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.

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?

Understanding the Penalties for DUI in Virginia

In the state of Virginia, it is illegal for anyone to operate a motor vehicle, train, motorcycle, or even a moped while under the intoxicating effects of drugs or alcohol. In cases of drunk driving, this generally means a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08 percent or more, while any amount of drugs that impairs the ability to drive a vehicle safely is prohibited.

The penalties for breaking the law get more and more severe with each subsequent offense. As a result, offenders can face a number of harsh punishments for DUI in Virginia depending on whether they have been arrested for:

• First offense. Penalties for a first-time DUI depend on the driver’s blood alcohol content (BAC) level at the time of arrest. If you have never been charged with drunk driving and your BAC was less than .15, it is a Class 1 misdemeanor, carrying penalties up to 12 months in jail, a $2,500 fine, and a loss of your driver's license for up to one year. If your BAC was between .15 and .20, you must serve a mandatory minimum jail sentence of five days; if your BAC is .20 or higher, then you must serve a mandatory jail sentence of at least 10 days. Finally, if your BAC was .15 or more, you will be required to attend and complete the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) and install an ignition interlock device on your registered vehicles for a minimum of six months.
   
• Second offense. If you are convicted of a DUI within five years of your first offense, it is a Class 1 misdemeanor with a minimum fine of $500 and a mandatory jail sentence of at least one month. For a BAC between .15 and .20, an additional 10 days will be added to the mandatory jail sentence; if the BAC is .20 or greater, 20 days will be added to the minimum jail sentence. Any BAC over .15 will increase the fine to a minimum of $1,000. Your driver’s license will be suspended for three years, with an option to renew a restricted license anywhere from four months to a year after conviction. If a restricted license is granted, the driver is required to install an ignition interlock in his or her vehicle until license suspension is ended and until six months have passed.
   
• Third offense. If you are arrested for a third Virginia DUI within 10 years of the first offense, you may be charged with a Class Six felony, face up to five years’ imprisonment in a penitentiary, and pay up to $2,500 in fines. If your third offense falls within five years of your previous offenses, you will pay a minimum $1,000 fine and spend a minimum of six months in jail, and your license can be suspended indefinitely.

Should I Just Plead Guilty in a DUI Case?

If you are planning on pleading guilty to a DUI, you should know that there is no guarantee that the charges against you will be reduced if you do so. You will need to negotiate a plea bargain to lessen the charges, something very few defendants are able to do without a lawyer. Call the trial law team at The Daniel Law Firm, P.C. today to have us examine the facts of your case and advise you on your best strategy in court.

There are many different types of charges for inflicting physical harm on a person under Virginia laws. The most common laws refer to physical injury as crimes of assault or battery. Assault generally refers to an intention to cause physical harm (including threatening harm or placing the victim in reasonable fear of harm), while battery occurs when a person inflicts harm (such as breaking someone’s arm).

The punishments for assault or battery will depend on the facts of your case. However, there are some circumstances that will upgrade your charges to a felony offense, automatically granting you a higher sentence. For example, the following offenses may all be charged as felony assaults in Virginia:

• Attacks on protected employees. Attacks on protected employees, such as law enforcement officers, correctional employees, judges, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel can all be charged as Class 6 felonies, carrying a minimum jail sentence of six months.
   
• Prisoner offenses. Prisoners who have been confined to a correctional or juvenile facility or are on parole or probation can be charged with a Class 5 felony for assault on a correctional officer, an employee supervising or working with prisoners, a visitor to a correctional facility, or a probation or parole officer. If the attacker knew that the victim was performing official and protected duties at the time of the attack, he or she can be sentenced to one to ten years in prison and face a fine of up to $2,500.
   
• Domestic violence. A physical attack on a family or household member (including a spouse or ex-spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, in-laws, and other residents who cohabit the same house as the attacker) can be charged as a Class 6 felony if the defendant has previously been convicted of assault, battery, or malicious wounding against a family member.
   
• Hate crimes. An attacker can be charged with a hate crime (a Class 6 felony with a minimum sentence of at least six months with a mandatory 30 days in jail) if he or she inflicted bodily harm on a victim based on the victim’s religion, color, race, or national origin.

Will I Automatically Go to Prison on a Felony Assault Charge?

While some charges carry mandatory minimum sentences, a good criminal defense attorney should be able to closely examine the facts of your case to determine if there is a way you could qualify for a lesser penalty. The Daniel Law Firm, P.C. always prepares criminal cases for trial, ensuring that you spend a minimum of time in jail. 

We offer Free and Private Consultations. Call us toll free at 540-204-4316 to set up an appointment or have us explain what you can expect in your case.