http://www.kentucky.com/2011/07/07/1802291/casey-anthony-attorney-has-kentucky.html
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
http://www.whas11.com/video/yahoo-video/Granddaughter-of-former-Ky-congressman-on-Casey-Anthony-defense-team-125098009.html
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
My presentation to the Kentucky Justice Association on iPhone and iPad apps every lawyer should be using. I strongly recommend square which is app that gives you a free credit card reader and links to office bank account, genius scan, bump, skype, google voice, KY UOR’s, dropbox and dropvox, cardmunch, gps drive, dragon and dragon search, appadvice, siri assistant…
Go to: http://box.net/shared/lgnrl0v76ykitji4n2uy
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
Great new CNET tab:
http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-20070447-285/welcome-to-cnet-how-to/?tag=TOCcarouselMain.0
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
The New Iphone Ipad operating system, IOS 5 will ship in early September with integration of Dragon Dictation. This should mean that Voice Control will actually become a usable application.
From AppAdvice.com:
Leaked “Hidden” Developer Files Show Nuance Integration Will Likely Ship In iOS 5 — AppAdvice
http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/06/leaked-hidden-developer-files-show-nuance-integration-ship-ios-5
Get the AppAdvice.com iPad app by visiting http://itunes.com/apps/appadvice
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20110611/NEWS01/306110001/Bigger-hit-Jefferson-County-drivers-without-insurance?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CHome
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
bsims@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
http://governmentnewsarticles.com/government_articles/2011/05/padilla-v-kentucky-and-the-role-of-criminal-defense-representation-211057.htm
Another interesting article about representation of illegal immigrants and the role of the criminal defense attorney.
Interesting New York Times article about companies that loan clients money while their lawsuits are pending. Now, more then ever, our clients need to know the risks. Visit: http://nyti.ms/gzb9tm to read the story.
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
benham@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
Location:http://nyti.ms/gzb9tm
Please read the article about my sister, Dorothy Clay Sims in the Casey Anthony case.
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
benham@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
When the police administer a breathalyzer, the suspect’s breath sample is analyzed — and then destroyed by purging it into the air. Although it is easy and inexpensive to save the sample so that it could later be independently analyzed by the defense, the U.S. Supreme Court in California v. Trombetta ruled that there is no right to this. (See “Why Do Police Destroy the Evidence in DUI Cases?”.)
Recognizing that an accused should have some minimal rights even in a DUI case, many states have enacted laws requiring the police to advise the suspect that he has the right to have an independent blood sample drawn so that it may be later analyzed and compared to the breath test results. California’s Vehicle Code Section 23614 is an example:
(a) ….a person who chooses to submit to a breath test shall be advised before or after the test that the breath testing equipment does not retain any sample of the breath and that no breath sample will be available after the test which could be analyzed later…
(b) The person shall also be advised that, because no breath sample is retained, the person will be given an opportunity to provide a blood or urine sample that will be retained at no cost to the person so that there will be something retained that may be subsequently analyzed for the alcohol content of the person’s blood. If the person completes a breath test and wishes to provide a blood or urine sample to be retained, the sample shall be collected and retained in the same manner as if the person had chosen a blood or urine test initially. [italics added]
Sounds fair. Except officers don’t like handling a suspect’s urine or spending an hour or so finding a blood technician to draw a sample. Result: this law is commonly ignored by the police. (Some DUI report forms contain a place for the officer to indicate that he advised the suspect of the right to an independent test, and it is commonly checked off — and ignored.)
So what can a defendant do if this legal right is violated? Well, the statute clearly says “shall” advise and collect: it is mandatory, not optional. It would seem to follow that there would be some legal sanction for a willful refusal to follow this law — the only meaningful one being suppression of the breath test.
Wrong. Remember: this is a DUI case we’re dealing with. If you look closely, another little provision at the end of California’s statute adds the following:
(d) No failure or omission to advise pursuant to this section shall affect the admissibility of any evidence of the alcohol content of the blood of the person arrested.
Cute, no? The law gives you a “right”, and then makes it unenforceable. It is, as we lawyers say, “a right without a remedy”. And, of course, since there are no consequences for ignoring this advisement of the right to an independent test, most officers continue to ignore the law. Practically speaking, then, officers do not have to follow the law and advise the suspect of his right to an independent test.
There are some court decisions, however, which seem to say that interfering with attempts by the arrested person to have blood drawn may be grounds for suppression of the breath test. See, e.g., In re Martin, 58 Cal.2d 509. And many states will suppress breath test results if the police refuse to permit the suspect to obtain a blood sample. In State v. George, 754 P.2d 460, for example, the Kansas court ruled that breath results should have been suppressed where the arresting officer refused a suspect’s request for an independent test because of the time required to transport him to a hospital and find a physician.
Bottom line: yes, you have an absolute legal right to a blood sample…except, well, you don’t.
**************************************************
PHILADELPHIA TO REVIEW ALL BREATHALYZER-DUI CASES FROM 15 MONTHS DUE TO MISCALIBRATION
Philadelphia, PA. March 25 — A day after Philadelphia police announced that miscalibrated breathalyzers had compromised 1,147 drunken-driving cases, District Attorney Seth Williams declared he would conduct a wholesale review of all DUI cases during the 15 months in question.
Philadelphia police file 8,000 to 10,000 drunken-driving cases each year, so the review announced Thursday by Williams’ office will involve a staggering amount of work that will take months to complete.
Deputy District Attorney Edward McCann, chief of the Criminal Division, decided to launch the review, said Williams’ spokeswoman, Tasha Jamerson. Assistant District Attorney Lynn Nichols will lead a team of prosecutors and staff that will examine the cases from September 2009 to November 2010.
McCann is also implementing training on DUI cases for prosecutors that will emphasize recognizing potential problems with the Breathalyzer devices.
Finally, Jamerson said, the District Attorney’s Office will start doing its own calibration checks on Breathalyzers rather than depend solely on police certification.
The real bill will be some time in coming.
Besides the cost of reviewing thousands of DUI prosecutions and likely retrying some, the police and city could face civil lawsuits by people wrongly convicted – some of whom may have lost their driver’s license, their job, or their freedom.
Though police officials have a list of about 400 people affected by the miscalibrated machines, Jamerson said Williams had decided a full review was needed.
Though defense lawyers specializing in DUI cases said only two of the Police Department’s eight Breathalyzers had proved inaccurate, police said Wednesday that the total was four. Some court-system sources said that number was likely to increase.
Thousands of citizens are convicted every day of driving with a blood-alcohol level of .08% — based entirely upon the readings of these machines. In a “trial by machine”, the results of these devices legally establish a rebuttable presumption of guilt and are considered proof beyond a reasonable doubt. See Whatever Happened to the Presumption of Innocence? and Trial by Machine.
Benham J. Sims, III
Attorney at Law
Suite 300, The 600 Building
600 West Main Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
(502) 589-6190 Office
(502) 736-3188 Direct Fax
(502) 509-1759 is my Google Voice Number
(502) 648-1759 Cell
bsims@600mainlaw.com Office E-mail
benham@thekentuckylawyer.com
Web Sites: www.helpexpungeme.com and
www.thekentuckylawyer.com
Location:W Jefferson St,Louisville,United States
