The doctrine that “a man’s home is his castle” is enshrined in the Bill of Rights.  The Fourth Amendment to the United State Constitution embodies the principle and states that a home should be free from search without a warrant.  The Fourth Amendment states, “The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause * * *.” Furthermore, in United States v. United States Dist. Court for the E. Dist. of Michigan (1972) 407 U.S. 297, 313, 92 S.Ct. 2125, 2134, 32 L.Ed.2d 752, 764, the court noted that the “physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.”  Under normal circumstances, a police officer is not permitted to enter one’s home to effectuate an arrest.  But does this principle apply in DUI prosecutions?

In State v. Lake, 2009-Ohio-3057, a police officer observed the Defendant commit several traffic violations, but failed to stop the Defendant before he could pull into his garage.  The Defendant argued in a motion to suppress to the trial court that he was illegally arrested when the officer barged into his garage.  His motion was overruled and he was eventually found guilty.  On appeal, the Seventh District Court of Appeals (Columbiana County) dismissed the Defendant’s argument. The Court held that the “hot pursuit” entry exception to the Fourth Amendment applied. They then stated that a defendant cannot defeat an arrest which has been set in motion in a public place by the escape to a private place, reiterating U.S. v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411, 96 S.Ct. 820, 46 L.Ed. 2d 598 (1976), the United States Supreme Court case on point.  In United States v. Santana (1976), 427 U.S. 38, 96 S.Ct. 2406, 49 L.Ed.2d 300, the court made it clear that a suspect may not avoid arrest simply by outrunning pursuing officers and finding refuge in her home. The court noted that hot pursuit “need not be an extended hue and cry ‘in and about [the] public streets.’ “ Id. at 43, 96 S.Ct. at 2410, 49 L.Ed.2d at 305, quoting the trial court. Moreover, the court went on to conclude that “a suspect may not defeat an arrest which has been set in motion in a public place * * * by the expedient of escaping to a private place.” Id. at 43, 96 S.Ct. at 2410, 49 L.Ed.2d at 306.  In 2002, the Ohio Supreme Court extended this principle to misdemeanors, see Middletown v. Flinchum 95 Ohio St.3d 43, 2002-Ohio-1625 wherein the court reasoned that since the officers observed at least two traffic violations, they had probable cause to stop the Defendant and pursue the Defendant into his “home” to effectuate an arrest.

So where does this leave us?  Does the proscriptions dating back to Roman law still apply: quid enim sanctius, quid omni religione munitius, quam domus unusquisque civium? (What more sacred, what more strongly guarded by every holy feeling, than a man’s own home? -Cicero-)  The answer lies in how effectively your attorney can argue your case before a trier-of-fact and the strength of the facts you are able to present.  DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI”

Related articles

• MADD’s Historic Push For A .05% Alcohol Limit (daytondui.com)
• DUI Checkpoints: Are They Justified (Still)? (daytondui.com)
• Innocent Until Proven Guilty; Does it apply in Ohio DUI Prosecutions? (daytondui.com)
• DUI Law: What Should I Say? (daytondui.com)
• Ohio DUI Law: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (daytondui.com)
• Are the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests Fair to Fatter People? (daytondui.com)

• Clerk of Courts
• Case Look-Up
• Map & Directions
• Local Rules
• Pay On-Line

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI”

Related articles

• Arrested for DUI in Xenia or Bellbrook? (daytondui.com)
• Fairborn Municipal Court; contact information (daytondui.com)
• Arrested at Wright-Patterson AFB? (daytondui.com)
• Arrested for OVI in Centerville, Ohio? (daytondui.com)
• Arrested for DUI in Kettering? (daytondui.com)
• Arrested for DUI in Beavercreek, Ohio? (daytondui.com)
• Arrested for OVI in Vandalia? (daytondui.com)

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat

In America you are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  ”Presumption of innocence” serves to emphasize that the prosecution has the obligation to prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt and that the accused bears no burden of proof.  This presumption is ancient, dating back to the Old Testament.  In Genesis 18:23-32, it states, “Abraham drew near, and said, “Will you consume the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous within the city? Will you consume and not spare the place for the fifty righteous who are in it? What if ten are found there? The Lord said, “I will not destroy it for the ten’s sake.”  Latin legal principle provided that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies).  Relying on this tradition Maimonides, a twelfth-century legal theorist looked to Exodus 23:7, “the innocent and righteous slay thou not” and argued against the use of presumptive evidence, concluding, “it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death.”  In the De Laudibus Legum Angliae, c. 1470, Sir John Fortescue argues that “one would much rather that twenty guilty person should escape the punishment of death, than that one innocent person should be condemned and suffer capitally.”  In 1678, Lord Hale says that , ”In some cases presumptive evidence goes far to prove a person guilty, though there be no express proof of the fact to be committed by him, but then it must be very warily pressed, for it is better five guilty persons should escape unpunished than one innocent person should die.” He further observes: “And thus the reasons stand on both sides, and though these seem to be stronger than the former, yet in a case of this moment it is safest to hold that in practice, which hath least doubt and danger, quod dubitas, ne faceris.”  The principle and the concomitant prosecutor’s duty was referred to in the English Common Law and the “golden thread” by Lord Sankey, who wrote in Woomington v. DPP [1935]  AC 462, “throughout the web of the English criminal law one golden thread is always to be seen – that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defense of insanity and subject to any statutory exception…”

The principle of presumed innocence was accepted in America even before we were a county.  On Ocotber 3, 1692, Increase Mather relied upon Fortescue to decry the Salem Witch Trials writing, “It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that the Innocent Person should be Condemned.” Benjamin Franklin, writing in a letter of 1785 stated it as, “it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer. The words “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” do not appear in the United States Constitution but many provisions rely upon the proposition.  The concept is embodied in several provisions of the Constitution, however, such as the right to remain silent and the right to a jury and the 14th Amendment.  The presumption of innocence principle supports the practice of releasing criminal defendants from jail prior to trial. Based upon this premise, the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that excessive bail shall not be required, but it is widely accepted that governments have the right to detain through trial a defendant of a serious crime who is a flight risk or poses a danger to the public. In such cases the presumption of innocence is largely theoretical but deserving of, and receiving, special constitutional protection.

In 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a decision in the case Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432; 15 S. Ct. 394, traced the presumption of innocence, past England, Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, to Deuteronomy.  The Coffin case stands for the proposition that at the request of a defendant, a court must not only instruct on the prosecution’s burden of proof–that a defendant cannot be convicted unless the government has proven his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt–but also must instruct on the presumption of innocence–by informing the jury that a defendant is presumed innocent. The Court stated, “The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law.”  Much later in Taylor v. Kentucky, 436 U.S. 478, 98 S.Ct. 1930, 56 L.Ed.2d 468 (1978), the United States Supreme Court described the presumption of the innocence of a criminal defendant as an assumption of innocence that is indulged in the absence of contrary evidence. It is not considered evidence of the defendant’s innocence, and it does not require that a mandatory inference favorable to the defendant be drawn from any facts in evidence.  The Supreme Court has required, under some circumstances, a court should issue jury instructions on the presumption of innocence in addition to instructions on the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.  A presumption of innocence instruction may be required if the jury is in danger of convicting the defendant on the basis of extraneous considerations rather than the facts of the case.

The rights associated with the presumption of innocence have become a staple of modern democratic ideals and have been included in several important international legal codes and constitutions, including:

• The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of the Council of Europe says (art. 6.2): “Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law”. This convention has been adopted by treaty and is binding on all Council of Europe members. Currently (and in any foreseeable expansion of the EU) every country member of the European Union is also member to the Council of Europe, so this stands for EU members as a matter of course. Nevertheless, this assertion is iterated verbatim in Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

• In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: “Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal”.

• In the South African Constitution, section 35(3)(h) of the Bill of Rights states: “Every accused person has a right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be presumed innocent, to remain silent, and not to testify during the proceedings.”

• In France, article 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, of constitutional value, says “Everyone is supposed innocent until having been declared guilty.” and the preliminary article of the code of criminal procedure says “any suspected or prosecuted person is presumed to be innocent until their guilt has been established”. The jurors’ oath reiterates this assertion.

• Although the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. See also Coffin v. United States and In re Winship.

• In the 1988 Brazilian constitution, article 5, section LVII states that “no one shall be considered guilty before the issuing of a final and unappealable penal sentence”.

• The Constitution of Russia, in article 49, states that “Everyone charged with a crime shall be considered not guilty until his or her guilt has been proven in conformity with the federal law and has been established by the valid sentence of a court of law”. It also states that “The defendant shall not be obliged to prove his or her innocence” and “Any reasonable doubt shall be interpreted in favor of the defendant”.

• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which they have had all the guarantees necessary for their defence. (from Wikipedia, original link HERE).

[T]o interpret the effectiveness of the ALS to be dependent on the Registrar receiving a sworn report is not only contrary to the express statutory language but would also serve to make the suspension process inefficient and impractical. If the ALS does not take effect immediately upon refusal to submit to the chemical test or upon the chemical test indicating a prohibited concentration of alcohol, then presumably a person’s driver’s license would remain effective until the Registrar processed the form.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Dayton and throughout the Miami Valley.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter@DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook, www.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

Related articles

• DUI Trial Techniques (Voir Dire) (daytondui.com)
• DUI and Facebook Don’t Mix (daytondui.com)
• How to Hire a DUI Defense Attorney (daytondui.com)
• Arrested for DUI in Dayton, Ohio? (daytondui.com)
• Automatic License Suspension; Testing Over the Limit (daytondui.com)
• DUI and the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests – An Introduction (daytondui.com)
• Top Ten Rules for Partying in Ohio (daytondui.com)
• H.B. 86 Brings Changes To Ohio’s OVI Law (daytondui.com)

Rick Armon at the Beer Blog has compiled a list of Ohio’s beer festivals.  Some such as the International Beer Fest in Cleveland and the Cincy Winter Beerfest in Cincinnati will draw thousands. Others such as the Frozen Falls Beer Festival in Garrettsville and the Celebration of the Hop in North Olmsted will attract hundreds.  You can find a continuously updated version of this list at the Beer Blog.  Have fun and enjoy a beer festival near you.

• Saturday: The Columbus Winter Beerfest at the Greater Columbus Convention Center. The event will feature more than 50 breweries and 250 beers.

• Jan. 28: The Montessori School of Dayton’s Brew Ha-Ha at the school in Kettering. The first-ever event will raise money for the school’s capital campaign.

• Feb. 4: The seventh annual AleFest Columbus at the Aladdin Shrine Center Ballroom. The event features more than 70 breweries and more than 180 craft beers.

• Feb. 4: Cincinnati Brew Ha-Ha! at the Cintas Center on the Xavier University campus. Comedian Greg Hahn headlines the winter version of this event, which combines comedy and 80 beers. Brew Ha-Ha! also is held in August at the Cincinnati riverfront.

• Feb. 10-11: The fifth annual Cincy Winter Beerfest at the Duke Energy Convention Center. It will feature more than 300 craft beers.

• Feb. 18: The third annual Winking Lizard Barleywine Festival at the Winking Lizard Party Center in Bedford Heights. The event focuses on barleywines.

• March 2-4: The 20th annual Bockfest in Cincinnati’s Over-the-Rhine neighborhood. The event claims to be the oldest and largest bock festival in the United States.

• March 2: The Glass City Beer Fest at the Erie Street Market in Toledo.

• March 3: Frozen Falls Beer Festival at Main Street Grille & Brewing Co. in Garrettsville.

• March 9: The fifth annual Art of Ale at the Akron Art Museum. The event is held in the glass-enclosed lobby and also features local food.

• April 21: The Big Tap In at the Covelli Centre in Youngstown. It claims to be the largest beer festival between Cleveland and Pittsburgh.

• April 28: Cask AleFest Dayton is April 28. It focuses on cask ales.

• May 5: The 10th annual Mini Real Ale Festival at Barley’s Smokehouse & Brewpub in Columbus. The event featured 20 gravity-fed beers last year.

• May 11-12: The second annual International Beer Fest at the IX Center in Cleveland. The event features about 800 beers from more than 200 breweries, and includes a beer competition.

• June 8-9: The second annual Columbus Beerfest at the Greater Columbus Convention Center.

• June 22-30: The seventh annual Ohio Brew Week in Athens. The festival is a celebration of Ohio-made beer and includes educational events and tastings.

• July 21: The fourth annual Scene Magazine Alefestival at Lincoln Park in Cleveland.

• July 21-22: The Great Lakes Burning River Fest along the waterfront in Cleveland. The event combines music, environmental advocacy and beer from Great Lakes Brewing Co.

• July 28: Blues & Brews is July 28 at Lock 3 in downtown Akron. The event features about 75 breweries and more than 200 beers.

• Aug 9-12: The second annual River, Trails and Ales Festival in Marietta. The event features cycling, paddling, music and beer at various locations.

• Aug. 25: The 14th annual AleFest Dayton at Carillon Historical Park. It features about 300 beers from more than 100 breweries.

• Aug. 31-Sept. 3: The Cleveland Labor Day Oktoberfest at the Cuyahoga County Fairgrounds in Berea. The event bills itself as “Northeast Ohio’s Largest Annual Outdoor Festival” and includes a microbrew competition.

• Sept. 14-15: The Columbus Microbrew Festival at the North Market in Columbus. The event focuses on Columbus and Columbus-area breweries.

• Sept. 14-16: The 14th annual Ohio Pawpaw Festival at Lake Snowden in Albany. The event celebrates the pawpaw fruit and brewers create special pawpaw beers.

• Sept. 21-23: The 37th annual Oktoberfest-Zinzinnati USA in Cincinnati. The event celebrates the community’s German heritage and includes the world’s largest Chicken Dance. More than half a million people attend.

• Oct. 13: Big Beers & Barley Wines at the Montgomery County Fairgrounds in Dayton. As the name implies, the event focuses on higher alcohol beers.

• Oct. 27: Brewzilla at the Galleria at Erieview in Cleveland. The beer festival marks the end of Cleveland Beer Week.

DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in Fairborn, Dayton, Springfield, Kettering, Vandalia, Xenia, Miamisburg, Springboro, Huber Heights, Oakwood, Beavercreek, Centerville and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hours help contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to 40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebook and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at: CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324. “All I do is DUI”

The crime is referred to as Hit and Run, Leaving the Scene of and Accident, Hit/Skip or Failure to Notify.  Here is an overview of what proscriptions Ohio has adopted to punish persons involved in an accident who leave the scene.  Because of the serious nature of the offense you should seek a qualified and experienced criminal/traffic  attorney to help you combat this charge and give you advice.

Ohio law, O.R.C. 4549.02, requires any person who is involved in an accident on public roads or highways to stop and exchange information with the other party.

What information must I provide?  The statute requires that you provide your name and address.  If you are not the owner you must provide the name and address of the owner, together with the registered number of that vehicle.

To whom do I provide the information?  The statute states that you must provide the information to “any person injured in the accident or collision or to the operator, occupant, owner, or attendant of any motor vehicle damaged in the accident or collision, or to any police officer at the scene of the accident or collision.”  O.R.C. 4549.029(A).

How long must I stay? You are  required to stay at the scene until you have given your information to the other driver, any person injured, or the police officer.

What if I hit a parked car? If the accident or collision is with an unoccupied or unattended motor vehicle, “the operator who collides with the motor vehicle shall securely attach the information required to be given in this section, in writing, to a conspicuous place in or on the unoccupied or unattended motor vehicle.”

What if the other driver is unable to take my information? If the accident is sufficiently serious to render the other driver unable to record or comprehend your information, you are required to notify the nearest police authority about the accident and remain at the scene until a police officer arrives, unless you are removed from the scene by an emergency vehicle.

What are the penalties if I leave?  The answer depends on how badly the other person involved in the accident is hurt.  Simply failing to stop after an accident on public roads or highways can be charged with a misdemeanor of the first degree. This offense is punishable by a maximum of 180 days in jail and/or a fine not more than $1,000.  If the accident results in serious physical harm to a person, the alleged offender who failed to stop can be convicted of a felony of the fifth degree. This degree of offense can result in a prison sentence from six months to one year and/or fines up to $2,500.  If the accident results in the death of a person, the individual who allegedly failed to stop after the collision can be charged with a felony of the third degree. This offense is punishable by a prison sentence ranging from one to five years and/or fines not exceeding $10,000.

Any other penalties? An individual who has violated this statute will receive a class five suspension, which will result in a suspension from at least six months to three years.  Additionally, an individual who is charged with failure to stop after a collision can receive six points under Ohio’s driving point system. If anyone receives 12 or more points within a two-year period, their license and driving privileges will be suspended under a class D suspension. This may result in a suspension for up to six months.

What If the accident occurs on other than a public road or highway? You must comply with O.R.C. 4549.021 which requires an individual driving or operating a motor vehicle on any public or private property to stop after an accident or collision resulting in injury or damage to persons or property when they had knowledge of the accident or collision. They are also required to submit their information within twenty-four hours to a law enforcement officer if they were previously unable to give the information to the owner.

What are the penalties for violating R.C. 4549.021? This offense is punishable as a first degree misdemeanor or felony of the fifth or third degree depending on the injuries sustained by the other party. Additionally, the alleged offender’s driver’s license will be suspended under a class five suspension, which will result in a suspension from at least six months to three years.

What if I just damage a fence or a tree?  O.R.C. 4545.03 requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in property damage to real property or personal property attached to real property to take reasonable steps to locate the owner of the property and give them their information. If they are unable to locate the owner after a reasonable search, they are required to submit their information within twenty-four hours to a law enforcement officer.  Failure to do so will be punished as a first degree misdemeanor.

Contact Charles M. Rowland II today for a free consultation regarding the serious crimes of leaving the scene, hit/skip, or hit and run described above.  A former prosecutor, Charles Rowland is uniquely qualified to help you avoid the repercussions and consequences of a bad error in judgment. Charles Rowland has worked hard to become one of the most recognized attorneys practicing DUI and criminal law and has created a blog to give credible information about how best to fight your case.  Call (937) 318-1384 now, or contact Charlie on his 24/7 DUI hot-line at (937)776-2671.

Related articles

• Ohio BMV Reinstatement Offices Expand Payment Sites (daytondui.com)
• Who Is Charles M. Rowland II? (daytondui.com)
• Aggravated Vehicular Homicide, O.R.C. 2903.06 (daytondui.com)
• Ohio Driver’s License “POINTS” (daytondui.com)
• Top 10 Rules For Dealing With The Ohio BMV (daytondui.com)
• DUI Law: Is This Constitutional? (daytondui.com)
• Ohio Revised Code 4511.194, Physical Control (daytondui.com)
• Consequences of a Fake ID (daytondui.com)