Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney | Driving Under Influence Charge | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office
Are you looking for the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney? Call Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale at 918-277-4800. Your initial consultation with the Cale law office is free. Attorney Stephen Cale has been practicing for nearly 20 years and focuses his practice on criminal defense.
When you contact Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale, he will develop a free defense strategy plan document for you. This document is a guidepost for the criminal justice system in the steps that attorney Cale will take in defending you. When the first things he will look at his whether he can get the charge against you dismissed. Attorney Stephen Cale is well worth the money.
The DAs office appealed from an order suppressing evidence and dismissing the charge. Prosecutors charged the defendant with aggravated driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. The arresting officer said that he saw signs the defendant was driving all intoxicated as she left a convenience store. Defense counsel moved to suppress the evidence of various grounds. The judge granted the motion to suppress, and the state appealed. Here’s a summary the facts of the case.
The district judge suppressed evidence based on a statute concerning the appointment of a share for deputy sheriff. The sheriff is supposed to maintain a list of every appointment revocation of an under share for deputy sheriff. Less must be made available to the public upon request. After an evidentiary hearing on the motion, the judge found that the Sheriff had not complied with the statute because he felt to maintain a list of every appointment the revocation of an under share for deputy sheriff. This included the arresting officer. Because a list not available to the public upon request of the time the arrest, that was a violation of the law. The district judge concluded that the rest officer conducted the arrest outside his jurisdiction because he was out on the list. Therefore, he suppressed all the evidence of intoxication is fruit of the arrest and dismissed the case. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals disagreed.
The appellate court held that the District Judge abused its discretion in ordering suppression of evidence as a result of the shares violation of the statute. In 1987 case, the appellate court found that the rest made by meniscal police officer while outside his jurisdiction was lawful. Consequently, evidence obtained by was admissible under either of two alternative theories. First was that the limited power granted by the statute authorizes deputy to deputize a person to do a particular act. Because the police officer in the case was acting under the specific request of the Sheriff’s deputy, the appellate court found that the rest was lawful. Additionally, police officer enforces the law outside his jurisdiction’s testify by statute authorizes are and arrest by a private person.
The idea of fresh pursuit requires an officer began the chase in his or her own jurisdiction continue until a person is caught. The case at hand, the crime as well as the arrest occurred outside the jurisdiction of the officers. So fresh pursuit not justify the real arrest. However, the appellate court holds that the arrest was justified. Statute provides the private person may make an arrest when the felon is been committed and the person making the arrest has reasonable cause to believe that the person arrested committed the crime. Additionally, the Oklahoma court criminal appeals is held that the law enforcement officer outside his jurisdiction may make a citizens arrest, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale.
In another case, the defendant crashes vehicle just outside the city limits. He had been drinking. The officer cause of the scene next it was a city policeman. Saw the defendant was intoxicated, police amend arrest and saw container liquor in the car. The officer testified at trial days authority for the arrest outside of the city was his deputy sheriffs commission. The court said that the arrest did not violate the law. In another case, the jury convicted the defendant driving under the influence. The defendant driving erratically within the city limits. An officer proceeded him, stopped his car, and place them in the arrest was three miles from town. The defendant argued on appeal that the police officers outside the city limits and therefore without authority to make arrest for the misdemeanor. The appellate court said that statutes allow for the arrest.
Arresting officer in this case was a tribal police officer as well as a deputy sheriff. He saw the defendant leave the convenience store driving in a high rate of speed. The officer testified that he saw the initial traffic violation on tribal land make a stop outside tribal land when he saw for the violations state law. This was a valid arrest authorized by statutes in the private arrest statute. A tribal immiscible officer make an arrest outside the jurisdiction for an offense committed in his presence must also comply with other statutory limitations an arrest by private persons.
For one, the person make the arrest must inform the person to be arrested the reason for the rest. You must require him to submit. The person is make an arrest was also take person before judge or deliver them to peace officer having jurisdiction of the offense. The sheriff’s deputy rectified the error concerning maintain the list. However, whether the sheriff streaking comply with the statute does not determine the outcome here. Even if the share failed to maintain a list of appointments revocations directed by statute, the effects show the arresting officer was justified as a private person in making the arrest.
If you’ve been charged with a crime, call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800. Your initial consultation with attorney Stephen Cale is free. Attorney Cale will do whatever he can to get a charge dismissed. If you cannot get the charge dismissed, he will try to get the best possible result for you.