1. Call the relevant City/County Clerk's Office (most likely the Clerk of the General District Court) to get your actual case number; or, if you're computer savvy, navigate your way to the correct Court via the following link https://eapps.courts.state.va.us/gdcourts/
2. Once you have the case number from the Clerk or the Courts website, look at the first two letters of your case number.
   • If it starts with "GC" [e.g. GC160000-00] then it's a criminal charge and, candidly, you should probably have a lawyer with you.
   • If it starts with "GT" [e.g. GT160000-00] then it's a traffic charge and, as to the need for a lawyer, see below for further comments. 

In regards to traffic charges, be aware that DUI, Reckless Driving, Failure to Maintain Control and/or Improper Brakes are all considered "traffic charges" but none of them are pre-payable and they are all Class 1 Misdemeanors which require your attendance in-Court (unless you get a waiver of appearance - which we can often negotiate for most non- DUI clients). Notably, however, these "traffic charges" can- and often do - carry high fines and/or jail time! In sum, most "traffic charges" in Virginia are serious enough to at least, consult a lawyer...just make sure you talk with someone who'll give you the straight scoop!

So, call us first! We are good at what we do; but, don't take our word for it. Instead, see for yourself...check out client testimonials on our website and read client reviews posted with the Better Business Bureau http://www.bbb.org/western-virginia/business-reviews/attorneys-and-lawyers/the-daniel-law-firm-pc-in-roanoke-va-90007130/customer-reviews

Finally, one last helpful tidbit, your official case number is NOT the same number which was printed on the warrant or summons that you received from the police officer. 

So, in order to allay your concerns in the quickest and most effective way (i.e. from scariest to most inconvenien to most expensive), I am going to lay out four (4) bullet points which - I think - will assuage some of your concerns and answer some of your most immediate and pressing questions.

1. Although true in the 'world of possibilities,' most people do not go to jail for Reckless Driving;
2. Similarly true in the same 'world of possibilities,' most people do not receive a license suspension for Reckless Driving;
3. While, again, true in the world of possibilities,' most people do not receive enormous fines ranging in the thousands of dollars; and, 
4. You almost never need an appeal to Cicuit Court; so, call us before you pay for one!

That said, there are exceptions to these general rules and some of those include:

• Young Drivers (i.e. under 25 years of age)
• Reckless Driving in a Highway Saftey Corridor (fines are doubled)
• Reckless Driving over 85mph (in most Virginia cities/counties)
• Roadside arguments with the officer
• Others too numerous to name but which include: "tailgating at over 85mph," "agressive driving," "racing," etc.

Additionally, in some places,  things can be done on an Appeal to the Circuit Court which can't (or won't) be done  in the General District Court. So, if it's even possible that you might fall into one of these execptions or think you might need an appeal, then either e-mail us or call us. We will help. This is what we do and we do it well.

Motorcycle Helmet: 

Not only is wearing a helmet while riding the law in the Commonwealth – it’s a good idea. Riding without a helmet may increases one's chances of being severely or even fatally hurt if struck by another motorist or if your motorcycle malfunctions resulting in an accident.

“Helmeted motorcyclists were less likely to experience facial and head injuries compared to unhelmeted motorcyclists. Helmeted motorcyclists were significantly less likely to experience a traumatic brain injury…. [M]otorcyclists with TBI were much less likely to be discharged home and more likely to require rehabilitation or to be discharged to a long-term care facility following their hospitalization.”  - National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration Report DOT HS 811 208 October 2009

Shopping for helmets can be overwhelming given the number of styles and the wide range of prices; so, although we know you want to ride in style, it’s very important that the helmet fits snug on your head and is comfortable enough to wear for long periods of time.

Per §46.2-910B of Virginia Code, helmets sold to Virginia drivers must meet or exceed the standards set forth by Snell Memorial Foundation*, American National Standards Institute, Inc. or Virginia's Department of Transportation (DMV).

You will also need to decide if you want a face shield or if you will want to wear goggles.

Motorcycle Face shield, G0ggles or Glasses: 

In Virginia, goggles or glasses are only required if your helmet is not equipped with a face shield or your motorcycle is not equipped with a windshield. Bugs, dirt, dust, road debris and other airborne matter are only some of the things that can make their way into a motorcyclist’s eyes and cause severe eye damage when riding.

Goggles, safety glasses and face shields should be scratch free, shatterproof and well ventilated to prevent fog buildup. Another helpful feature to invest in are either tinted visors or glasses that are more effective than sunglasses at blocking the sun. Do not risk your eyesight. If a helmet doesn’t already come  with a full cover face sheild, buy and wear full coverage, impact resistant eye protection whenever you ride.

Motorcycle Jackets, Pants, Gloves and Boots: 

As all bike enthusiast know road rash, deep lacerations, broken or fractured bones, loss of limbs, and permanent scarring and disfigurement can occur if not properly outfitted. The general rule of thumb, in regard to road friction, is that you’ll lose 1mm of flesh for every 1mph you’re going over 30mph when you hit it. Now, consider that formula at 55mph and think about how much flesh will rip off. Any faster and the friction against the road will cause you’re body to wear down to its bones, which will likely cause a fatal bone infection. Leaving your skin exposed can lead to road rash or open wounds inviting in infection.

Humans instinctively reach out to catch our falls by throwing our hands in front of our bodies. Hands are extremely fragile and fleshy. A durable, non-slip pair of gloves will protect your hands from abrasion upon impact. They will also assist with holding onto the handlebars of the motorcycle during your ride. 

Heavier materials and/or strong leather will provide much protection all times of incidents. Textile motorcycle jackets and leather motorcycle jackets can help protect you from such abrasions and road rash. Jackets that are waterproof and have extra padding called (body armor) around joints, chests and backs offer even more protecton.

When it comes to pants they should not be baggy or flared at the bottom, this is to prevent entanglement with equipment of the motorcycle.   Pants that are made from thicker materials, such as special synthetic material or leather, add more protection than what is offered by regular jeans.

Just like your hands, your feet are fragile and need protection.  Proper footwear involves thicker materials – such as leather – and closed toe and heal shoe or boot that covers the ankles.   Sandals or sneakers will not protect you from crushing impacts or abrasions.

Motorcyclists’ Colors:

Another imperative when riding is to be visible to others on the road, so wear clothing that will make you visible. Whether its bright colors or reflective strips embedded in your gear, other motorists need to be able to see you on the road. This is the time that you do want to draw attention to yourself so that you are visible to everyone on the road.

* Quick note the Snell Memorial Foundation (http://www.smf.org/) is not a government agency but a non-profit organization that works on research, education, testing and development of helmet safety standards. 

Sources:

1) National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration Report DOT HS 811 208 October 2009

2) Virginia DMV website http://www.dmv.state.va.us/safety/#programs/motorcycle/index.asp

Virginia will no longer recognize concealed handgun permits from 25 other states with less stringent gun permit laws starting next February, the state's Attorney General Mark Herring says. 

The new regulations mean that "more than 6.3 million people who could legally carry concealed handguns into Virginia today will lose the privilege when the change takes effect next year," The Washington Post reports.

Herring, who is a Democrat, says the state will continue to recognize permits from Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. Visitors from other states will need to obtain a nonresident permit to carry a concealed weapon.

These are some of the disqualifiers and safeguards mentioned in Herring's statement that are meant to rule out "potentially dangerous individuals": anyone who has been ordered to receive outpatient mental health treatment, or has been convicted of stalking or assault, or has been convicted of a felony, or is addicted to a controlled substance.

The Post spoke with Chelsea Parsons, vice president of guns and crime policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, who says Virginia's new policy is representative of "where the gun violence prevention movement is going." Here's more from Parsons:

"In much the same way President Obama said I'm not going to wait for Congress anymore, the same can be said for leaders at the state level to really use their authority to take strong meaningful steps on this issue."

The decision came under fire immediately from Republicans. The chairman of the Virginia Republican Party John Whitbeck said Herring's announcement "is further proof that Democrats in Virginia have declared war on the Second Amendment." Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz criticized the decision in a statement, saying: "You don't reduce violent crime by taking away the right of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves and their families."

A spokesman for the National Rifle Association told The Associated Press that "his organization is unaware of any state ever implementing a change of this magnitude" to concealed handgun reciprocity agreements.

The following “blog post” is a continuation of a recent Facebook post by M. Tyson Daniel – founder of and lawyer with The Daniel Law Firm PC in Roanoke, Virginia – which addressed, in limited part, the recent passing of “The Good Samaritan Law” in Virginia [codified at §18.2-251.03 (Code of Virginia, 1950), as amended].

For starters, the Virginia General Assembly gets kudos for recently enacting the “Good Samaritan Statute” – see §18.2-251.03 – because it finally brings the law into conformity with a well-established public policy principle which, founded on grounds of equity, states that: people who, at their own peril, engage themselves with law enforcement, for the purpose of helping another person in serious medical distress, ought to be afforded protection from personal prosecution when such prosecution would otherwise stem from their effort to “do-the-right-thing” by engaging the authorities to help another person in need of their assistance. It goes without saying that good deeds ought not to be punished – at least not in this context. We want people to help, or call to get help for, others in distress; and, we want them to do so without reservation based on their own preservation.

In order to transform this principle that “Good Deeds Should Not Be Punished” into daily practice, the GA recognized that we must motivate people to assist others in distress; and, in sum, it’s excellent that our legislature has motivated the otherwise Good Samaritan not to choose to turn a selfish blind eye to their fellow human in dire need of their assistance.

This is not, however, an article about the infinite wisdom of our legislature. Indeed, somewhat to the contrary because, this statute, however well-meaning it is, is drawn so narrowly that, in many instances, the spirit of the statute may be defeated by the plain language of the statute.

For example, here is a hypothetical that evidences the above-referenced flaw in the otherwise, I believe, well-meaning statute:

Jane and her husband, Larry, are retired and they live in a small town in Virginia. They have no children. Larry is at a doctor’s appointment one day and, since he is gone and they have no kids, Jane is at home alone. All of her doors are locked and she’s reading a book. Phillip is a neighbor who she has known for many years and for whom she is sympathetic and, hence, not unfriendly…even though she believes he has a serious drug problem. At about 2pm in the afternoon, Jane hears Phillip banging on her door and screaming to let him into her home because he is dying of a drug overdose. Jane, concerned for Phillip, opens the doors and, without any invitation or other exchange, he runs into her small home and barricades himself into her bedroom. She can hear him yelling “I’m Gonna Die. This Smack is Killing Me!”

Jane, knowing of Phillip’s drug problems and concerned that he’s screaming about a possible Heroin overdose, immediately calls 911 and then, immediately thereafter, calls her husband - who had just left his doctor’s appointment and was already traveling home. Larry, upon this news, travels quickly home to assist.

As it would happen, both the EMS and local law enforcement officers were already present treating Phillip in the bedroom and otherwise “securing the scene,” respectively, when Larry arrived. Notably, when Larry walked-in, one of the officer’s immediately made a remark about the number of pill bottles on a side table. Larry tells the officer of his medical issues and the absence of children; and consequently, no need to otherwise “secure” the various medications.  Another officer was walking by during this exchange and, among the dozen or so pill bottles, sees one bottle that appears to have a plastic baggie in it. He grabs and turns the bottle and then picks-it-up to see it better and, in so doing, he sees Larry’s name on the label of the bottle and he also sees what he believes to be a bag of marijuana in the pill bottle. When he picks the bottle up and questions Larry about it, Larry states that it is his bottle and his marijuana and that he did not have a prescription for the marijuana. Larry is charged with Possession of marijuana. The Officer bringing the charge does not conduct a Field Test and there is, otherwise, no Certificate of Analysis but there is an admission by Larry that it was his marijuana.

Query: Is Larry Protected By the “Good Samaritan Statute” such that he can have the case dismissed on those grounds alone?

Hint: The statute provides for an “affirmative defense” – which means that the burden shifts to the Defendant to show that he or she meets all the elements of the statutory defense. In this instance, the statute (18.2-251.03) is not long and is definitely worth the read. It can be conveniently found at the following link: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?151+ful+CHAP0418+pdf

Answer: When looking only at the plain language of the “Good Samaritan Statute,” Larry is not protected and, excluding all other issues regarding suppression and chemical analysis of the evidence, he would be guilty under Virginia Law. Now, that said, the answer here is meant to:  show the reader the flaw in the statute and it is not meant to be a discussion on the other defenses present (of which there are several). As for the flaw, if one looks at the statute closely, they will notice that it only affords protection to the person who called the EMS or the 911 Services and, in this instance, it was Jane who called but it was Larry who was charged.

As mentioned above, Larry still has a whole slew of defenses/suppression issues including: suppression based on issues of custodial interrogation, absence of Miranda warnings, a shaky “plain view” argument and the absence of a certificate even in the face of his otherwise seemingly inculpatory, but perhaps inadmissible, statements.  

So, to reiterate, the purpose of this post is to show how a well-meaning – but too narrowly drawn statute – can violate the spirit of its own language by excluding the very people who it is designed to protect because of the rules of strict statutory construction. To be sure, I appreciate the rules of statutory construction because they are fixed rules by which we can all count and, therefore, practice. Thus, it seems to me that the solution is to re-draft the statute to include others who stay to assist. Simple enough, eh?

Presumably you’re here at The Daniel Law Firm website because you have a problem or a legal issue that you want more information about, or you would like to solve. One way to do that is to download the free resources you see on this site. Another thing to do, for example, after downloading those resources and reviewing them would be to contact us and give us a call. We’ll set up an appointment. If you’re out of town, we can set up a “Go to Meeting” or an otherwise electronic appointment, so that we can get the full narrative from you. We need the facts so that we can help you with the law. And if you have a legal issue, it’s best to address it right away than to wait. Give us a call today or shoot us an email, but at least download the materials that are free on this website.

Persuasive presentation of strong mitigating evidence brought this client’s case to a close with a big sigh of relief; because, in light of the nature of the charges and the facts of the case, the client faced a maximum penalty 3yrs and 30 days (37 months) and, obviously, there was a very real concern that the client would be sentenced to an active jail sentence of, at least, 12 months.