Areas of Practice
View Larger Map
|
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Sunday, September 25th, 2011
If a person is convicted of driving under the influence, the punishment inflicted on them by the law, and their self-guilt is a high price in itself to pay. If convicted of driving under the influence, a person is likely to lose their job, credibility, and license for a year. All of these punishments will make life extremely difficult for a person who has been convicted of driving under the influence because losing a job will make it that much harder to find another one, and if their license is taken away, they have no means of getting to work for one year, which will also cost them their job–not to mention a driving under the influence charge irreparably damages their permanent record. So, needless to say there are great consequences for driving under the influence; but apparently in some places that punishment is not enough, and the need is felt to go a step further.
Law makers in Oklahoma have passed an act in their state senate which requires driving under the influence offenders to have the term: “DUI Conviction” printed on their driver’s license. This is a very intense form of public humiliation for anyone, and the question of its fairness is highly debatable. Printing that term on the license of every driving under the influence offender will subject to public humiliation wherever they go; whether that be having to present their license at the movies, certain stores, etc; having to show someone a license with the term: “DUI Conviction” will automatically make that person pass critical judgment on the citizen who bares the license, and that is just unfair. It is especially unfair to those who are truly sorry for driving while under the influence of alcohol, and also those who were wrongly accused of drunk driving, but were still convicted. Inevitably, not only will Pennsylvania be on the way, but so will all other states.
Furthermore, why should a driving under the influence felony be the only offense to be printed on a license? Why shouldn’t capital murderers have their offense printed on their licenses, as well as rapists, thieves, and drug dealers? Why should driving under the influence offenders be the only ones who have to divulge their offense to every establishment or person who asks them to present their license? This law is the result of harsh driving under the influence laws due to certain groups wanting to completely eradicate drunk driving; not because of what data and statistics have proven to be true.
This fact is a vital reason that you should seek out a knowledgeable and experienced driving under the influence attorney if you are charged with a DUI to help protect you from penalties that require you to be publicly humiliated.
Tags: Pittsburgh DUI law firm
Posted in Costs of a DUI, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011
A new problem has been launched upon the forensic community: synthetic drugs. Certain chemicals in bath salts, along with bath salts in general have been banned in the United States. This eradication of distribution is due to citizens who have used bath salts and reported having severe health complications as a result. Also, it has been reported that certain bath salts are being used as a disguise for drugs such as marijuana, and cocaine–these new drugs are just as harmful, it is just that they are in a more synthetic form when packaged as bath salts.
Americans are at great risk if the production of these bath salts are permitted to continue, and that is precisely why the DEA (Drug Enforcement Association) has made it their chief effort to bring production to halt. Even though this cessation of the production of the bath salts is good, it does pose a new and equally severe problem: the production of newer synthetic drugs, with easier accessibility for the public and harder traceability for forensic investigators. These new synthetic drugs will make things extremely difficult for forensic investigators.
Along with these new drugs under new guises, there has to be a new drug test and standard of testing to trace the drug in someone’s body. There also has to be a new determined level to decide what quantities of the new synthetic drugs are harmful, or even fatal. Unfortunately, these new drugs are extremely popular among teenagers and young adults, who are putting their health at great risk by using them.
Another down side for the forensic investigators is that many of these new tests are not federally approved, and lead to many false positives, which can be detrimental to someone’s case in a court of law, because these tests have the chance of convicting the innocent. These new drugs will require a new level of research and investigating for the forensic community, and they are just another step in the chase of cat-and-mouse that drug dealers and law enforcement officers are constantly in.
With all of this being said, such as the probability for false positives and bath salt health hazards, it is acutely important to seek out an experienced and knowledgeable attorney who has extensive insight into the world of forensics and matters pertaining to new and upcoming synthetic drugs. Handling, or distributing these types of synthetic drugs is a federal offense; and if convicted, the punishments will be pursued to the fullest extent of the law.
Tags: Pittsburg Drug Crime lawyer
Posted in Drug Crimes, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Wednesday, September 7th, 2011
In today’s day and age, many people rely on medical technological advancements to help aide them of many natural, and common health issues, or illnesses. If an individual was to walk down the aisle of a grocery store, or even a convenience store for that matter, they could view a whole array of drugs ranging from something that could simply be a pain relief drug, to something that could help with stomach issues. Although most drugs usually help individuals with issues that could bring harm to an individual’s health if not treated properly, some people have begun to abuse drugs that are prescribed by doctor’s, or other medical professionals to get a “high” or simply use the adverse effects of the medication to their liking.
Naturally, the next thing associated with an individual that is using prescription drugs would be “what does one do about driving?” However, the line is certainly blurred when it comes down to what do the law enforcement officers and entities need to do about individuals who are behind the wheel after using prescription drugs and showing similar side effects from the drug compared to drivers who drunkenly drive. Many who use the prescription drugs sometimes do not know all of the side effects of the drugs, and frankly could easily not be held liable for any of the damages that could occur from them being behind the vehicle. With a doctor’s blessing, it is hard to pinpoint how to actually assess each case, and ultimately, what the government and law should do when handling individuals who drive while on prescribed medication.
Today, many government officials are attempting to group drugs in two categories, as either “Legal” or “Illegal” drugs. For those who are not prescribed drugs and caught without driving, their actions serve quite differently than that of an individual prescribed. If caught while driving under the influence of prescription drugs that are not prescribed by a doctor, or drugs in general, an individual not only faces the same punishment, fines, and possible jail time as that of a person who is drinking and driving, but could face longer time, more expensive fines, and inevitably a harder life.
Hopefully, the future will hold positive standards that those are driving while using prescription drugs that are given by a doctor will have proper sanctions that will exam their case individually, as well as fairly to the driver. With more and more prescription drugs not only being used, but created on a daily basis, the time for action with this issue is now so that not only Pennsylvania, but also the country overall will have increasingly safer roadways.
With a focus on thorough preparation, superior client service and dedicated representation, as a Pittsburgh DUI attorney I help families and individuals solve a wide range of DUI and criminal litigation issues throughout the state of Pennsylvania.
I will respond to your email submission as promptly as possible. I ask that you consider calling me directly at 1-412-475-9217 or toll free at 1-855-DUI-CRIM for a free initial consultation to discuss your case. You will also find out how our practice can be put to work for you.
I look forward to listening to the circumstances of your case and discussing all available options under the law.
Sincerely,
Michael V. Worgul
Michael V. Worgul, Esq., LLC
429 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Toll Free: 1-855-DUI-CRIM
Phone: 412-475-9217
Fax: 412-288-8943
Tags: Pittsburgh DUI Attorney, Pittsburgh DUI attorneys
Posted in DUI, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Monday, August 8th, 2011
Today, technology is an ever expanding, ever growing part of our life that touches everyone in some way, shape, or form. One form that everyone has certainly become accustomed to is the cell phone. At the beginning, cell phones were simply huge, bulky devices that were difficult to keep up with. Now, however, cell phones have evolved rapidly. Today, we have advanced from small phones to large, thin, multifunctional devices that even instead of buttons have a touch screen response. One of the most common brands of these phones is Apple Inc.’s Iphone. Equipped on all of these phones are a program known as an Application Store, which contain many different types of varying programs known as applications or “apps”.
Today, these apps have evolved our culture dramatically, especially when it comes to maintaining proper checkpoints and roadblocks trying to reduce driving while under the influence. Apple had an application that helped link users of the program to locate law enforcement officers in their area, such as speed traps or roadblocks. Many government officials did not really agree with the overall appeal and demeanor of the application, which included several United States Senators who wrote Apple asking for the company to remove the program from the application store as well as from users. At fist, Apple was very hesitant with the removal at first since all roadblocks have to be publicized anyways, the application would simply speed up the process as well as expand the information.
However, the agenda of DUI lobbyist simply posed a huge threat towards the company, which could have possibly lead to a profit lose of Apple Inc. Many organizations that lobby the opposition of drinking and driving often use the ploy “support drinking and driving” to make propaganda emerge to make people attack something instantly without truly getting a true feel of the situation as a whole. The fact that the application served no true ill purpose and simply made our Fourth Amendment Constitutional Right just a little easier leaves many scratching their head what the real purpose of the removal of the application really accomplished. Many find sobriety checkpoints quite uncomfortable, especially those who have not even contributed to the illegal act of driving while under the influence. The checkpoint also contributes to traffic and consumption of valuable time of the motor vehicle operators, where if an application was still present many could simply choose another route to proceed and help keep the roads running smoothly, without time constraints.
For an effective DUI defense strategy, call us today at 412-475-9217 or toll free at (855) DUI-CRIME
Experienced Pittsburgh DUI lawyer Michael V. Worgul represents those accused of DUI. If you have been arrested in Pittsburgh or anywhere in Allegheny County, we are prepared to advise you of your rights and help you formulate the most effective DUI defense strategy so call us today at 412-475-9217.
Tags: Allegheny County DUI, Allegheny County DUI attorney, Allegheny County DUI law firm, Allegheny County DUI Lawyer
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Friday, June 24th, 2011
The process of prosecuting a DUI in Pennsylvania is often founded on half-truths and outright falsehoods. Many people believe that they have a valid defense to a DUI case or any criminal case for that matter so explaining their version of the facts they can avoid a conviction or reduce their punishment. There is nothing further from the truth. The police and prosecutor will ignore anything that is actually helpful to you, but anything that you say that is incriminating or that is inconsistent will be used by a prosecutor in an attempt to obtain a conviction.
The reality is that the police may lie and suggest a better outcome if you simply “come clean” about what happened. Unless you are represented by a Pennsylvania DUI defense attorney who is engaged in plea negotiations with a prosecutor, these representations are outright falsehoods. Anything you say can and typically will make things worse. The best case is that you offer nothing useful or information that does not incriminate you. However, frequently admissions that a driver has been drinking or is coming from a bar becomes evidence in a Florida DUI criminal case. In certain criminal cases, a lie told to a law enforcement authority can actually form the basis of an independent criminal offense.
The double standard is grotesque. When the police are trying to question you after you have waived your Miranda rights and agreed to speak with them, the officer may use lies and deceit to trick you into making damaging admissions. Any lies you tell may then be used to undermine your credibility. While lies used by police officers during a DUI interrogation or other criminal interrogation regarding the evidence that prosecution has supporting a conviction cannot be used to undermine the officer’s credibility. Sometimes a lie or misrepresentation to a person during an interrogation can be so coercive that it makes a confession involuntary.
Ultimately, the line between a legal interrogation and involuntary coerced admission is far from a bright line rule. It means that the best policy is to politely decline to answer any questions until you have an attorney present. An experienced Pennsylvania DUI defense attorney can make sure that you do not provide incriminating information that compromises potential defense strategies. The key is to remember that the officer is not trying to get the truth, rather the officer is searching for damaging information that can be used to help convict you of DUI or to enhance the penalty.
While most police officers are honest, some will fudge the details or misrepresent the facts to build a stronger case. An experienced Pennsylvania DUI attorney will carefully analyze the police report, squad car video, booking video footage and other evidence to expose instances of fudged facts or outright misrepresentations. Pittsburgh DUI lawyer Michael V. Worgul provides zealous DUI defense to those of Pittsburgh and throughout Allegheny County and the surrounding area so call us today at 412-475-9217.
Tags: Pittsburgh DUI Lawyer, right to remain silent
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off
Friday, June 17th, 2011
Driving under the influence of alcohol is a very serious offense and a DUI conviction has consequences that can follow you for years. The legal definition of driving under the influence is based on the amount of alcohol present in your system at the time of arrest. In all states, driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08 percent is a crime. In some states, you can be arrested for driving with a lower BAC if the officer deems you to be too impaired to operate the vehicle safely.
Blood alcohol concentration isn’t always an accurate measure of how impaired a person will become. People who drink infrequently may show signs of impairment with far less alcohol in their system. Others may have an unusually higher tolerance for alcohol and will feel few effects at the legal limit. However, your ability to function is not the bottom line in a DUI charge. Your BAC at the time of your arrest, regardless of whether you seem impaired, is what defines the crime.
BAC is tested in three ways, using breath, blood and urine.
A breath test isn’t a true measure of BAC, but rather an estimate. Portable breathalyzer devices may be used in conjunction with field sobriety tests when police officers stop a driver whom they suspect is impaired. Larger, tabletop machines are thought to be more accurate than the portable models, so some states prohibit the use of portable breathalyzers. The results of breathalyzer tests can be skewed by some medical conditions, hygiene products or even breath spray.
A urine test also provides an estimate of the BAC, but is considered the least accurate of the three methods. Because urine accumulates in the bladder, test results can be higher or lower than a person’s actual BAC depending on how recently they drank and how long ago they last emptied their bladder. Urine tests are generally used only when the two other tests are not available.
A blood test is the most reliable measure of BAC, but even that process can be flawed if the blood sample wasn’t properly preserved or analyzed promptly.
If an officer stops you for suspected DUI and requests that submit to a chemical BAC test, you advised to comply. Under implied consent laws, refusing the test carries automatic and immediate penalties that will remain in effect even if the court does not convict you. The better course is to submit to the tests and then retain the services of an attorney who is experienced in DUI defense.
Tags: Pittsburgh DUI defense attorney, Why Does BAC Matter?
Posted in Blood Alcohol Concentration, Uncategorized | Comments Off
Monday, June 13th, 2011
We have previously addressed the issue of a challenge brought by four U.S. Senators to pressure Apple, RIM and Google to pull DUI checkpoint apps from the companies’ app stores. The senators portrayed the apps as a way for those who wanted to violate DUI law to frustrate the intent of DUI checkpoints. What these senators failed to acknowledge was that the Supreme Court has imposed strict limits and procedures that must be followed for a sobriety checkpoint to be legal.
A sobriety checkpoint basically represents an exception to the Fourth Amendment constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizures. The U.S. Supreme Court in MICHIGAN DEP’T OF STATE POLICE v. SITZ, 496 U.S. 444 (1990) essentially ruled that despite the affront to the Fourth Amendment of searches and seizures based on a complete absence of individualized suspicion the danger of alcohol related car accidents justified allowing sobriety checkpoints under certain conditions.
One of the key requirements of a sobriety checkpoint is that it cannot be a secret hidden from the public, and the time and location of a field sobriety checkpoint must be publicized so that it reduces the burden on the public. The reason for this requirement is that the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the infringement on the Fourth Amendment of search and seizures that were conducted without any factual basis for believing the person detained had violated any law. To justify the intrusion, the U.S. Supreme Court had to minimize the scope of the intrusion as much as possible as compared to the harm to be addressed (i.e. driving under the influence DUI).
One part of minimizing this intrusion on the Fourth Amendment rights of drivers was to limit the duration of such detentions, discretion of officers in selecting vehicles to be detained and providing the public with notice of the potential inconvenience. In other words, drivers are supposed to have the opportunity to elect not to drive through a sobriety checkpoint. This limitation on the Fourth Amendment intrusion was a requirement imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court to permit the state intrusion into the search and seizure rights of motorists.
Unfortunately, Apple and RIM have caved to the pressure from strong lobby groups like MADD who claim that the app which identified and publicized the location of sobriety checkpoints was designed to help drunk drivers avoid detection. Apple, Google and RIM all have checkpoint apps, but Apple and RIM have chosen to pull them from their apps markets under pressure from these lobby efforts.
These apps provide a free way for government entities to comply with the constitutional requirements for the lawful operation of a sobriety checkpoint. The opposition apparently based on the offensive notion that the publicity might actually be effective at informing the public.
If you are arrested for DUI in Pennsylvania, experienced Pittsburgh DUI lawyer Michael V. Worgul is dedicated to protecting the Constitutional rights, driving privileges and freedom of those throughout Allegheny County charged with DUI so call us at (412) 475-9217.
Tags: arrested for DUI in Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh DUI Lawyer
Posted in DUI, Uncategorized | Comments Off
|
