Click to call 602-307-0808 24/7 Click Here for Free Consultation

Posts by: David

Denial of Right to Counsel – Arizona DUI Defenses

Denial of right to counsel is an important defense for DUI cases. When being arrested, you always have a right to legal counsel, but it is particularly vital in the case of a DUI arrest. If you are prohibited from talking to an attorney which prevents you from obtaining his advice, your body will naturally eliminate the evidence of blood alcohol content that can be used for or against you. The police may tell you that your blood alcohol content is above the legal limit, but it may not be; in the meantime, your body is burning off the alcohol, making the determination more difficult.

David Cantor explains the DUI Defense of Denial of right to counsel:

The key cases on this issue are Holland v. State of Arizona, Juarez v. State of Arizona, McNut v. State of Arizona, Edwards v. State of Arizona and the latest one, Penney v. State of Arizona. In Edwards v. State of Arizona, which went up to the United States Supreme Court, Mr. Edwards said, “I think I should talk to a lawyer.” The Court said that was equivocal, or ambiguous, and Mr. Edwards needed to be unequivocal when requesting a lawyer. Instead, Edwards should have said “I want to talk to a lawyer” or “I need to talk to a lawyer.” The minute you say this, the police have to get you to a phone and a phonebook in a private area so you can talk to a lawyer.

The Holland v. State of Arizona case deals with eleven specific questions a lawyer will ask you. These include, “what did you drink?”; “when did you start drinking?”; “when did you stop drinking?”; “when was the last time you ate?” Certain information needs to be known so the lawyer can approximate what your blood alcohol content will be so you can decide whether to submit to a blood or breath alcohol test. The attorney will also be able to tell you to request to be released in order to get an independent chemical test at a hospital.

The additional guidance a lawyer can provide is important. A lawyer can tell you not to answer any further questions, not to do any further physical tests, and probably get a blood or breath test because the police will likely get a warrant for it and get a test by force. But if you’re stopped for a DUI and you request a lawyer but were not given a lawyer or the police were not quick to respond, contact our firm. You can set up an appointment at www.DMCantor.com or call 602-307-0808 at any time to get a Free Case Review. An initial consultation is free and takes just 30 minutes.

Be sure to visit our DUI case victories for a sampling of DUI cases we’ve won in Arizona.

Arizona DUI Defense: No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop

Law enforcement personnel must have “reasonable suspicionto stop and/or detain a motorist. Absent this, any resulting arrest is “pretextual” and any charge(s) are subject to summary dismissal. Moreover, any evidence obtained is inadmissible in a court of law.

“Lack of reasonable suspicion to stop” is a valid legal defense to a DUI charge. As the label implies, “reasonable suspicion” requires a rational basis. Race, physical appearance, dress, or mere presence in a particular area is insufficient legal grounds for reasonable suspicion or detention. Rather, police must have some specific objective factual basis to suspect criminal activity. Thus, the fact that you were driving in an area where there are many bars during the wee morning hours does not, by itself, constitute reasonable suspicion to stop.

David Cantor explains the DUI Defense, No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop:

 

Arizona’s controlling legal precedent on reasonable suspicion to stop is a case called Livingston v. State of Arizona. In that case, officers from a specialized drug task force claimed to have seen the defendant weave six inches across the yellow line three times. At the time, the motorist was driving through a large curved area of highway near Globe, Arizona at about 50 miles per hour. During the subsequent vehicle stop and search, officers found several hundred pounds of marijuana.

The court later rejected the officers’ “hunch” based on the motorist’s alleged erratic driving and race as insufficient legal justification to reasonably suspect illegal activity. Consequently, it ruled the initial stop “pretextual” and dismissed the entire case.

We frequently see similar scenarios in DUI cases. For instance, a common situation involves an officer staked out near a local bar who claims that our client weaved in the road, made a California stop, or improper turn. We are able to get many of those DUI charges dismissed due to lack of reasonable suspicion to stop. See the “Victory” section for details about specific cases we have won in such instances.

Contact us today via email or phone for a free initial consultation and expert case evaluation. The Law Offices of David Michael Cantor is available 24 hours a day by calling (602) 307-0808 or via our secure and confidential web form.

What are Fraudulent Schemes in Arizona?

In the Phoenix area or anywhere else in the state of Arizona, as per A.R.S. §13-2310, the crime of fraudulent schemes is committed when an individual creates a scheme or artifice to defraud, which involves the attempt to defraud knowingly and when they receive a benefit as a result. A scheme or artifice to defraud means that a person intended to gain an unfair benefit or that another person was deprived of the right of honest services. For a defendant to be convicted of this crime, it is not necessary that the individual who was defrauded actually relied on said fraud.

Here is a short video where David Cantor explains Fraudulent Schemes in Arizona:

Punishment for Fraudulent Schemes Conviction

If you are convicted of a first offense fraudulent scheme, it is considered a class 2 felony. The punishment for such a conviction includes probation with zero days to up to one year in jail or a prison sentence ranging anywhere from three to 12.5 years. With one prior conviction, the prison only term ranges from four and one half to 23.25 years of incarceration. If the individual has two prior convictions, the prison sentence can range anywhere from 10.5 to 35 years of time served.

If the monetary amount the individual received is $100,000 or greater, they would not receive probation and the punishment of prison is instituted. However, a skilled defense attorney would strive to get you the minimum sentence instead of the maximum.

Defenses to Fraudulent Schemes in Arizona

There are several different tactics a skilled defense attorney can take toward defending an individual who is charged with the crime of fraudulent schemes in Arizona. Generally speaking, the key to a successful defense involves the lawyer showing that the defendant never meant to defraud anyone and did not knowingly do so. To accomplish this, the attorney must present evidence that shows that the individual never created a scheme or artifice to obtain a benefit in a fraudulent manner from another person. In addition, it has to be proven that any benefit the defendant did receive was either through the consent of the so called victim or via mutual understanding between the two individuals. A third option is to prove that the defendant never actually received any benefit. Many times, a person may be accused of fraudulent schemes by a dishonest employer. For example, a person may be informed that they can pay for personal expenses with company checks as a bonus and that the employer can write it off on taxes. However, when or if the employment relationship sours or there are tax issues, the employer turns around and accuses the employee of embezzlement.

Other possible defenses include violation of Miranda rights where an individual was not read their rights when arrested, denial of right to counsel, meaning the individual asked to speak to an attorney but was not granted that right, that the police coerced them to falsely confess and forensic flaws during the investigation.

If you have been suspected of Fraudulent Schemes in Arizona and would like to speak with an attorney, please give us a call at (602) 307-0808 to schedule a free consultation. If you would like, you can also send us an email and we’ll contact you back as soon as possible. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Click Here for Free ConsultationComparison Questions to Ask when Hiring a Lawyer