Tampa DUI Lawyer Blog

Nicole Scholl of the Tampa area (Palm Harbor) was taken into custody as a result of her involvement in a single car accident in which her passenger Anthony Campaign was killed.  Authorities have alleged that Scholl was driving under the influence of alcohol when she lost control of her 1996 Plymouth van.  Scholl was driving the van in the early morning hours on a frontage road, which runs along U.S. 19.  Campaign had his body hanging out the window at the time of the accident because he was sick.  Police say Nicole collided with a utility pole ejecting Campaign from the vehicle.  Campaign was killed instantly according to authorities.

Clearwater police arrested Scholl who they said exhibited signs of being under the influence of alcohol including alcohol on her breath, slurred speech and bloodshot and glassy eyes.  The police did not indicate whether a breath or blood test was administered.  However, Tampa DUI lawyer John Musca indicated that under Florida's implied consent law a driver who is arrested for DUI but will not consent to a breath or blood test faces serious consequences including a mandatory one year license suspension.  "Where someone has been seriously injured or killed, an officer can actually use reasonable force to compel a driver to submit to a blood test under Florida DUI law," explained Musca.

Official records show that Scholl was arrested just a month before the accident and charged with possession of marijuana and Vicodin.  Scholl was also arrested for DUI last year but those charges were dismissed.  Scholl faces a potential sentence of 15 years in prison on the DUI manslaughter charge and a maximum of 15 years in prison on the drug charge.

The police report also indicated that Scholl demonstrated signs of being intoxicated at the hospital.  The report also stated that Scholl repeatedly told the arresting officer she was drinking at a bar before the accident.  Musca explained that Scholl could still be convicted even without breath or blood test results.  "The prosecutor will seek to introduce evidence that Scholl was impaired in terms of physical signs, admissions and the any results of field sobriety tests," said Musca.   A person who is charged with DUI manslaughter faces very serious consequences and should consult with a Florida DUI lawyer as soon as possible.

If you or a loved one has been charged with a DUI, or other criminal offense, contact a reputable attorney for help with your case today.  It is understood that poor choices can lead to serious criminal consequences.  A Tampa DUI will advise you of your rights guide you through the complex Court system and provide you with the help that you need during this difficult time.  Contact the attorneys at Musca Law for a free, comprehensive review.

A jury convicted Donald Buffkin Friday on charges of DUI manslaughter, vehicular homicide and driving with a suspended license in the April 10, 2008 death of his wife Gari Ann Buffkin, who was a passenger in the car.  The man's wife was thrown from the vehicle when Buffkin lost control of his car and crashed.  Mrs. Buffkin suffered severe injuries and died at the scene of the accident.  They had been married 4 years at the time of the crash.

A blood alcohol test administered to Buffkin indicated his blood alcohol level was 0.115, nearly twice the level a person is considered impaired under Florida DUI law.  Buffkin was on probation from a prior DUI conviction at the time of the accident.  Buffkin faces a sentence enhancement because he was on probation for the prior DUI conviction.  Circuit Judge Joel Boles scheduled Buffkin's sentencing hearing for March 8.

"A case like this shows the tragic consequences that can result when one engages in driving under the influence of alcohol.  When a DUI case results in death, the impact is devastating.  A person is dead, and the driver's life is also forever changed.  A case like this can result in substantial jail time and in this case a family is literally destroyed," said Tampa DUI attorney John Musca.  Musca emphasizes that when faced with serious charges like DUI manslaughter, one needs to get legal advice and retain an attorney as soon as possible.  Musca points out that having an experienced attorney in Florida DUI law in cases like this can impact both the likelihood of conviction and the resulting punishment.

A 39-year-old mother was arrested and charged with DUI and DUI with property damage after crashing into another vehicle as she was pulling into a parking space. She then left the vehicle unattended, and on foot. 

Police that responded to the scene, reported that she was under the influence of a controlled substance.  She consented to a series of voluntary field sobriety exercises, where she reportedly failed.  She was then arrested and charged with DUI, DUI with property damage, leaving the scene of an accident with unattended property, and child neglect.

Setting aside the more serious charges, according to Florida Law, leaving the scene of an accident resulting only in damage to a vehicle or other property which is driven or attended by a person, shall immediately stop such vehicle at the scene of such accident, or as close there to as possible, and shall forthwith return to, and in every event shall remain at the scene. Any person failing to stop, or comply with Florida Law, shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $500, or by imprisonment for not more than 60 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

If you have been accused of driving under the influence of drugs, alcohol or other criminal offense, you should call the Law Offices of Musca Law as soon as possible.  Because Musca Law is relentless in the defense of their clients, they have effectively achieved reduced sentences, reduced charges, preservation of driver's licenses, and dismissed charges for their clients.

A taxi driver picked up an intoxicated patron at a Hernando County bar and dropped him off a local gas station. The man then started screaming obscenities towards the driver. After words had been exchanged, the intoxicated individual left on his bicycle and rode into the middle of State Road 50. Fearing for the man's safety, the taxi driver contacted the authorities to report the drunken driver.

Officers approached the rider, 45-year old Jeremy Bowen, and he immediately jumped off of the bicycle. The authorities noticed the defendant smelled of alcohol, slurred his speech and had difficulty maintaining his balance. At first Bowen denied riding the bike and then he eventually admitted to drinking 5 beers at a bar before accepting a ride from a taxi.

Continue reading "Hernando County Man Accused of DUI on Bicycle" »

Continue reading "Daycare Owner Fails to Appear on DUI Charges" »

Continue reading "Two Spring Hill Bicyclists Charged with DUI" »

Continue reading "Manatee County uses Controversial Intoxilyzer 8000 in DUI Checkpoints" »

Continue reading "Tampa Surgeon Arrested for DUI" »

Continue reading "Tampa Publisher becomes News with his own DUI Arrest" »

In the last article, we discussed the cases of two Florida men, Ryan Simmons and Joushua McKinnon, who were arrested for driving under the influence last year and refused to submit to breath tests to determine their blood alcohol content. Police officers then were issued a warrant by a judge allowing to draw the men's blood. Both men have sought to suppress the results of the blood tests at their criminal trials with opposite results. The judge in Mr. Simmons' case ruled that the blood draw violated Florida law and suppressed the results. The judge in Mr. McKinnon's case, however, ruled that the forced blood draw was permissible and denied his motion to suppress. In part one of this article we discussed the relevant case law in Florida concerning when a driver has to submit to a breath, blood or urine test and when forcible blood draws are authorized under Florida law. In this article we will examine some of the claims that each of the defendants has made about constitutionality of a forcible blood draw in a misdemeanor DUI case.

Some DUI attorneys would argue that the results of the blood test should have been suppressed because police can only receive warrants to obtain evidence in felonies under Florida, not misdemeanors such as DUI. State attorneys have countered that warrants can be issued for misdemeanor cases to obtain property used to commit a crime. Mitchell has rejected this argument, stating that while a vehicle may be considered property used to commit the crime of DUI, a driver's blood is not. Mitchell has also noted that Florida's law concerning forcible blood draws only mentions that they can be used in the event of a DUI leading to serious bodily injury of death, not in routine misdemeanor cases. A bill in the Florida legislature that would have allowed for forcible blood draws in more routine cases was defeated in committee. Despite this Assistant State Attorney Rick Mantei has argued that forcible blood draws should be permissible since there is nowhere in the Florida Constitution that explicitly forbids them. "There's nothing that says we can't," said Mantei, noting that other counties such as Broward have already permitted forcible blood draws.

Both Ryan Simmons and Joshua McKinnon were arrested last year for driving under the influence and were asked to submit to a breath test to determine their blood alcohol content. After their refusal, police officers received the permission of a county judge to issue warrants to allow them to draw the men's blood. At issue in both appeals is whether the results of the blood test should have been suppressed during their trials. In part one of this article we will examine the relevant Florida law concerning when roadside blood testing is admissible in court.

Under Florida law, it is not a crime for a person to refuse to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test after his first DUI arrest, but his refusal can be used against him in court as evidence of their guilt. Refusal itself is only a crime after a person has already been convicted of a DUI or has already had a prior refusal. People who refuse DUI tests are nonetheless subject to the civil penalty of having their licenses suspended for up to a year after a first refusal and having their licenses suspended for 18 months after a second refusal. A person asked to submit to a test to determine their level of intoxication generally has the right to determine whether the officer performs a breath test, a blood test, or a urine test. Most people who decide to submit to a test will choose a breath test because it is generally less intrusive and less time consuming than the other tests. Additionally, many people are not aware of their right to choose which test they have to perform. In Florida, the forcible withdrawal of a person's blood against his will is only permitted in the cases of a DUI resulting in serious bodily injury or death or where the driver is unconscious and therefore has not withdrawn his implied consent to a blood test. In part two of this article we will discuss the various challenges of these forcible blood tests in court.

A Lakeland man has agreed to a plea deal that will close a long-running DUI Manslaughter case. Kenneth Delmar Stewart, now 38, was charged with five counts of DUI Manslaughter following an April 2006 car accident, says Tampa DUI attorney John Musca. Stewart was driving his truck at about 3:00 a.m. on April 21, 2006, when he apparently ran a red light, striking another vehicle driven by Emily Manzano, who was 61 years old. Manzano and all four of her passengers were killed as a result of the accident. All of those killed were in town for the wedding of Manzano's daughter, Cathy Manzano, on April 22. The police investigation determined that neither vehicle braked before impact. At the time of the accident, law enforcement officials determined that Stewart's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) was 0.12 percent, legally impaired. Under the terms of the plea deal, Stewart will spend 25 years in prison and 10 years on probation.

DUI Manslaughter (codified at Florida Statute 316.193) is a crime that occurs when a person is driving under the influence of alcohol or another substance and, while operating the motor vehicle, "causes or contributes to causing" the death of another person or, in some cases, a viable fetus, according the Tampa DUI lawyers at Musca Law. To be "under the influence" of alcohol, the driver must have a BAC of at least 0.08 percent or, if lower, actually be impaired. For example, if a man driving 20 miles over the speed limit, with a BAC of 0.12, runs a stop sign and crashes into a vehicle driven by a woman who is eight months pregnant and had the right of way, killing her, the man could potentially be charged with and convicted of two counts of DUI Manslaughter. Each count is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, although that figure increases if the driver failed to stop or render aid.

Another serious Florida DUI Manslaughter case:

Read the original report here.

If a police officer sees a vehicle with odd driving patterns - such as failure to maintain a single lane, swerving, or otherwise driving erratically - he will usually pull over the vehicle. Then, he inquires about the driver's sobriety and may ask the motorist to perform roadside field sobriety tests or even blow into a handheld breath test device. During all of this, he also gauges the driver's overall appearance of intoxication. Common indicators a law enforcement officer could cite that point to a decision regarding intoxication include slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and even confusion or disorientation.

A few years ago, a serious problem with this model became known to the public when a local Orlando television news station reported on the pre-written reports. These reports covered all of the bases, describing the general conditions of the DUI arrest in a "Mad Libs" sort of fashion. For example, the pre-composed reports had fields such as "I asked the suspect how much he had been drinking tonight and he responded ________" or "I made the traffic stop when the weather was _(cool/warm)_ and it was _(dark/daylight)_ outside." These pre-made DUI arrest reports are problematic because they do not demonstrate the individualized issues with each defendant. They may also encourage officers from abandoning traditional investigative techniques and simply filling in easy answers throughout the DUI template.

When a police officer comes to court to testify against a DUI/DWI defendant, it is often many months following the actual arrest. Because law enforcement officials make such a high volume of arrests in many cases, they likely do not remember the particular details of each arrest from the prior year or six months earlier. Therefore, they refresh their memories with the reports they filed for the case before they take the stand. These reports, which may be heavily relied upon by the police officer when testifying, need to be as complete, accurate, and individualized as possible for fairness to the DUI defendant.

Breath test devices, commonly known as "breathalyzers," can be used to convict a motorist of driving under the influence of alcohol on the streets of the Tampa bay area. The Florida statute provides that driving with a blood alcohol concentration, or BAC, of 0.08 percent or higher is definitively (or "per se") driving under the influence. The language means that anyone who is driving, or otherwise in "actual physical control" of a motor vehicle, who blows a 0.08 percent BAC or higher on a breathalyzer device, can be convicted of DUI/DWI.

Unfortunately, experienced criminal defense attorneys know that DUI is more complicated. In fact, many experts in DUI dispute the accuracy of breath testing devices. These breathalyzers are known for false positives for a variety of reasons, including chemicals released from certain kinds of dental work and mouth alcohol.

The breathalyzer machine, which is imperfect, is designed to measure certain alcohol-related or alcohol-based chemicals. This is why is detected breath alcohol, but also why a person who is on a ketogenic diet (such as Atkins) can cause the breathalyzer to have a false positive. Similarly, a diabetic whose blood sugar has spiked to very high levels can also show a false positive result. Perhaps most problematically of all, however, is the fact that it is widely accepted that there is a margin of error for these devices, which is conservatively estimated at 0.01 percent BAC. This means that someone whose blood alcohol concentration registers at 0.08 percent BAC, whose reading is actually based legitimately on the consumption of alcoholic beverages, probably actually has a BAC between 0.07 and 0.09 percent.

If you have been arrested in the Tampa bay area or anywhere else in Florida for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, including prescription medications, contact the DUI lawyers at Musca Law as soon as possible to discuss your case and your rights under the law.