education remain essential to achieving lasting reductions in DUI incidents and ensuring safer roadways for all. 3. Arresting Officers Leaving Their Agency. Officers leaving their agency or the profession will likely impact the disposition of the cases from their arrests. While some agencies put in effort to try to still get convictions on those cases, the most common practice by far is for those cases to get dropped or pled down to less serious charges. For areas with higher rates of turnover, which is currently very high in the profession, this can definitely impact the overall conviction rate. Because DUI arrests are often concentrated among a relatively small group of officers, like Highway Patrol Troopers or members of a local agency traffic team, a departure of even one high arrest officer can affect many cases. 4. Delays in Cases. It is often discussed that the longer a case drags out, the less likely a conviction will be reached. If the arresting officer moves, leaves law enforcement, or for any other reason becomes unavailable for the hearing, then the case is often dismissed. Many of our experts related stories of defense attorneys requesting continuances with one possible benefit being that the officer becomes unavailable. There are other factors that can delay a case, however, including the fact that misdemeanor DUI cases are heard in the lowest courts. If someone involved in the prosecution or defense of the case is needed in a higher court, then that will likely prompt a continuance. It should also be noted that some case delays occur when there is a more problematic case from a prosecution perspective, and they may be less likely to push for swift hearing of the case. However, the majority of comments reflect that most continuances are requested by the defense. 5. Judges/Magistrates Not Favorable to DUI Convictions. Based on past experiences, those prosecuting DUI cases may come to believe that some judges/magistrates do not like convicting people of DUI and, consequently, they work out a plea to a lesser charge. This was commonly repeated during our 2024 stakeholder roundtable conversations. In addition, an issue brought up in more than one of our Roundtable discussions was regarding how judges handle pro se (defendant representing themselves) cases. While it is essential that the legal system, including judges, protect the rights of pro se defendants, there were descriptions of practices that seemed to us and others to reach beyond the line of what is appropriate. Specifically, we heard of some judges that simply refuse to accept guilty pleas, even when the pro se defendant has repeatedly indicated they understand their actions and are declining representation. In some other instances, there were reports of judges acting as the defendant’s attorney, telling them what they should do in terms of a defense strategy. We believe the system works best when each component works within its role. This issue could suggest a need for additional training for judges on handling pro se defendants.
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator