Get documents about "HIGHWAY TO
Document Sample
HIGHWAY TO
JUSTICE SUMMER 2011
From The ABA and The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
TechNoLogy aNd The FouRTh ameNdmeNT:
RemoTe appLicaTioNs FoR evideNTiaRy seaRch WaRRaNTs FoR BLood
Judge Frederic Rodgers While innocence projects and criminal defense lawyers may laud
Judicial Outreach Liaison, Region 8, Black Hawk, CO forensic evidence and the certainty it brings to jury trials, its availability
may actually lead to fewer jury trials in DWI cases. Overheard at a
Background recent continuing legal education program for criminal trial lawyers
In most states, law enforcement officers who have probable cause was one participant commenting, “If it bleeds, it pleads.”
to make a driving while intoxicated (DWI) arrest, ask the suspect to
No Right to Refuse
take a blood or breath test to scientifically measure the presence
A blood test is a search of the person’s body and in Schmerber v. California,
of alcohol in his or her body for later use at trial. In states with
384 US 757 (1966) the Court held that a non-consensual blood test may
implied and express consent laws, the arresting officer will inform the
fall under the exigent circumstance exception to the Fourth Amendment’s
suspect that failure to take the chemical test will lead to a suspension
prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures because of the
of driving privileges.1 In most states, when a DWI crash results in
evanescent nature of alcohol. Some state courts have found explicitly that
death or serious bodily injury, the law requires submission to the test
DWI cases present very clear exigent circumstances allowing warrantless
without the option to refuse it. If a felony suspect refuses the test, it
blood draws; implied consent statutes impose simple limitations, not
may be carried out involuntarily, and the refusal may still result in loss
constitutional prohibitions, on officers seeking a blood draw. Beeman v.
of driving privileges.
State, 86 S.W. 3d 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); State v. Shiner, 751 M.W.
Judges and lawyers have learned empirically that some suspects arrested 2d 538 (Minn. 2008). Even before Schmerber was decided in 1966,
for DWI believe that refusing a chemical test may provide them states had begun enacting “implied consent” laws on the theory
a tactical advantage at trial. Echoing this notion, some that anyone driving on the streets and highways of a state
lawyers advise their clients to refuse the test when it has impliedly given consent to chemical testing if there
is offered, believing that they stand a better chance were probable cause to believe they committed DWI.
of jury acquittal without forensic evidence conclusively New York State enacted the first implied consent
establishing the client’s intoxication. law in 1953 as a way to obtain chemical testing,
“No Refusal” Nights and approximately 15 states had followed that
In response, many local prosecutors and law lead prior to the Schmerber decision. These
enforcement officers have begun conducting statutes allowed drivers to refuse alcohol
“No Refusal” week-ends and holidays as testing and face administrative license
part of their impaired driving enforcement sanctions. Originally these sanctions applied
efforts. If a driver refuses to provide an alcohol test, law only to drivers refusing testing; however, implied
enforcement officers will immediately seek a search warrant to draw consent laws were later adopted to sanction drivers
a blood sample, by force if necessary. Prosecutors are available to with prohibitively high blood alcohol concentrations
draft the application for a search warrant and judges are on call to (sometimes referred to in the vernacular as “above the limit”).
sign it at any hour. Some states, e.g. California, Nevada and South Loss of License for Refusal
Dakota, carry out taking of blood samples as an incident of the DWI While implied consent laws creating a statutory right to refuse testing
arrest, as in felony cases, without the search warrant. may seem philosophically in conflict with Schmerber - ignoring the
Not surprisingly, there is opposition to blood search warrants and the compelling state interest of traffic safety identified in Schmerber - it is
certainty they bring to DWI cases. Blood evidence may be as convincing important to realize that implied consent laws may discourage refusals
in an intoxication case as DNA evidence in a case of sexual assault. because of the ancillary license suspension sanction and the opportunity
editor’s Note TechNoLogy aNd The FouRTh ameNdmeNT:
RemoTe appLicaTioNs FoR evideNTiaRy
highway to Justice is a publication of
seaRch WaRRaNTs FoR BLood continued
the american Bar association (aBa) for the jury to learn about the refusal at trial, often to the defendant’s detriment.
and the National highway Traffic safety There is no constitutional right to refuse testing. South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S.
administration (NhTsa). The views 553 (1983). However, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”)
expressed are those of the author(s) reports that although implied consent suspensions have made an impact, there remain
only and not necessarily those of significant refusal rates, especially among repeat offenders. See Initiatives to Prevent
the aBa, NhTsa, or the government Impaired Driving (NHTSA 2003). Consequently, states have looked for other ways to
agencies, courts, universities or law firms deal with uncooperative drivers. Four states have elected to make refusal a separate
with whom the members are affiliated. criminal offense: Florida, Indiana, Minnesota, and Nebraska. They report that refusals
have been cut almost in half, leading to a result preferable to forcibly obtaining blood
We would like to hear from others. if samples. However, there may be unforeseen legal and highway safety problems that
you have an article that you would like stem from criminalizing refusal which are beyond the scope of this paper to discuss.
to share with your colleagues, please Warrants: a suggested procedure
feel free to submit it for inclusion in This brings us back to our topic: the novel Remote Email Applications for Evidentiary
an upcoming edition. deadline for Blood Search Warrants. Any innovative approach coupled with vagaries in local law
submission of articles for inclusion in the will provide a fertile field for attacking non-traditional Fourth Amendment search
warrant procedures. Although all state constitutions have a provision similar to the
Fall 2011 issue is august 10, 2011.
U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, in some states it varies from the exemplar: for
example, in Wyoming, search warrants must be premised “on affidavit” rather than
articles should be submitted to marc
“upon oath or affirmation,” and local jurisprudence often may hold that such variances
Loro electronically at mloro@ilsos.net, give greater protection to criminal defendants than does the U.S. Constitution’s
with a copy to aBa staff at gena. corresponding clause. Some states require that the applicant for a search warrant
Taylor@americanbar.org. appear personally before the judge to swear to the contents of the affidavit, and there
are further distinguishable features among all states’ organic charters’ search and
seizure provisions. But at bottom, it is the practical, common sense determination
that underlies making a legally sufficient probable cause determination. Illinois v.
Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983). Chief Justice John Marshall said probable cause means
“less than evidence which would cause condemnation . . . It imports a seizure made
under circumstances which warrant suspicion.” Locke v. U.S., 7 Cranch 339, 348 (1813).
Search warrants arising from a telephone conversation between the applicant and the
judge followed by facsimile document transmission have become an accepted method
of solving problems of time and distance in obtaining a judicial determination of search
warrants under a procedure that will pass constitutional muster. See Rodgers, “The
Rural Judge Can Always Be Found: Judicial Orders by Fax and Phone” 32 Judges Journal
34 (Summer 1994). Sixteen years ago, warrants by fax and phone were thought to
be innovative. Fast forward to the 21st century, and add secure websites and email,
electronic signatures, secure state e-filing systems and criminal justice information
sharing programs and the groundwork is prepared for states to use an eWarrants
procedure. The procedure is wizard driven and quite ingenious.
The following procedures on eWarrant applications, derived from Utah, Texas,
Florida, and Wyoming procedures, will arguably be compliant with state and federal
search and seizure jurisprudence. A news report from Florida (Palm Beach Post,
March 9, 2011) describes one such occasion using the Skype program:
In Palm Bay, Florida, detectives are using an Internet communications
tool to create a high-tech way of getting official testimony to swear out
warrants faster. The method, using the popular online service Skype,
helps officers in the field obtain blood search warrants in suspected DUI
cases. Skype software allows video conferencing and phone calls over
the Internet. Palm Bay Police Cpl. Darin Morgan worked with Judge David
Silverman and prosecutors to develop the system.
Officers use email to forward documents to the judge and then hold a
conference call by Skype to obtain warrants for blood draws on suspects.
The process can be used for other types of crimes, officials said.
“It’s like a virtual office and courtroom,” Morgan added. “If an officer can
stay within his patrol zone instead of having to drive to the courthouse
page 2
TechNoLogy aNd The FouRTh ameNdmeNT: RemoTe appLicaTioNs FoR
evideNTiaRy seaRch WaRRaNTs FoR BLood continued
or the judge’s house to obtain the warrant, it saves time and, within a reasonable time, files those sealed documents in
and increases the officers ability to protect the public.” court files which are secured against access by the public. Those
“When it comes to impairment, time is of the essence,” documents shall remain sealed until twenty days following
Cpl. Morgan said in a statement. “The goal is get the most issuance of the warrant;
accurate capture of evidence closest to the time of the 6. Officer or prosecutor logs on to CJIS and retrieves warrant and
incident and our experience using Skype helps us do that.” prints it out for service (it cannot be saved on PDA or Blackberry
The procedure and simply shown to the suspect before execution). Filing of
1. The officer logs on to the Criminal Justice Information System the warrant may be by writing or by mechanical, magnetic,
(CJIS), contacts the prosecutor and names an on-call judge to electronic, photographic storage or by other means;
be notified, enters warrant request information consisting of: 7. Officer serves warrant and enters “return of service” information.
(a) officer’s training and experience in the relevant field of law, Tickler system alerts officer if no return of service information
(b) the reasons the officer has probable cause to believe the is entered within a set period of time by return email or text
suspect committed DWI, (c) the reason that an involuntary blood message to cell phone;
draw will produce evidence of the crime, and (d) return contact
information. A formatted menu will help the affiant organize 8. After 10 days the warrant is submitted in XML format to trial
the content of the application. The affidavit should contain the court for filing.
source of each piece of information, and while it may contain The Utah Supreme Court has presaged the arrival of eWarrants in
hearsay, the source of the hearsay must be identified. If the dictum in its opinion in State v. Rodriguez, 156 P.3d 771, 778 (Utah
affiant is not the investigating officer, then the affidavit must 2007). The highest courts in the states of Texas and Minnesota have
identify the investigating officer and the affiant’s sources of approved the procedure in principle in cases cited above. To this
information. While blood search warrants must be done quickly, author, who in 1993 believed search warrants by fax and phone
they must be done sufficiently, and officers must be trained to were on the cutting edge of technology’s brave new world, I see
provide appropriate detail. The affidavit to sufficiently establish no reason why the eWarrant approvals thus far evident should
probable cause that the defendant’s blood contains evidence of not grow in number as more courts find the procedure reasonable
his intoxication must detail the times of the officer’s observations under the Fourth Amendment.
and investigation. The judge’s independent determination
of probable cause must be based on the affidavit’s content, 1. As used here, “suspension” means the temporary loss or withdrawal of driving
including the time of the affiant’s observations to conclude the privileges for a specified period of time, depending upon the offense, and the
blood is relevant evidence; automatic return of privileges upon the termination of the suspension. In many
jurisdictions, the suspension for failing or refusing a chemical test is referred to
2. Prosecutor reviews information and makes any adjustments or as an implied consent and/or summary suspension.
changes necessary, includes warrant ID number;
3. Message is sent to on-call judge by email, text message, pager
or cell phone, containing warrant ID number. All communication
between the judge, prosecutor or the peace officer may be
remotely transmitted by voice, image, text, or any combination
of those, or by other means. The communication will be
recorded by writing or by mechanical, magnetic, electronic,
photographic storage, or by other means;
4. On-call judge, having been notified, logs on to CJIS and retrieves
the application by warrant ID number, or can select from list
of available applications to review. Judge either approves or
denies the warrant, updates the file to note the outcome, and
the warrant, if approved, is saved and stored on CJIS in non-
modifiable PDF format by warrant number. The judge may affix
an electronic signature or may direct the peace officer or the
prosecuting attorney requesting the warrant from a remote
location to sign the judge’s name on the warrant. In PDF format,
concerns about the integrity of the court’s record keeping and
preserving capabilities should be allayed, and no changes to the
documents may be made;
5. Notification is sent to initiator, by email or text message on cell
phone, that warrant has been approved and may be retrieved by
ID number. At the time of issuance, the judge retains and seals
a copy of the search warrant, the application and all affidavits
or other recorded testimony on which the warrant is based
page 3
NoT iLLegaL, JusT igNoRaNT? Judge maRy JaNe
KNiseLy Named JudiciaL
Hon. Peggy Fulton Hora
Region 9 Judicial Outreach Liaison, Walnut Creek CA
ouTReach LiaisoN FoR
NhTsa RegioN 10
Just when you thought smart phones couldn’t get
any more intelligent, there’s a new application that
takes the cake. You can now find out, on your phone, A native Montanan,
exactly where sobriety checkpoints are located. The Mary Jane McCalla
information is incorporated into the navigational Knisely graduated
software. That’s right, the new app gives the precise location of checkpoints and from Texas Christ-
apparently that’s not illegal, according to a recent opinion piece in The New York ian University with
Times.1 As one DWI attorney website says, “There is nothing wrong with learning a Bachelor of
where the checkpoints will be in order to avoid them. That is your legal right.”2 Science Degree in
psychology before
In March, three Senators asked Apple ®, Google ® and the makers of BlackBerry® to attending law
remove the apps from their store. BlackBerry immediately did so voluntarily. At the school at the Uni-
beginning of June, Apple, maker of iPhone, said it would ban future applications versity of Montana.
but did not remove old apps that give checkpoint information. The Senators are After receiving her
still waiting for calls back from Google which makes Droid. juris doctorate, she returned to Billings to
Since the purpose of checkpoints is general deterrence – that is, impaired driving clerk for the Hon. Russell K. Fillner, District
will be reduced if people think they have a good chance of being stopped at Court Judge, Thirteenth Judicial District, before
a checkpoint – the deterrent effect is eliminated if you can find out the exact becoming a prosecutor for the City of Billings.
location and simply avoid it. Studies have shown that checkpoints reduce Over the seven years she worked as a prosecutor,
alcohol-related crashes up to 20 percent.3 she worked on criminal cases, including domestic
While there are rules for checkpoints that include an announced location, the violence, drug cases and DUIs. In 1997, she
decision about which cars to pull over being done in a random manner (e.g., was elected as Billings Municipal Court Judge,
every fourth car, depending on the department’s policy), and keeping the time a position in which she served for more than
of the detention to a minimum, these sites are disclosed in general terms, not 12 years. She was elected to her fourth term in
with precision. A Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) spokesperson told the November, 2009.
Times, “There’s a difference between a broad announcement that there will be In addition to presiding over the more than
sobriety checkpoints in a general location versus a specific location that can be 30,000 cases adjudicated in the court annually,
downloaded to your smart phone with the intent of allowing a drunk driver to Judge Knisely served in an administrative position
evade a checkpoint.” as Department Head and as a member of the
Sobriety checkpoints were upheld by the United States Supreme Court in 1990.4 City’s Executive Leadership Team. Working with
The Court found that although a seizure does take place when a car is detained in the Municipal Court Administrator and staff, she
a checkpoint, such detention is not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. was key in implementing National Trial Court
“No one can seriously dispute the magnitude of the drunken driving problem or Performance Standards to ensure efficiency
the States’ interest in eradicating it,” the Court said. in case processing and court operations. She
The Court found the overwhelming interest in removing impaired drivers from served as Chair of the Montana Supreme Court
the roads to be different from other criminal activity and did not require specific Commission on Courts of Limited Jurisdiction,
suspicion of wrongdoing to stop vehicles in a roadblock. which identifies educational and training needs
for municipal court judges and justices of the
Interestingly enough, a decade later the Court struck down a “drug checkpoint” peace throughout Montana. She also served as
that added a police dog to the stop in order to sniff out illicit drugs. That, the a member of its curriculum subcommittee.
Court said, constituted a “dragnet search for criminals” that was not permissible
under the Search and Seizure Clause.5 Then, in yet another case, “informational Judge Knisely is a member of the Montana
checkpoints” were held to be reasonable and did not violate the Fourth Supreme Court Equal Justice Task Force and
Amendment.6 assisted in the facilitation of a comprehensive
statewide legal needs study for low-income
Montanans. She is also a member of the
1. Stross, Randall, “Helping Drunken Drivers Avoid Tickets, but Not Wrecks,” The New York Times Self-Help Law Center Advisory Board, which
(Apr. 17, 2011). works to ensure that all citizens have the
2. DUIAnswer.com.
legal information they need to represent
3. “Traffic Safety Facts: Sobriety Checkpoints,” NHTSA (Jan. 2008).
4. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990). Thirty-nine states now have themselves in court.
sobriety checkpoints. The eleven states which do not have checkpoints, due to their constitutions
or statutes that disallow them, are Alaska, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Rhode
Island, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
5. Indianapolis v. Edmond 531 U.S. 32 (2000).
6. Illinois v. Lidster 540 U.S. 419 (2004).
continued, page 5
page 4
admiNisTRaTive LaW JudiciaL FeLLoW Judge maRy JaNe
seeKs WoRK KNiseLy Named JudiciaL
ouTReach LiaisoN FoR
dear colleagues: NhTsa RegioN 10 continued
I am taking the liberty of exercising my prerogative as Editor pro tempore to, first,
express my appreciation to NHTSA and its Impaired Driving Division, and to the ABA Instrumental in obtaining grant funding and
and its National Conference of Administrative Law Judges for the confidence they public support for treatment courts, Judge
have shown in me by giving me the opportunity to serve as the Administrative Law Knisely presided in Billings Adult Misdemeanor
Judicial Fellow for the coming year. Drug Court (BAMDC) from 2005 through 2010,
Second, I write to offer my services to your court or agency. My expertise is in and in Billings Adult Misdemeanor DUI Court
administrative due process and procedure, the hearings process, traffic law, and (BAMDUI) and Billings Adult Mental Health
substance abuse. This expertise is the result of doing hearings for the past 29 years, Court (BAMHC) following their establishment
and active involvement in my department’s and bar association activities in training in 2009. Based upon its success, BAMDC was
hearing officers, service providers, and attorneys who practice administrative and named as a National Drug Court Institute
traffic law. Mentor Court in 2010.
We believe that the Illinois Secretary of State driver’s license reinstatement hearing In 2010, Judge Knisely was elected to the
process is one of the most effective (in terms of low rates of recidivism) in the nation. I Yellowstone County Thirteenth District Court, and
would enjoy the opportunity to share the knowledge that I have acquired through my assumed the bench in January 2011. In addition
experience here, and to assist other jurisdictions in developing and improving their to her regular judicial duties, she continues to
hearing process. I would also expect to learn from other jurisdictions that have taken preside in DUI/DWI Court, which allows entrance
a different approach to the rehabilitation of the alcohol/drug impaired offender and, into the program by both misdemeanor and
hopefully, apply something from these different approaches to improve our process felony offenders. She continues to work with the
and share this information with judges in other jurisdictions. judiciary, law enforcement and court clerks to
educate about highway safety, and has testified
My experience has been on the front line of the efforts by the Illinois Secretary of State to before the State Law & Interim Justice Committee
protect the public safety and welfare by demanding personal accountability, the taking of about strengthening Montana’s DUI laws.
individual responsibility, and the rehabilitation of the impaired drivers who come before
us seeking driving relief. I have examined thousands of impaired drivers and have learned Married since 1993 to Richard Knisely, Judge
a great deal from this experience. I believe that I can use this knowledge and experience Knisely is the mother of two boys.
to assist other jurisdictions in improving their hearing process.
The Illinois Secretary of State subscribes to the disease model of alcoholism/chemical
dependency, and we have incorporated this model into our hearing process. This
means that petitioners, having been convicted of driving under the influence or some
other alcohol/drug-related offense, carry the burden of proving that they should be
granted some form of driving relief. Their ultimate burden is to prove that they will
be a safe and responsible driver for the indefinite future. We have promulgated iNFoRmaTioN FoR
an extensive rulemaking to give petitioners, their attorneys, and our hearings staff
notice and guidance on how to accomplish their various tasks. See the rules of the
cRacKdoWN daTes:
Secretary of State at 92 Ill. Adm. Code Part 1001. http://www.ilga.gov/commission/
jcar/admincode/092/09201001sections.html. daTes
The objective of the process is to quantify, in an artful rather than scientific or
mathematical sense, the petitioner’s risk to the public safety and welfare. The
To RememBeR
foundation of this process is an evaluation and classification of the petitioner’s
alcohol/drug use. The classification scheme is based upon the disease model and June 19 – July 4, 2011
the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). The standards 4th of July Impaired Driving Prevention
for the evaluation process are promulgated by the Illinois Department of Human
Services, Division of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse (DASA). http://www.ilga.gov/
commission/jcar/admincode/077/07702060sections.html The evaluator then refers august 19 – september 5, 2011
the petitioner to a treatment agency, which may conduct its own assessment of the Labor Day Impaired Driving Prevention
petitioner’s need for treatment. Enforcement
The petitioner is required to successfully complete whatever treatment is
recommended as a result of these evaluations. The purposes of the hearing process
are to determine whether the classification is valid and whether the petitioner has
successfully completed the countermeasures appropriate for that classification.
So, therefore, if the petitioner is classified as alcoholic/chemically dependent,
they must complete treatment for alcoholism, maintain abstinence for at least
twelve (12) months, and establish and demonstrate a long-term commitment to a
page 5
admiNisTRaTive LaW JudiciaL FeLLoW coNTacT iNFo
seeKs WoRK continued
To learn more about programs offered by
support/recovery program that supports their commitment to abstinence. If NhTsa, please contact one of the following:
the petitioner developed a drinking or drug problem that did not progress into
addiction, then s/he must complete whatever treatment is recommended by hon. Karl grube, Judicial outreach Liaison,
the treatment agency, demonstrate abstinence or non-problematic use for an Region 4 (Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South
extended period of time and a change in their lifestyle that assures the Secretary Carolina, Tennessee); kgrube@jud6.org
of State that they will not repeat their past abusive behavior. All petitioners
must demonstrate an understanding and acceptance of the nature and extent of
hon. Thomas panichi, Judicial outreach Liaison,
their problem, and a resolve to never repeat their past abusive behavior. These
Region 5 (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana,
requirements are based on a core belief that one cannot resolve their problem if
they do not acknowledge and accept it. Michigan ,Ohio): soj1655@aol.com.
Finally, we look for some objective piece of evidence against which we can
hon. david Keith Rutledge, Judicial outreach
measure the credibility of the petitioner’s testimony and his or her alcohol/drug
use evaluation. We rely most heavily on a chemical test result, but also utilize
Liaison, Region 7 (Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas,
an “objective test” score (the most commonly used are the Mortimer-Filkens test Missouri, Arkansas): dkrutledge@sbcglobal.net
and the Driver Risk Inventory), which is administered during the course of the
alcohol/drug use evaluation. We compare the results of these tests to the other hon. Frederic B. Rodgers, Judicial outreach
evidence admitted at the hearing, and base our findings of fact and conclusions Liaison, Region 8 (North Dakota, South
of law on the totality of the evidence. No one piece of evidence is dispositive, Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Nevada):
but the evidence must be consistent throughout. judge@centralcitycolorado.us
The Illinois Secretary of State also has extensive experience with incorporating
ignition interlocks into its rehabilitative requirements and hearing process. Most hon. peggy hora, Judicial outreach Liaison,
of the multiple offenders who come through our office are required to use an Region 9 (Arizona, California, Pacific Territories):
interlock device for at least one year. I can assist you or provide information on peggyhora@sbcglobal.net
the efficient and effective use of the interlock device by your petitioners.
If your state or agency is having difficulty with its rate of recidivism, or with the hon. mary Jane Knisely, Judicial outreach
cohesion or structure of its hearing process, if your attorneys or hearing officers Liaison, Region 10 (Alaska, Washington,
are having difficulty in conducting a thorough examination of your petitioners or Oregon, Idaho, Montana); maryjaneknisely@
in analyzing the evidence admitted at your hearings, I can help. Please contact gmail.com
me or Ms. Eugenia Taylor of the ABA at the e-mail addresses provided in this
newsletter. The ABA and NHTSA have substantial resources that we can utilize to
hon. harvey hoffman, Judicial Fellow,
get you the help that you need. They might send me to your location for a face-
to-face consultation or training, but there are other resources available, such as HHoffman@eatoncounty.org
conference calls, video conferencing, webinars, etc.
marc Loro, Judicial Fellow, mloro@ilsos.net
I am ready and eager to help. Please do not hesitate to contact me.
upcomiNg WeBiNaRs oN TRaFFic saFeTy Topics
presented by the american Bar association Judicial division in cooperation
with the National highway Traffic safety administration
July 28 – 12:00 – 1:30 pm eastern
What Judges Should Know About Ignition Interlock Devices and the Pharmacology
of Alcoholism
september 13 – 12:00 – 1:30 pm eastern
What Judges Should Know About Administrative Hearings and DUI Courts
Each Webinar will consist of a 30 minute presentation on each topic followed by
time for questions and answers. Free CLE is provided.
For more information or to be added to the mailing list for detailed information
contact Gena.Taylor@americanbar.org.
page 6
