a trial, and spent about 4 years in prison before their convictions were thrown out. He has written a book, out now, and recently sat down with 48 Hours to talk about his experience.
Also, a Seattle writer recently published a book on the case.
Dewey the squirrel- in action
Of course, in Florida: Dewey the squirrel runs rampant in Fleming Island: (get it, ‘Dewey’?)
This was a top story on cnn.com, and I had to share. Warren Michael was driving with his new pet squirrel, and says it got in his shirt and caused the erratic driving that led to a DUI arrest. Also, he’d had a few drinks. Riding with a squirrel = not illegal, but driving with your “normal faculties impaired” is illegal, regardless of whether you’ve got ants in your pants. I suspect the squirrel was no longer in his shirt when he was asked to perform the field sobriety exercises.
Reminder, if you are ever charged with a crime… ANY crime, and the press comes calling, call your attorney before you talk to them!
Now, can one of my journalist friends explain to me why the reporter included the ‘action shot’ of him walking up to the house to do the interview?
Charles Cowart mug shot
Also in Florida: Man arrested for after drunken horse-riding adventure:
Not far from Dewey’s antics, a man in Bunnel, Florida was arrested after a little rampage while drunkenly riding around on a horse. Charles Cowart has been charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, aggravated fleeing, and animal cruelty. He was riding around in major traffic on US 1: apparently he even caused a train to stop. As far as I can tell, no DUI charges. I don’t think a DUI can be charged on a horse in Florida, though that’s not as bad as animal cruelty, a felony. This happened in the middle of the afternoon. Spectacular.
Chad Johnson entered a no contest plea in court. He was sentenced to serve a year of probation, and attend counseling. The counseling program he has entered is a “Batterer’s Intervention” program required by Florida on all cases involving domestic violence. It’s a pretty standard sentence for someone with little to no criminal history. If he completes his counseling and pays all his fines and fees, the judge may let him off before the year is up. Again, the charge is a misdemeanor, not a felony, though if he were to find an NFL job, he may still face sanctions from the NFL (which would be pretty harsh, since the Dolphins already cut him because of the incident.) He is taking responsibility with the legal situation, and receiving what the state believes to be sufficient punishment under the circumstances.
Posted in Criminal Law, Florida, Miami / South Florida
Tagged battery, bengals, chad johnson, dolphins, domestic violence, evelyn lozada, lozada, miami, ochochinco
Sarah Jones is in court today, trying to suppress the text messages the prosecutors want to introduce against her. The testimony has been compelling: first, her attorney challenged the judge who signed the warrant. Deters put Judge Easterling on the stand and questioned him. That was followed by the case agent, the detective, who testified that nearly 40 false statements were included in the case against Jones and her mother.
No word yet on the result of the hearing.
Update: According to WCPO, the Judge will issue an order on the suppression motion in the next few weeks. That doesn’t indicate much, just the the judge reserved ruling, meaning she’s going to think about it and probably put out a written order with her ruling.
I speculated before that the Sex/Driving/Robbery/Gun/Crash case involving Amanda Linscott had a lot more than meets the eye when I first saw the story. I spoke to Ms. Linscott’s attorney at Brown, Suarez & Rios and confirmed that there was a lot more going on that the media had reported. Crimcourts has now obtained a copy of the actual police report, the Probable Cause Affidavit [PCA], and holy cow the other side of the story is monumental.
According to Detective Korte-Sweede, after Ms. Linscott fled from her accuser, her father flagged down law enforcement to give her side of the story. What you haven’t heard in the media is that Ms. Linscott told deputies that Glenn Aspen instigated the incident by trying to force her to engage in sex acts. That’s a pretty important detail. Additionally, the gun was legally possessed, it belongs to Ms. Linscott’s father and she had a permit to carry it. Also, the Detective found Mr. Aspen to be impaired when she initially responded to the scene.
Coupling these new allegations, with the fact that Ms. Linscott bore injuries from being punched (and from the car crash), we must have serious concerns about the validity of these charges. In fact, if Ms. Linscott’s story is to be believed, she was the victim of an attempted sexual assault that day. Certainly Mr. Aspen committed the offenses of DUI with Property Damage and Leaving the Scene of an Accident and Prostitution. It is difficult to discern what happened inside the car, but we do know that only Ms. Linscott got beat up.
After reading the PCA, I got upset with the media for not including the other half of the story… until I checked the press release from the Sheriff’s Office. Guess what, the Sheriff’s release only told the accuser’s version of the story. The completely left out that Ms. Linscott claimed to be the victim. Sadly, the media just ran with the story, instead of doing a minimal amount of research to report both sides of the story. Crimcourts will keep digging, to provide you with the whole truth.
Posted in Amanda Linscott, Criminal Law, Florida, Florida Cases, punta gorda / port charlotte / charlotte / southwest florida, Stand Your Ground
Tagged amanda linscott, battery, dui, glenn aspen, highwayrobbery, linscott, port charlotte, robbery, stand your ground, swfl
Dateline did a pretty solid and in-depth piece on Drew Peterson and his trial last week. You can check out the full video of the episode online. It seems to be the most complete discussion of the trial I have yet seen in one place, and is presently clearly and concisely. If you have followed the case, it’s a must see.
They ran parts of the statements from the jurors that agreed to speak to the press. I found it particularly insightful that the jurors (according to the foreman Eduardo Saldana) relied heavily on the hearsay evidence: including the controversial evidence that was admitted only thanks to a new law passed in Illinois that changed hundreds of years of courtroom procedure. He specifically referenced statements Stacy Peterson made to her divorce attorney about admissions Drew Peterson had made about Kathleen Savio’s death.
The defense team had seemed cocky earlier in the case. I wonder if they were banking on the jury disregarding the hearsay due to its reliability concerns. Having heard the prejudicial statements that were introduced, I’d say they were just too damaging, and they didn’t just come from one source. Collectively, the prosecutors were able to use the hearsay evidence to put on a relatively strong case against Peterson. Dateline’s Lester Holt categorized the verdict as “shocking.” I wouldn’t go that far, in spite of the lack of physical evidence, the testimonial evidence was devastating.