make WWAY your homepage  Become a fan on facebook  Follow us on twitter  Receive RSS Newsfeeds  MEMBERS: Register | Login

Court to decide on revisited DWI cases

NEW HANOVER COUNTY -- A first of its kind DWI appeal case wrapped in court Wednesday afternoon. But it may take a while before there's any decision. It could be some time before the judge comes back with a ruling in this complicated case. In essence, this is a story of bungled paperwork. Last January judges dismissed 83 DWI cases because the magistrates booking the suspects didn't fill out the right form. Now the DA is arguing that the cases can still be tried and wants the dozens of thrown out cases prosecuted after all. After two days in court there is still no ruling. And late word is that it might take another week and a half before a final ruling is handed down, leaving all of the defendants dangling in a legal limbo. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are not allowed to discuss the case outside of the courtroom until a ruling has been made. Many people have raised the question of double jeopardy since these cases had been dismissed, but we can't talk with any of the participants because of the gag order.

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.


I really have begin to wonder

If it is a legal substance and it is legal to go to bars then why should police be able to sit outside of bars and wait for someone to enter a vehicle? It seems like a little bit of entrapment.Look at it like a mouse going to eat that piece of cheese... someone think about that!!!

What's the problem?

We have laws on the books that state it is illegal to drink alcohol and operate a motor vehicle. It is an intentional personal choice when a person drinks and gets in a vehicle and drives. They know it is against the law, but they choose to drive anyway. They know what the penalty is if they get caught. The book should be thrown at them for doing so no matter what the circumstances may be. You choose to drink, you choose to drive, you get caught, you should face the harshest penalty the court can sentence you to. If you have an accident and kill an innocent person, you should get the death penalty. I knew a little child that was killed by a drunk driver while she rode her bicycle on a sidewalk. It was not his first offense, or second, he had been caught so many times his license were suspended for life, and he had spent time in prison, yet he chose to drink and drive with no license and ran up on the sidewalk and killed this little girl. What did she do to deserve this? I believe the laws are not tough enough for these crimes. And as for the people that lose their license and can't go to work, you should have thought of the consequences before you got under the steering wheel after you had been having FUN drinking. Was that temporary FUN worth your not being able to go to work and ruining your life over? Think about it before you drink and make that foolish choice again.

I feel the court system is

I feel the court system is too strict on restrictions concerning revoking driving privlidges of people required to maintain an honest living. I feel monetary penalties are acceptale,however after impossed pay back and maintaining a self supported living without a job as a result of no driving privledges causes the majority of people relying on government assistance to live,bankruptcy,self-destruction,or possibly burglary which could affect any one of us. Remedy imposse restrictions such as the 'blow box'etc, I feel with treatment and limited privlidges and as mentioned,monitored devices,this serious problem can be approached with less damage to our society as a whole.

Limited Permits

Those that have lost their license may petition the DMV for a limited DL permit that allows them to drive to and from work...or during certain hours of the day. That is all they need. And those privleages should only be given for the first DWI. For a second DWI, the person should lose their license for a year. Obviously they haven't learned their lesson...or they just don't care. They need to be taken off the streets before they kill someone


This case is not complicated! This is definately a "double jeopardy" case! The phrase "double jeopardy" stems from the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the words "twice put in jeopardy." The full clause is "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." This clause is intended to limit prosecutorial abuse by the government in repeated prosecution for the same offense, as a means of harassment or oppression. It is ... in harmony with the common law concept of res judicata, which prevents courts from relitigating issues and claims that have already been the subject of a final judgment. Veronica Gonzalez states in her article: Under a state law, a form called, 'Implied Consent Offense Notice' is required to be filed by the magistrate judges while processing people charged with DWI offense. This new state law went into effect December 1, 2006. "For example, people staying in jail have a right to call a witness to come observe them or to have a separate alcohol test administered. Magistrate judges are supposed to require defendants to list all people they want to contact along with their witnesses' telephone numbers. The year-old law also requires magistrates to include in the case file a copy of the form that verifies the procedures have taken place." OKAY, THE LAW, IS THE LAW! NOW, if these people were not informed of their rights while 'being processed', then the magistrate did not follow "the state law", under "Improper Arrest and Procedure", therefore, violating the rights of these defendants. YOU DA'S, ATTORNEYS AND JUDGES NEED TO LEAVE THESE 83 OR MORE CASES ALONE!!! AND DISMISSED ALL OTHER CASES OF DEFENDANTS WHOM RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED!!! THESE ARE THROWN OUT CASES!!! the state gets only "ONE BITE OF THE APPLE"!!!

Guess again, Clarence Darrow

Jeopardy was never attached, as the charges were administratively dismmised prior to trial. This is in no way, shape, or form double jeopardy. The trial must BEGIN for jeopardy to attach.

Good for our DA it is about

Good for our DA it is about time that someone is going to try to do something about the drunks risking innocent lives every time they drank and drive. I tink they should have to spend time in jail and they should also have to spend time with a family that has lost a loved one to a drunk driver.Or go to the hospital and volenteer time on the trauma floors were a lot of wreck victims are at and just let them see while they are sober what thier drunken night episodes do to people.Put machines in thier cars for the rest of thier lives that disables the car if they have even one drank.If I see you dranking and driving I am call 911. B/C these people are risking innocent families lives not just thier own.

RE: good

This is a complicated issue, and one that is more political than realistic. To say all people convicted of DUI's are driving around wrecklessly or endangering the public is 100% false. Its is extremely narrow-minded to group everyone who gets a DUI in the same category as someone who is running over women and children playing in the street at 2am. There are many factors that apply to ones intoxication, and many do not merit the punishment of prison and loss of license for extended periods. I believe drinking and driving is dangerous and irresponsible, but let the punishment fit the crime and make the DA's do their job better.

How dangerous

How dangerous is not being able to read road signs? There is more than one DA but "your DA" may be responsible for the oversight to begin with. You need a 1978 machine in your head.


Its the magistrates fault for not filing the proper paperwork to begin with. However, I am not defending these POS that get behind the wheel after consuming. You people have forgotten or just blind to the fact that drinking and driving kills innocent people. I could care less if they kill theirselves, but dont take anybody with you. I have been in the jail when these idiots are brought in. Half of them cant stand up. Whats wrong with getting drunk at the house. I'll tell you, These men start thinking with the other head and feel like they got to go out and find something. Only thing they get is some drunk mexican sitting beside them in the holding cell. They all need jail time! And for the person that thinks the court is to strict. Trust me they are not as strict as you think they are. The reason why they get revoked is because they dont pay the fine or dont go to court. How hard is that anyway?? As long as you make an attempt the court throws everything out anyway