Bucks County DUI Information

Bucks County DUI Lawyer Warns Against Buzzed Driving

2011-06-13T16:30:00.000-04:00

New to the Bucks County lawyers DUI website is a piece about buzzed driving in Bucks County that everyone can relate to. It is focused on drunk driving accidents and injuries such as death and how they are all connected.

The article starts off with questions for the reader to answer that all deal with the amount of alcohol consumed. How the reader answers these questions determines whether or not they are fit to get into a car and drive without the risk of a DUI or causing a drunk driving accident in Bucks County.

The article also gives the reader some statistics so the reader can gauge just how many drunk driving accidents and deaths there are in the Bucks County area. If you or a loved one has been charged with a DUI, call the Bucks County DUI Lawyers at Saile & Saile LLP for a sound legal defense.

Charged with DUI on Drugs???

2010-11-09T21:31:00.000-05:00

If you have been charged with DUI in Bucks County while under the influence of drugs, you should check out Bucks County DUI lawyer, Michael L. Saile's new webpage discussing DUI-D.

Driving under the influence of drugs has been getting more and more popular in the last several years. Pennsylvania police have new training procedures and certifications to attempt to detect the type of drug you may have ingested. Drug Recognition Experts can testify against you in court.

Believe it or not, you can be found guilty of DUI in Bucks County, Pennsylvania for being impaired by legal, over-the-counter drugs. Certain drugs including prescription drugs in combination with alcohol cause impairment worse than either alcohol or the drug by itself.

The Bucks County District Attorney’s Office may hire a scientist to testify that the combination of drugs and alcohol caused you to become more impaired. If you have been charged with DUI-D or drug related DUI in Bucks County, PA check out our new web page here.

Contact the Bucks County law office of Saile & Saile LLP for a free DUI Roadmap Consultation involving your Bucks County drug related DUI.

Bucks County criminal courts do not always grant time served for inpatient rehab treatment…

2010-10-14T21:17:00.001-04:00

A friendly warning…don’t assume you are going to get “time served” for your Bucks County DUI case if you checked yourself into an inpatient rehab facility. If you are charged with DUI in Pennsylvania, there is a chance you can avoid mandatory jail time if you spend time in an inpatient rehabilitation center.

Time served is a term commonly used in criminal court when a judge will apply time that you previously spent in a rehab center or time that you previously spent in jail to your current jail sentence. Pennsylvania law requires criminal judges to consider time spent in an inpatient rehab center as jail time. “Consider” does not mean “grant” time served!

An inpatient rehab program is a type of rehab program where you stay overnight participating in full-time rehabilitation, classes, counseling, and other recovery activities.

We had a recent case where a client was charged with DUI in Bucks County. She was charged as a first time offender, but was not eligible for the Bucks County first offender’s program known as ARD. She was facing a 72-hour minimum stay in the Bucks County prison. At the time of her Bucks County DUI arrest our client had addiction problems. Her family checked her into a 22-day inpatient rehab program. When she successfully completed the DUI rehab program she, among other things, attended 4-5 Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) classes a week.

Because our client had a prior DUI conviction many years ago, the Bucks County Common Pleas Court judge properly considered the inpatient rehab as time served, but denied her time served…just a little lesson on DUI cases in Bucks County. For this reason and many other reasons, hire a local Bucks County DUI attorney for your Bucks County DUI case.

MADD and its new DUI curbing efforts

2010-09-29T16:00:00.000-04:00

MADD turns 30

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has been in operation for 30 years. We, drivers and passengers on U.S. roadways, should not only congratulate them, but perhaps also thank them. They made us aware of the serious dangers of driving under the influence (DUI), as well as the number of innocent victims killed by drunk drivers every day in DUI related car accidents.

Since the group formed in 1980, drunk-driving related fatalities have dropped by over 40%. Even more relevant, between the years 2006 and 2009, car accident deaths associated with drunk driving dropped 20%.

While great success has been achieved in reducing the number of drunk-driving car accidents and fatalities, impaired drivers are still to blame for nearly one-third of all car accident deaths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 32 people in the U.S. die every day in car accidents caused by an alcohol-impaired driver. That is over 11,000 drunk-driving fatalities each year.

MADD continues to advocate for the passage of tough drunk driving laws, push for stronger enforcement of existing laws, as well as remind Americans that it is not okay to drink and drive.

Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. of Saile & Saile LLP is a Bucks County DUI lawyer. He does not promote driving under the influence or believe it is in any way acceptable behavior. Mr. Saile's goal is to educate his clients so that they understand the grave consequences of driving under the influence so that they will never drive impaired again.

Another horrific Bucks County DUI accident kills two and injures two

2010-08-16T21:03:00.003-04:00

This past weekend, a car full load of teenagers were speeding down in Route 1, in Middletown Township, lower Bucks County, PA. Middletown Township police actually clocked the case at speeds of over 90 m.ph. in the posted 55 m.p.h. zone on Route 1. Middletown Township police attempted to stop the vehicle but could not catch up and called off the chase. While exiting Route 1 in Penndel, the vehicle collided with a brick wall of a building. Two passengers were tragically killed and the driver and another passenger are injured. The driver of the vehicle was able to walk out of the car and walk away until police apprehended him.

Police found alcohol, empty bottles, and controlled substances in the vehicle. If the investigating police officers can prove that the driver was driving under the influence (DUI), chances are he will be charged with the death of two and injuring a third person. The jail sentence in these types DUI death cases should be well over two years in a Pennsylvania State Penitentiary. Perhaps the worst sentence will be that the driver will have to live with killing two of his friends and injuring another.

The families of the two fatal victims of this Bucks County DUI accident would have a wrongful death case against the driver, whether he was drunk or not. The other injured person would have a strong Bucks County personal injury case against the driver of the car. Unfortunately, in many of these types of tragic accidents, there is not adequate insurance coverage to cover all injury or wrongful death claims.

The attorneys at Saile & Saile LLP are not currently representing the individuals involved in this accident. The source of this information is from the Bucks County Courier Times. If you have been involved in this incident it is important to contact an experienced Bucks County injury lawyer or DUI lawyer before your rights are compromised.

Bucks County may own its own DUI testing lab…

2010-06-01T21:34:00.001-04:00

The Bucks County Courier Times reports that the new Bucks County District Attorney, David Heckler, has requested and may get his own chemical testing crime lab. The main job of this crime lab would be to test Bucks County DUI defendants for blood alcohol content (BAC) and controlled substances. It has been reported that Bucks County currently pays a private lab about $250,000 a year to test blood samples. The Bucks County District Attorney's new crime lab is estimated to save the County about $90,000 a year when it is up and running. The new crime lab would cost Bucks County about $200,000 to set up.

A DUI suspect may be tested for DUI in Bucks County, Pennsylvania by either supplying a blood sample or by providing a breath sample at the police station. In addition to blood and breath tests, a Bucks County DUI suspect's urine may be tested. The arresting police officer has the option as to which DUI test he or she desires to conduct. Most local police officers and Pennsylvania State Police officers assigned to Bucks County opt to have the DUI suspect give blood and sometimes urine at the closest hospital. The blood and/or urine sample is then taken to the lab for testing.

Should the District Attorney's Office crime lab be trusted to test the 3,500 or so DUI defendants' blood or urine? Should Bucks County DUI suspects' blood only be tested by an independent laboratory? What is independent? If Bucks County pays the independent lab $250,000 a year, is the lab really independent?

As a defense attorney, I would certainly advise my clients that they have the option of having their own blood tested by an independent source. What are your thoughts on this topic?

PA police will be using Airplanes against speeders…

2010-05-27T19:34:00.002-04:00

To help increase safety of all persons on the road and reduce the number of injuries from Pennsylvania car accidents and accident fatalities, PennDOT and the Pennsylvania State Police will be rolling out their Air, Land, and Speed campaign. This campaign will work hand-in-hand with the Click It or Ticket seat belt enforcement program. This dual approach to roadway safety focuses on reminding motorists to drive at safe speeds and to buckle up, two very important factors which aid in avoiding car accident injuries and even death.

The Air, Land, and Speed campaign utilizes aircraft to register motorists' speed. The aerial police then instruct state troopers via radio to make the traffic stop to issue Pennsylvania speeding tickets. Local municipalities will also have police deployed in full force along targeted roadways to further the PA speeding ticket enforcement effort. People who drive carelessly or at excessive speeds often do so because they are driving under the influence (DUI) in Pennsylvania. Car accidents caused by those who drive drunk are often very serious and can cause life altering personal injuries to those unfortunate enough to be a victim of a Pennsylvania drunk driving car accident.

Keep an eye to the skies this weekend, you just may be being watched! If you are charged with a speeding ticket in Bucks County, PA, hire an experienced traffic violation lawyer such as Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. Many times we can reduce or eliminate your PennDot driving points.

Michael L. Saile, Jr. is quoted in major Bucks County newspaper DUI article

2010-05-17T17:45:00.001-04:00

This past Sunday, the Bucks County Courier Times ran a series of front section, and even a front page articles written by Ben Finley about DUI arrests in Bucks County, PA. The first (front page) article titled "Drivers take to the roads drunk" stated that DUI is the most charged crime in Bucks County and that Pennsylvania had a record number of DUI arrests last year.

One of Michael L. Saile Jr.'s DUI clients, "a 22-year old", was interviewed by reporter, Ben Finley, about his experience with the DUI process in Bucks County, PA. Mr. Saile was quoted several times along with Assistant District Attorney, Robert Salzer, Newtown Township police officer, Tim Keegan, and toxicologist, Gary Lange. You can link to the article here: Bucks County Courier Times.

In the second article titled "Tips for staying sober behind the wheel", Mr. Saile gives some tips on how to drink responsibility without reaching the "under the influence" point. It is very hard to predict or measure a person's blood alcohol content (BAC). Even the most sophisticated testing process yield error.

Some of Mr. Saile's tips include: eating a full meal before drinking alcohol, counting your alcoholic drinks, keeping track of the amount of alcohol the bartender is pouring in your drinks, alternating water between alcohol drinks, and have no shots or martinis if you are driving. You can find the second article here: Bucks County Courier Times.

If you are charged with DUI in Bucks County, hire an experienced and knowledgeable DUI lawyer. Contact us to set up a free DUI case consultation and provide us with your DUI arrest information here: case submission form.

Can you get into the Bucks County DUI-ARD program if you have been involved in a Bucks County Car Accident?

2010-05-11T20:18:00.001-04:00

There are a few state-wide exclusions for the Pennsylvania first offender's program for DUI (otherwise known as the ARD Program). Being involved in a Pennsylvania car accident is not one of the state-wide exclusions.

Pennsylvania law allows each county's district attorney's office to run their county's DUI ARD Program. The Bucks County District attorney's ARD program is known to be one of the tougher Pennsylvania ARD-DUI Programs to gain admittance. Bucks County has its own ARD Program rules for DUI cases.

Bucks County had a longstanding policy not to allow DUI defendants admittance to its ARD-DUI Program if the DUI defendant was involved in a Bucks County car accident. Even if the Bucks County DUI defendant did not cause the car accident, the DUI defendant would be prevented from the ARD Program.

In the past few years, we at Saile & Saile LLP have been successful in obtaining admittance of our clients into the Bucks County ARD Program when they have been involved in a car accident in Bucks County. These clients have been individuals who have been arrested for DUI in Bucks County and who have not caused the Bucks County car accident.

Recently there has been a new District Attorney elected in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. The new Bucks County D.A. has made a few improvements to Bucks County criminal procedure. Perhaps the new Bucks County D.A. will allow more Bucks County DUI defendants into the Bucks County DUI-ARD program?

There are many Bucks County car accidents caused by people arrested for DUI that involve no personal injuries. These accidents often involve only minimal property damage. These Bucks County DUI defendants should be admitted to the Bucks County DUI-ARD program. What do you think?

If you have been involved in a Bucks County DUI, do not wait and jeopardize your rights, contact us for an aggressive and experienced DUI defense and guidance.

Philadelphia may de-criminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana…

2010-04-13T18:59:00.001-04:00

There is an effort afoot in Philadelphia to reduce the penalty for possessing small amounts of marijuana for personal use. The effort is being led by Philadelphia's new District Attorney, Seth Williams. This is one way, according to Williams, to ease the crowding of Philadelphia courts.

In late April 2010, a policy will be put into effect in which those in possession of up to 30 grams of marijuana with be charged with only a summary offense. This means that those individuals charged with minor possession may be required to pay a fine, but they will not gain a criminal record. The fines will most likely be set at $200 for first offenses and $300 for subsequent offenses, though these figures have not yet been formalized.

As possession of marijuana remains illegal, those charged with possession for personal use will continue to be arrested. Their cases, however, will be heard in summary court and not criminal court.

The idea behind stepping-down the charge of possession of marijuana from misdemeanor to summary offense is to clear the nearly 3,000 yearly cases dealing with limited marijuana possession from the court dockets. By keeping the small-time offenses to a minimum, Philadelphia's courts are freed up to concentrate on more serious cases such as big-time drug traffickers, as opposed to recreational users.

The new Philadelphia District Attorney Williams is actually working with two of Pennsylvania's Supreme Court justices, Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille and Justice Seamus McCaffery, on this matter and a number of other reforms to Philadelphia's criminal justice system.

Perhaps Philadelphia's precedents will encourage a state-wide shift in criminal justice procedures. Do you think de-criminalizing marijuana possession is a good idea?

New Bucks County DUI ARD procedure…

2010-03-29T21:07:00.001-04:00

If you are offered ARD (Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition or commonly known as the "First Offender's Program") for your Bucks County DUI offense, your deal may have just gotten sweeter. The new Bucks County District Attorney has made some changes to Bucks County criminal procedure. The change to the ARD-DUI procedure was much needed.

First, Bucks County ARD DUI cases are now being consolidated and are scheduled for court only two days per week now (usually Wednesday and Thursday) as opposed to five days per week. In addition, the DUI-ARD cases are now separated from the other Bucks County criminal cases, including DUI guilty pleas, DUI motion hearings, and DUI trials. DUI Court still meets at 9:00 a.m. For the first half hour or so the DUI defendants and their attorneys go over and sign the ARD Agreement. A judge will then take the bench and go through the ARD colloquy and soon enough the ARD procedure is over.

In my experience the first few weeks of this new Bucks County ARD procedure was not any more efficient than the "old" way. Now, the court and the Bucks County District Attorney's Office have got the procedure down. If we just had more judges, the remainder of the Bucks County DUI cases would also run efficiently. Hopefully the new DA will make some more changes!

Can you really get a DUI without driving?

2010-03-24T21:27:00.001-04:00

As we already know, Driving Under the Influence (DUI) is a criminal offense in Pennsylvania and Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) is a serious traffic offense in New Jersey. In the state of Minnesota a DUI conviction was issued against a man who was not driving. Although he appealed the lower court's ruling, the Supreme Court of Minnesota upheld the DUI conviction.

Daryl Fleck of Minnesota was found by a neighbor to be asleep in his car with the driver's side door open. Mr. Fleck's car sat legally parked in the parking lot of his apartment building. The police who responded to the neighbor's call found that Fleck's car was not running and that the engine was cold. Furthermore, the keys were absent from the ignition and instead were found inside the center console.

Fleck, however, was proven to be intoxicated as his blood-alcohol level was .18 (Minnesota's legal blood-alcohol limit is .08). He also had a history of prior DUI convictions. Yet, there was no proof that he had driven on this given evening in 2007. It appeared only that he was "sleeping off" a night of drinking that had taken place in his home. Still, for this offense he received a felony conviction for DUI which landed him in jail for 48 months and required him to serve five years of probation.

Mr. Fleck appealed the court's decision all the way up to the Minnesota Supreme Court. The conviction was upheld by the high court, based upon a ruling from 1992 which applied the concept of "physical control", meaning that a person's ability to drive may be greatly affected but they still have control of the vehicle. The Court found Fleck to be in control of the vehicle because he was in a position to start up the engine and drive the car since the vehicle and keys were available to him. Intent to drive (or not drive) did not come into play, even though police were unable to get Fleck's car to start.

Pennsylvania DUI law also incorporates "physical control" language into its DUI statutes: "An individual may not drive, operate or be in actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle after imbibing a sufficient amount of alcohol such that the individual is rendered incapable of safely driving, operating or being in actual physical control of the movement of the vehicle." (PA code section 3802)

To some, a DUI conviction based upon the assumption that because car keys are available to a drunk person they are going to use them is absurd. In cases such as these, where a person takes shelter in his car and refrains from driving, does it seem the person was acting more responsibly than irresponsibly? With news of convictions such as Mr. Fleck's, people may just opt to drive if they know there is a chance they will be charged with DUI anyway for "waiting it out" in their car. How does that keep us any safer?

If you are facing a Bucks County, PA DUI charge of any sort, contact a lawyer with a vast amount of experience in Pennsylvania DUI matters. Call Michael L. Saile, Jr. for a free, in-office consultation.

New Jersey legalizes medical marijuana…will it cause a spike in drunk driving arrests?

2010-02-03T13:45:00.001-05:00

New Jersey's Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act attained passage by both the New Jersey Assembly and the State Senate on Monday, January 11, 2010. Governor Jon Corzine signed the bill into law on Monday, January 18, 2010 just a day before leaving office. This new law allows chronically ill patients access to marijuana for medicinal uses. There are now 14 states with a medical marijuana law on its books. The law is scheduled to go into effected in six months.

In the eyes of many, this is a very liberal leaning law. However, New Jersey's medical marijuana law is the most restrictive and tightly controlled in the nation. It is believed it will quickly become a model for other states considering passage of such a law.

The legislation permits only those patients afflicted with certain diseases, including but not limited to multiple sclerosis, cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, muscular dystrophy, and ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease), to obtain medical marijuana. A doctor's prescription is mandatory and only two ounces of the drug per month is permitted to be dispensed to patients suffering with severe pain, nausea, seizures, muscle spasms or extreme loss of weight and/or muscle tissue brought on by their chronic disease.

Unlike in California, where anyone with a "recommendation" from their doctor is permitted to use, possess, and/or grow medical marijuana, the growing of marijuana is strictly prohibited under the New Jersey law, as is using the drug in public. Along the same line, a qualifying medical marijuana patient who is caught driving while high is not exempted from a DWI (driving while intoxicated) arrest. Driving under the influence of marijuana remains illegal and is subject to the penalties associated with the highest levels of blood alcohol content (B.A.C.).

The state of New Jersey will implement a strict registry ID card system for users of medical marijuana. Only those patients suffering with a condition set forth within the parameters of the law who have a written prescription from their doctor will be permitted to obtain the drug. Further, all marijuana dispensaries in New Jersey will be heavily monitored by the state. An additional restriction requires all caregivers who may have to procure the drug on behalf of an ill person to undergo criminal background checks.

Recent Gallup Polls show that over 70% of Americans favor marijuana being legalized for medical use, that is doctors legally prescribing marijuana to patients who suffer terrible pain due to their illnesses. There are many happy people in New Jersey with the passage of this law, feeling that they no longer have to engage in a criminal act just to realize relief from insufferable pain. It appears more and more Americans are growing sympathetic to their plight. Public sentiment would also suggest it is a law whose time has come. Where do you stand on the issue?

2 hit-and-run victims, same alleged drunk driver

2010-02-01T12:45:00.001-05:00

In the early hours of January 8, 2010, Chelsea Murningham, 21 of Philadelphia, was the victim of a hit-and-run accident. So was Brian Reilly, of Penndel, Bucks County. They were each victims of alleged drunk driver Michael Saunders, of Philadelphia.

As he was leaving Albert's Café on Grant Avenue in Northeast Philadelphia, Michael Saunders hit and knocked over Ms. Murningham in the parking lot and then fled the scene. While other bar patrons were gathered around Ms. Murningham in the parking lot in an attempt to provide her aid, Mr. Saunders drove back into the lot. He sped in his minivan toward the gathered crowd and ran over 23-year old Brian Reilly.

Ms. Murningham was left with bruising on her right hip, as well as shoulder, lower back, leg, and neck pain.

Mr. Reilly was actually pinned underneath Saunders' minivan. He suffered a broken bone in his left arm, a dislocated left shoulder injury, a black eye, facial swelling, and extensive bruising on his back. Mr. Reilly must remain in an upper body brace in order for his left arm to remain in place and heal.

As for Mr. Saunders, in addition to inflicting bodily harm upon two individuals in the parking lot of the restaurant that evening, he is also responsible for causing property damage. As Saunders was attempting to leave the premises, before he hit Ms. Murningham, he crashed into a parked car. The owner of that car was present; he and Saunders got into an argument. Saunders proceeded to intentionally bang into that man's car five more times with his minivan.

After hitting the man's car repeatedly, Mr. Saunders hit two other vehicles parked in the lot, just before he hit Ms. Murningham. Saunders fled the scene after hitting her. He returned to the parking lot within minutes, which is when he ran over Mr. Reilly. Saunders fled, yet again. Mr. Reilly was transported to Aria Health at Torresdale while Philadelphia police caught up with and apprehended Saunders in front of his Philadelphia home.

Mr. Saunders was charged with driving under the influence and many felony counts, including attempted homicide and aggravated assault. He is also charged with risking a catastrophe.

New Bucks County, PA DUI ARD procedure!!!

2010-01-21T21:25:00.002-05:00

Congratulations to the new Bucks County District Attorney for improving the court procedure for DUI matters in the Bucks County Common Pleas Court. The Bucks County Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) cases are now being adjudicated in a separate courtroom than the remainder of the Bucks County criminal cases.

In the past, all Bucks County criminal cases called to court on a particular morning were initially directed to Courtroom #1. The list of the all the criminal cases were called by a judge and then the court would address various issues regarding the cases. After a short break, the Bucks County ARD cases were then called forward and were addressed by the court. The remainder of the Bucks County criminal cases, which included guilty pleas, had to wait and wait until the cases were called to the attention of the court. Many times guilty pleas in were not heard by the court for the purposes of sentencing until mid-afternoon.

The new Bucks County ARD procedure is much improved. Much like Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, the DUI-ARD cases are called to a different courtroom and are adjudicated separately from the other Bucks County criminal matters. This new procedure should speed up the criminal court process, assuming that there are available judges. The Bucks County Court of Common Pleas is short on judges. Hopefully this year, there will be more available judges for court matters.

Contact us, Bucks County DUI attorneys if you are interested in being admitted to the ARD program if you are charged with a DUI in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

NJ’s new Ignition Interlock legislation passes the Assembly & Senate!

2010-01-11T20:31:00.001-05:00

Good news for New Jersey drivers! This evening, Ricci's Law has passed both the Assembly and the Senate with flying colors. Ricci's law is New Jersey's new Ignition Interlock law. For those of you who do not know, an ignition interlock device prevents intoxicated drivers from starting a vehicle's ignition if their blood alcohol content (BAC) is above a certain level. It is expected that Governor Corzine will enact Ricci's Law before he leaves office this month.

Currently, ignition interlock is part of New Jersey's DWI law. Unfortunately for the past few years, NJ's ignition interlock law was optional and it was up to local Municipal Court judges to apply the law when sentencing DWI offenders. Most NJ Municipal Court judges did not order ignition interlock on DWI offender's vehicles.

Ricci's Law will now make ignition interlock mandatory on most DWI offender's vehicles, including 1^st offenders with a BAC above 0.15%. States across the country are enacting mandatory ignition interlock laws for all DUI/DWI offenders. The federal government will soon be passing legislation that will require every state to pass ignition interlock laws for all DUI/DWI offenders' vehicles. Each state that does not comply with the soon to be enacted federal law will lose millions of dollars of federal highway money each year. No state can afford this! In 2009, Pennsylvania legislators introduced 9 ignition interlock bills.

What do you think about ignition interlocks? Do you approve of the use of ignition interlocks on all DUI/DWI offenders' vehicles or is it just another addition to the harsh penalties associated with drunk driving?

I believe it's a lifesaving technology and any legislature that does not utilize this lifesaving technology is reckless with public safety.

Swine flu scare disrupts Bucks County Court…

2009-12-23T16:47:00.001-05:00

Did you hear the one about the Bucks County juror who claimed to have swine flu?

People go to some pretty outrageous extremes to get out of doing things they don't want to do, but in this case, juror DiCicco claims he was looking forward to jury duty and was, in fact, "really curious" about the process.

As you may recall, tensions surrounding any mention of swine flu ran pretty high back in the spring and early summer. Video clips of people in Mexico wearing facemasks were still very fresh in our minds, legions of spring-breakers canceled travel plans, plus there were constant reminders by our local newscasters of the coming pandemic, and, of course, a certain politician declaring railcars and airplanes to be virtual petri dishes filled with swine flu bacteria. People were scared and very cautious.

Then, there's Anthony DiCicco, a 24 year old Jamison, PA resident who was called to report for jury duty on July 13, 2009 at the Bucks County Courthouse in Doylestown. Upon being interviewed by lawyers on both sides of a medical malpractice case, Mr. DiCicco was selected to serve as a juror.

During the lunch break on July 13, Mr. DiCiccio approached a court official, stating that he had just gotten a message from his doctor's office saying test results showed he was sick with swine flu. The news of Mr. DiCiccio's illness was delivered to Judge Waite, the presiding judge in the case on which DiCiccio was serving as a juror. Judge Waite reacted with the declaration of a mistrial and sent the entire jury home, along with the entire jury pool and court personnel because they had all come in contact with the allegedly infected DiCiccio that day.

A fellow juror who observed odd behavior from DiCiccio following the action taken by the judge informed the court that DiCiccio may not have been totally honest about his health issues. Bucks County detectives were assigned to look into the matter of Mr. DiCiccio's specific health claims. Soon after, civil contempt charges were filed against DiCiccio.

As part of their investigation, Bucks County detectives make inquiries into the validity of Mr. DiCiccio's claim of a swine flu diagnosis. The nurse practitioner at the doctor's office from whom DiCicco claimed to have received a message testified at the contempt of court hearing that there had been no swine flu diagnosis issued for DiCiccio and no call made to DiCiccio by their office on July 13.

Not only did Mr. DiCiccio's act of poor judgment cause concern to many he had come in contact with that day and completely disrupt the court's busy schedule, but there is also a monetary cost to Bucks County and both parties involved in the medical malpractice case, which will now have to begin anew.

Mr. DiCiccio's contempt of court case was heard by judge Clyde W. Waite, coincidentally. DiCiccio was found to be in contempt of court for faking a diagnosis of swine flu and was sentenced to serve three days. These days will not be served in jail, however, but rather at the courthouse. Judge Waite ordered Mr. DiCiccio to spend three days in the Doylestown courthouse observing various jury trials.

A unique punishment was handed down by the judge, some would say. Does it fit the crime?

Check our new Understanding Blood Alcohol Content webpage!

2009-12-17T15:22:00.004-05:00

If you were wondering whether or not to have that final glass of holiday vino, take a look at our new web page on blood alcohol content. This web page will explain the absorption process of alcohol into the blood stream. Its some good information to know if you have to drive home!

Click here: BAC

Will Pennsylvania soon have traffic cameras for speeding?

2009-11-24T13:00:00.001-05:00

One general mission of the Pennsylvania State Police Department (PSP) and law enforcement organizations throughout the Commonwealth, is to enforce speeding violations in an effort to reduce the overall number of PA car accidents. More specifically, however, the department has also made, and continues to make, a concerted effort to have traffic laws in work zones, especially those traffic laws pertaining to speeding in Pennsylvania, strictly enforced.

In road construction zones in 2008, PSP issued 8,867 traffic citations, 7,359 warnings, and made 105 DUI arrests in Pennsylvania.

According to 2008 PSP and PennDOT records, 125,712 PA car accidents were reported. 1,422 of these Pennsylvania car accidents occurred in work zones and 230 of them in active school zones. As for another 2008 statistic, 25,000 people in Pennsylvania suffered car accident injuries, while 1,468 people were killed in Pennsylvania car accidents. 23 of those 1,468 car accident deaths resulted from car accidents that took place in work zones. 2 of the 23 persons killed were construction zone workers. Of the 230 school zone accidents, there was 1 fatality.

PennDOT separates speed-related car accidents into two types: (1) driving too fast for conditions and (2) speeding violations. Driving too fast for conditions was the prime cause for 23% of all PA work zone car accidents and for 17% of PA work zone car accident fatalities in 2008. Speed was a major factor in only 1% of the PA car accidents and none of the fatalities. In school zone car accidents in 2008, driving too fast for conditions was the root cause for 11% of the accidents; speeding was a factor for 2% of the crashes and the determined cause of the one school zone fatality on record.

Reducing work zone car accidents is a priority for PSP and aggressive work zone speed enforcement is one very important way PSP intend to achieve this goal. But what form is this enforcement going to take? As Pennsylvania law currently stands, automated speed enforcement is not allowed without the presence of an officer. While some Pennsylvania House Transportation Committee members are interested in exploring new legislation allowing the use of automated speed enforcement technology, such as cameras, the Bureau of Patrol for the PA State Police feels this enforcement approach has many flaws.

First, under current PA law, any radar-based camera system for speed enforcement would only be available to State Police (since radar is limited to use by State Police only). It is not the intention of the State Police to oversee enforcement of all active work zones throughout the Commonwealth, so this method falls short of allowing for participation of local law enforcement in the work zone safety endeavor. Enforcement of traffic laws in many work zones within the Commonwealth is conducted by local police.

As for alternative camera-based enforcement systems, they are used in conjunction with speed timing devices that use time/distance calculations to determine the speed of a particular vehicle. The flaw with this approach, argues the PSP, is that the photograph produced only identifies the vehicle itself (by its registration plate), not the person operating the speeding vehicle in the work zone. Pennsylvania law states that an officer issuing a citation to an individual must be able to identify that individual in court as the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of the violation.

In addition to issuing Pennsylvania speeding tickets, officers also cite motorists for offenses such as aggressive driving and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI) in work zones. If camera-based technology were employed as an enforcement method, PSP contend, it would be impossible to effectively enforce these other types of violations. For example, in April and May (2009) in a single work zone in York County, there were 1,157 PA traffic violation citations issued. Moreover, 27 PA DUI arrests and 20 criminal arrests were made in the same work zone, as well as 59 motorists being assisted by police. None of these arrests or the assists would have occurred if cameras were being used as law enforcement tools rather than live officers. Furthermore, those who were driving under the influence (DUI) would have continued to drive, endangering the lives of others on the road.

Lastly, the current proposal by state legislators calls for a fine of $100 for PA speeding tickets in an active work zone and no assessment of points to one's driver's license record. The PSP assert that the proposed fine is considerably less than current work zone fines, since fines in a work zone are automatically doubled. They feel strongly that a reduced fine for speeding, zero points, and receiving a citation in the mail, as opposed to being pulled over by a "real" cop, will not deter drivers at all from aggressively driving through work zones. If speed enforcement technology legislation is passed, State Police claim their goal of vastly reducing the number of Pennsylvania car accidents and fatal car accidents would be seriously compromised, believing that strict "on-site" enforcement methods keep residents of the Commonwealth safer than any other method.

Though the Bureau of Patrol for the Pennsylvania State Police does make some valid points, there is an equally convincing flip side to this argument. There is the strong assertion by several U.S. cities, states, and safety organizations that technology-based traffic law enforcement is very effective in curbing peoples' tendency to speed or drive recklessly when they know there are cameras watching them at lighted intersections, work zones, school zones, etc. The end result being that these technologically patrolled areas are safer for everyone. Some studies have essentially shown that surveillance begets compliance. If that is the case, PSP will realize their goal of reduced Pennsylvania car accidents in work zones. Red light cameras are currently used in 26 states and in more than 400 U.S. cities, with more municipalities looking into this speed enforcement technology every day.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has documented the effectiveness of speed cameras in reducing highway speeds and crashes. Are you aware that red light cameras are presently used in the city of Philadelphia? According to a study completed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in January 2007, cameras installed at red lights within the city reduced traffic violations by 96%.

Does the use of cameras promote better driving habits overall? Or only in the areas people know are equipped with surveillance? Collected data and careful study seem to show that traffic cameras are effective. Are these traffic cameras an intrusion into our privacy?

Drunk driver turns herself in to police…

2009-11-18T17:42:00.001-05:00

On Saturday, October 24, a Clark County, Wisconsin woman did an extraordinary thing: she made a call to 911 and reported herself for drunk driving. In the course of the 911 call, the driver, Mary Strey, told the dispatcher, "somebody's really drunk driving down Granton Road…" The dispatcher asked, "Are you behind them…?", to which Ms. Strey answered, "I am them".

Mary Strey was about 2 miles from home when she made the call. 911 operators heeded her call and dispatched Sheriff's deputies to the scene after they asked her to pull over to the side of the road and turn on her flashers. Deputies found Ms. Strey at the scene and issued her a ticket for OWI (operating while intoxicated). She told them she had been drinking all night long. Breathalyzer test results showed her to have a blood alcohol level of 0.17, nearly double the Wisconsin legal limit.

The county Sheriff's office admits that drunken drivers reporting themselves is rare. That is certainly not surprising, and it makes one wonder if this has ever happened before anywhere in the U.S. Has it happened in Bucks County, PA?

Believe it or not: PA receives 2009 National Road Safety Award

2009-11-11T14:55:00.001-05:00

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) received high marks from the U.S. Department of Transportation for its impaired driving program. This month U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood presented PennDOT with a 2009 National Road Safety Award.

PennDOT's award winning program educates people on the dangers of driving under the influence (DUI), removes impaired drivers from Pennsylvania road ways, and punishes motorists who are caught driving under the influence (DUI).

In 2008, police in Pennsylvania arrested over 56,000 motorists for DUI. This included 9,100 arrests of PA drivers who were driving under the influence of drugs. There were 12,752 alcohol-related PA car accidents in 2008, which is a 10-year low for the Commonwealth.

As for the educational aspect of the program, PennDOT utilizes district judge outreach, police training in drug recognition, and implementation of technology devices such as Ignition Interlock. Ignition Interlock is a device installed on vehicles to prohibit persons under the influence of alcohol from operating the vehicle. Under current PA law, a person convicted of a second or subsequent DUI offense is required to have an Ignition Interlock device installed on each car they own, lease, or operate for one year following the license suspension period.

In his acceptance of the award, PennDOT Secretary Allen D. Biehler, P.E. stated, "We're honored to have our impaired driving program recognized as one of the national leaders." Biehler stressed the importance of PennDOT's efforts and success in working closely with Pennsylvania's law enforcement branches. In doing so, there has been a great reduction in the number of PA car accidents involving impaired driving.

New Jersey enacts new winter weather safety law.

2009-10-30T12:20:00.001-04:00

New Jersey has enacted a law which may be the first of its kind in the nation. On October 21, 2009, New Jersey Governor Corzine signed a law that requires all drivers to remove accumulated ice and/or snow from their motor vehicles prior to operating the vehicle on any roadway. This includes vehicles from the smallest compact cars to the largest tractor trailers. Drivers are expected to clean snow off of the roof, hood, trunk and windshield. The law is officially "on the books" but does not go into effect until next year, winter season 2010-2011, giving commercial vehicle owner/operators sufficient time to purchase and install snow removal equipment.

If a police officer spots a driver who has failed to remove snow and/or ice from his or her vehicle, it is likely that driver will be pulled over, especially if the officer sees that the accumulated ice/snow has the potential to harm persons or property. This violation of failing to remove snow/ice from one's vehicle carries with it a cost of $25 - $75. If snow accumulates while driving during a storm, the vehicle/driver would be exempt.

In a situation where snow or ice is dislodged from a non-commercial moving vehicle and strikes another vehicle or pedestrian causing harm or physical damage, the operator of the vehicle faces a fine of $200 - $1,000. In the case of a commercial vehicle dislodging snow or ice and causing damage to another vehicle or person, the owner, operator, and/or lessee of said commercial vehicle is subject to a fine of $500 - $1,500.

In case you are wondering how many points these offenses carry or what effect they will have on auto insurance eligibility, the answer is zero. No motor vehicle points will be assessed.

In the coming months, we all will become more aware of the law as the New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety issues its public service campaign to educate the public on the importance of snow and ice removal from exposed surfaces of motor vehicles prior to advancing to the roadways. There are many potential dangers associated with snow and ice falling and flying from moving vehicles, such as chunks of ice hitting and cracking another motorist's windows or windshield, flying snow from vehicles causing blind spots and/or diminished visibility for surrounding drivers, and pedestrians being hit with chards of ice or heavy amounts of accumulated, packed snow. Accumulated snow falling off moving cars has caused many New Jersey car accidents.

The state intends for the fines collected by offenders of this new law to go toward funding the public awareness campaign, as well as the purchase and installation of equipment and technology used in the removal of snow and ice from motor vehicles, especially large trucks.

Laws in both New Jersey and Pennsylvania already exist to punish drivers if ice or snow from their vehicle becomes dislodged and causes injury, and in New Jersey, the law also applies to property damage. New Jersey has decided to take a more preventive measure in protecting people and property with the passing of this most current law.

A similar law was introduced in Pennsylvania by State Senator Lisa Boscola in 2007. Like New Jersey's new law, this bill proposed fining individuals for failure to remove snow and ice from vehicles before driving them. The bill, however, stalled in committee and has not been reintroduced by Pennsylvania legislators.

This new law may also be just another reason for police officers to pull someone over for driving under the influence (DUI). Due to the many holiday parties, DUIs in Pennsylvania and New Jersey spike during the wintertime. Don't give the police another reason to pull you over…clean your car!

Are you guilty of DWT?

2009-10-13T10:22:00.001-04:00

With all of the recent study results surfacing on the dangers of "distracted driving", wireless phone industry lobby, CTIA-The Wireless Association, who once opposed bans on texting or talking while driving, has changed its position. In fact, many related interest groups, including The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, are working with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration toward making driving while texting illegal.

The Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) does not favor a nationwide law on the matter. This group finds the current proposals in Congress unpalatable because the proposals include language that requires states to ban driving while texting (DWT) in order to receive federal highway funds. They contend that this is counterproductive at a time when states should be spending on road projects.

Currently, eighteen states and the District of Columbia have laws against texting while driving (DWT). At least half of these states have passed their anti-texting laws within the last year. Undoubtedly, many more states will be following suit.

In late September the U.S. Department of Transportation held a summit on distracted driving. Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood shared with participants findings by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) which show that nearly 6,000 people died in 2008 in car accidents involving a distracted or inattentive driver, and more than half a million people were injured.

No one can deny that distracted drivers create a dangerous potential for accidents. Therefore it's comforting to know that so many states have implemented laws banning texting while driving, right? Well, the states' laws are not all the same. What is "distracted driving" - other than a vastly broad term? Though many of us consider drivers who conduct activities such as reading, eating, using cell phone applications, programming an iPod or navigation system, shaving, and/or applying make-up while driving to certainly be distracted, most states' distracted driving laws only address cell phone use (calling and texting).

The New Jersey cell-phone law charges a fine of $100 for the use of a hand held wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle. In Pennsylvania, a law banning any sort of distracted driving has not yet been passed, though Philadelphia's ban on handheld cell phones and texting takes effect November 1st.

What do you think about DWT? Should it be illegal? Can it be enforced?

The unbelievable case of the mistaken substance identity…

2009-09-29T15:27:00.001-04:00

Mr. Donald May of central Florida was driving home from work when he was stopped by police for having an expired tag. At the time of the traffic stop, Mr. May was chewing on breath mints. Because the police officer thought the white matter in Mr. May's mouth was crack cocaine, he arrested him on drug possession and evidence tampering charges.

The police officer then took some of the mints from Mr. May's mouth and put them in a plastic bag for lab testing. Later, the police officer claimed he field-tested the evidence he took from Mr. May's mouth and it tested positive for drugs. Unable to post bond, Mr. May spent three months in jail waiting for more definitive test results from the state labs.

Whether or not you believe the police officer's claim of drug findings in his field-test results of the mints, you may be interested to know that field tests for drugs are disturbingly inaccurate. Many common items can trigger false positives, including chocolate, soy milk, and natural soaps.

During the three months he was in jail, Mr. May lost his apartment, his car, his personal possessions, and his job. The police took possession of his car as evidence and it ended up being sold at a police auction.

After three months, the police department received a letter from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement with the lab test results: the substance was not cocaine. The substance in Mr. May's mouth truly was breath mints. The state dropped all charges against Mr. May.

Mr. May has filed a lawsuit for false arrest and imprisonment, as well as a federal civil suit against the city. The police officer is no longer employed by the police department.

Does Mr. May have a great case or what?

Reckless Driving tickets in Pennsylvania

2009-09-01T12:19:00.001-04:00

If you have been charged with Reckless Driving in PA, you will be facing increased auto insurance rates, an expensive fine, and a six month license suspension.

We have created a new webpage regarding Reckless Driving charges in Pennsylvania. If you have been charged with Reckless Driving, click here for more information.

Do not just plead guilty by signing the form from the local District Justice Court. If you do, you will receive an automatic 6-month suspension from PennDot.

It is definitely worth consulting with an experienced Bucks County traffic ticket lawyer if you have been charged with Reckless Driving. Contact us for a free consultation.

Unique alcohol marketing has M.A.D.D. upset…

2009-08-24T19:54:00.001-04:00

Cherry Hill, NJ's Flying Fish Brewing Co. is proud to be from New Jersey. With that in mind, the company has come up with a unique marketing scheme for some of its brews: naming them in honor of NJ Turnpike exits.

The company was founded in 1995 and is the largest New Jersey-based brewery. With an already popular product associated with its name, the company released its first "Turnpike Exit" brew, Exit 4 American Trippel, in early 2009, and its second release, was due out on July 15, 2009, is Exit 11 Hoppy American Wheat Ale. They plan to continue introducing new exit-themed beers every few months.

Interesting idea? Not everyone thinks so, including MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), whose position is that a deliberate connection is being made to promote drinking and driving. The executive director of the New Jersey chapter of MADD was quoted as saying, "The combination of a roadway and advertising for any kind of a beer doesn't make any kind of sense." Adding, "This is almost a mockery."

Is MADD mad?

The New Jersey Turnpike Authority could be described as being "tolerant" of the brewery's approach to promoting its beer, but they certainly don't endorse it. That is made clear in disclaimers issued by Flying Fish.

Both Flying Fish and MADD seem to have avid supporters in this debate. The one thing they both agree on, according to a quote by Flying Fish's president, is that "… drinking and driving is never an option".

I think this adverting has nothing to do with drinking and driving. I believe Flying Fish Brewing Co. just wanted to show their New Jersey roots. What do you think?

2009-08-24T17:06:00.001-04:00

DUI Arrests Up Among Women

2009-08-20T13:08:00.001-04:00

Nationwide, including Pennsylvania and New Jersey, both police and traffic safety organizations are seeing an alarming rise in the number of drunk-driving (DUI – DWI) arrests among women. In Pennsylvania, the offense is known as Driving Under the Influence (DUI), while in New Jersey it is Driving While Intoxicated (DWI).

According to FBI figures, across the U.S. the number of women arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs rose 28.8 per cent from 1998 to 2007. Conversely, the number of men arrested for DUI during that same time period decreased 7.5 percent. While reports show that men still drink more than women and are still responsible for more DUI cases, the disparity is narrowing.

There are three reasons cited for this change: (1) women are driving more due to increased pressure at work and home, often times economic in nature, (2) younger women feel more equal to men and, therefore, behave in unconstrained fashions, and (3) police have become less likely to let women "off the hook".

It is not only the east coast of the United States that struggles with drunk driving matters. In California, women accounted for 18.8 percent of all DUI arrests in 2007, up from 13.5 percent in 1998, according to the California Office of Traffic Safety.

One federal study on women and alcohol defines abusing alcohol as having at least four drinks in a day. This same study shows that in the 10-year period ending in 2002 the overall number of women who admitted to abusing alcohol rose from 1.5 to 2.6 percent. For women aged 30 to 44, however, the number of those abusing alcohol more than doubled, going from 1.5 percent to 3.3 percent in that same 10-year period.

These trends have not gone unnoticed by the federal government. The Transportation Department's annual crackdown on drunk driving begins in late August and will focus on women.

Most of our Bucks County DUI clients still remain males, but there are a significant number of women who we represent. Of the women that Saile & Saile LLP has represented for DUI in Bucks County, PA, most are between the ages of 25 and 45 years old.

Jail time on my first Bucks County DUI offense…really???

2009-08-11T15:34:00.001-04:00

Most drivers are caught off guard with their first Pennsylvania DUI offense. This is simply because they have not had any experience with the criminal justice system.

The PA DUI penalties are split between three levels for a first offense DUI charge. If your blood alcohol level (B.A.C) is below at 0.099 there is no mandatory jail time for a first offense PA DUI charge. You can still receive jail time in this level if there are aggravating circumstances involved.

The next level of PA DUI penalties involves the B.A.C. level of 0.010 – 0.159. This is what we call the middle range. On a first offense DUI in this middle range, there is a mandatory minimum jail sentence in the Bucks County prison of 48 hours up to six months.

If your first offense PA DUI is in the highest level, B.A.C. 0.160+ there is a mandatory minimum jail sentence of 72 hours in the Bucks County prison up to six months.

If you qualify for the Bucks County A.R.D. (first offender's program) you will avoid jail time. House arrest is not usually given by Bucks County Common Pleas Court judges on a first offense DUI.

Although DUI is a dangerous crime in Pennsylvania, every citizen is presumed innocent under the law and has the right to challenge the evidence including police procedures.

Fatal Bucks County DUI car accident trial ends in the Defendant’s acquittal of criminal charges

2009-08-03T14:57:00.001-04:00

A Bucks County DUI case ended in an acquittal for Defendant Laurence Thompson of Bensalem, PA on Friday, July 31, 2009 in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas. In question throughout the weeklong trial was whether or not Mr. Thompson was the driver of the vehicle in which the Bucks County car accident victim Mary Anne Locicero was killed.

The charges Mr. Thompson faced were homicide by vehicle, involuntary manslaughter, and drunk driving. He had asserted from the time of his arrest that he was not driving the car that crashed on Route 13 in Bensalem, PA.

The fatal Bucks County car accident occurred on March 15, 2009 on Route 13 when Mary Anne Locicero's car, traveling at excessive speed, spun across the highway and hit two guardrails. Defense and prosecution experts alike contend that Ms. Locicero was ejected from the car through the passenger side window, but disagree on who was driving the car.

The prosecution argued that Mr. Thompson was driving the car, given the fact that Ms. Locicero was thrown from the passenger's side window. Defense, however, with the aid of their experts' accident reconstruction demonstrations, argued that Ms. Locicero could have been in the driver's seat and propelled, due to impact, across to the passenger's side, where she was forced from the car.

Providing even more uncertainly as to who was driving were the conflicting stories of the witnesses at the scene of the Bensalem car accident and the bouncer who was working at the Bensalem bar where Mr. Thompson had been drinking prior to getting into Ms. Locicero's car. Those who witnessed the car accident reported to police investigators that Mr. Thompson climbed out of the driver's side window after the crash.

In the end, the jury found Mr. Laurence not guilty. If he had been convicted of the crimes with which he was charged, Mr. Thompson could have spent over 10 years in a state prison.

Two kids fall victim to Bucks County drunk driver

2009-07-22T14:14:00.001-04:00

Two children were seriously injured in the Winder Village neighborhood of Bristol Township earlier this month. Lasandra Williams of Bristol Township is alleged to have been driving under the influence (DUI) when she struck two children with her car. The children, who remain unidentified due to their status as juveniles, were both badly injured with broken bones in their lower extremities, but are expected to survive.

When Bristol police arrived on the scene of the accident they found the boys lying in the street. Police were told by Ms. Williams at the scene that she had struck the children. Upon routine investigation, police learned that Ms. Williams' license had been suspended and that she was uninsured.

Ms. Williams reportedly failed the field sobriety tests which were administered by police at the scene of the crime. She was then transported to Lower Bucks Hospital to have her blood alcohol level tested, and then to local police headquarters to be processed.

Ms. Williams is facing the following Bucks County, PA criminal charges: two counts of aggravated assault while DUI (driving under the influence), which is a second-degree felony carrying a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and two counts of causing an accident with injuries while not properly licensed, which is a third-degree felony that carries a maximum of seven years in prison.

Welcome!

2009-07-20T13:19:00.007-04:00

Welcome to our first blog entry on our new Bucks County DUI Lawyer Blog. This blog is a continuation of our previous Bucks County DUI law blog with over 80 DUI related blog entries found here.

This law blog will focus on Driving Under the Influence (DUI) issues in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with an emphasis on Bucks County PA DUI offenses and procedure. At times we will also post blog entries about New Jersey Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) law.

Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. of Saile & Saile LLP, represents individuals charged with DUI & DWI throughout PA & NJ.

Please visit our DUI website at http://www.buckscountyduilawyers.com/. On this website we offer a free instant law chat feature if you have a burning question that you need quickly answered.

We invite you to post any comments or DUI/DWI related questions on this blog. Please understand that this blog does not give legal advice. Please consult with us in person to receive legal advice for your case.