Blog

We can all imagine the personal ramifications from a DUI arrest, not the least of which are the potential jail time, personal embarrassment, feelings of guilt and the need to rely on others for transportation after the loss of a license. But many do not understand the financial toll this type of arrest can take. Statistics show that the average cost of a DUI in which no one is injured and no property is damaged is roughly $10,000. In Illinois, the average cost of a conviction is more than $16,000. Many states, in an effort to crack down on these types of offenses, have increased the fees associated with DUI arrest and conviction - and they could easily wipe you out financially, making a bad situation even worse. These costs do not take into account your past history. Repeat offenders face stiffer penalties and will likely pay more than first-time offenders.

What kinds of fees are involved?

Initially following an arrest the individual's car is usually towed to an impound lot. Impound fees vary wildly, depending on where you were arrested, but they can range anywhere from $100 per day to upward of $1,200 per day. Failure to pay the fee and retrieve the car results in additional charges that are compounded daily. In some cities, if individuals are unable to pay the fees and regain possession of their vehicle before 30 days, their vehicle can be auctioned off.

Illinois is among 19 states that imposes life sentences to juveniles 14 and younger, according to the Los Angeles Times.

That could soon change.

According to the Times report, the U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to consider whether to limit life sentences for juveniles 14 and younger. Currently, 73 people are serving life sentences with no chance of parole for their involvement in homicides committed at the age of 14 or younger.

In fact, a research by the University of San Francisco School of Law found that the U.S. is one of two countries worldwide to sentence youth to life without parole for crimes committed. Isreal is the other.

Illinois has four prisoners age 14 or younger -- tied for the fourth most in the nation behind Pennsylvania (18), Florida (15) and North Carolina (five) -- and another 99 juveniles serving life without parole. That's according to The New York Times.

California used to require mandatory life without parole for anyone 14 and younger involved in homicides, but it has since changed its law. The Los Angeles Times reports sentencing is currently left to the discretion of the judge.

A handful of states, including Texas, Colorado, Kentucky, Montana, Alaska, Kansas, New Mexico and Oregon have laws in place prohibiting life sentences for 14 and younger juveniles.

The bottom line: Each state handles these types of sentences differently.

Supreme Court Weighs In

Two lifers -- one from Alabama, the other from Arkansas -- appealed their sentences. The justices voted to hear the prisoners' cases and will now decide whether a life sentence without parole for juveniles 14 and younger violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The high court has ruled on similar cases involving juveniles before.

Most recently, the justices ruled it was unconstitutional for Florida and other states to implement life terms without chance of parole for juveniles -- defined as younger than 18 -- whose illegal acts did not include a homicide. The court determined these criminals were privy to a parole hearing at some point. If deemed a non-threat to society, the inmate would be granted restricted release.

Each case under review, on the other hand, involves individuals convicted of murder and connected to a homicide. Both inmates were 14 at the time their crimes were committed.

The Alabama boy, along with a 16-year old, killed an intoxicated neighbor by setting the victim's trailer home on fire, following a fight. The 16-year old pinned the act on the younger boy, who is now serving life in prison.

The Arkansas boy was entangled in attempted robbery of a video store during which another teen killed the store clerk with a firearm. While the youth was not accused of discharging the weapon, or "intending to commit murder," he received a mandatory life term without parole.

The civil rights attorney representing both juveniles hopes the justices declare these life terms for criminals 14 and younger as unconstitutional on grounds that the majority of states do not impose such severe sentences on their youth.

The Los Angeles Times suggests the outcome of the Arkansas and Alabama youths' cases will come down to one particular associate justice, Anthony M. Kennedy. Kennedy, back in 2005, ruled with the majority in a 5-4 decision to abolish the death penalty for those under 18 years old convicted of a crime. His vote proved to be the difference in the Florida matter.

A ruling on the cases -- one that could dramatically change the future sentences of criminals 14 and younger involved in a homicide -- is expected sometime by summer 2012.

The recent national coverage regarding retired Penn State University assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky and the sexual abuse charges involving as many as eight boys has drawn national attention to sexual predators involved in sports. Allegations levied against Sandusky state that he used his involvement with sports as a former college football coach to gain access to children through a charity he set up for at-risk kids called Second Mile. The abuse is suspected to have taken place over many years, despite several alleged incidents where Sandusky was highly inappropriate with children. Those who were aware of the abuse could be considered complicit in the misconduct by looking the other way while innocent children continued to be sexually abused.

Though the issue of adult power figures in athletics and the abuse of children has suddenly become a hot issue, the Sandusky case is hardly a unique occurrence. Over the past few years, coaches from football, basketball, softball and cheerleading have been charged with sexual molestation of underage children in many states across the country. The idea of sexual predators being around children in the sports environment is anything but a new trend.

The participation of children in athletics and the ability for an adult predator to gain access to them through the context of sports is a known issue. As a result, there are in many instances steps taken to safeguard kids from possible contact with an individual who is intent on engaging in sexual misconduct. Many youth sport organizations use screening and background checks to identify sexual predators, but they are often not mandatory. In addition to screening potential coaches and volunteers, ensuring that known predators face a permanent ban from contact with young athletes does deter predators. Though regulations are important and helpful they are not foolproof nor can they even be the best way to avoid a problem.

Some of the best methods to prevent a child from being a victim of a sexual predator involve parents and the children themselves. Parents should encourage their children to report any behavior from a coach or other adult that that makes them uncomfortable. Unfortunately, many times the fears of stigma, ostracism or blame will cause a victim to remain silent and not speak about an issue. Parents need to be involved with their children and encourage a dialogue about the goings on of their daily life.

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (http://www.missingkids.com/) has information and resources on its website that can aid parents if they think their child might be the victim of sexual abuse. The suggestions include listening to you children, attending their activities and paying attention to any adults who show special attention to your child or who offer expensive gifts.

Parents and all adults need to be hyper-vigilant in the monitoring and protection of children when it comes potential sexual abuse. It would be ridiculous to suggest that every coach or adult involved in youth sports is a risk to children, but the sad truth is that parents have to be always weary of the potential risk to their child. In a sad twist to the incidents in Pennsylvania with Jerry Sandusky, many adults reportedly knew -- or perhaps should have known -- that Sandusky was acting inappropriately with young boys, yet the abuse continued. Only second to the hideous acts themselves was the silence of others who prevented the crimes from coming to light and bringing Sandusky to justice sooner. The acts of a single person can scar a child for his entire life. As parents and adults, it is our duty to prevent any such atrocity from occurring to a child and it takes the relentless effort of everyone to observe the warning signs and stop abuse before it can take place 

Recently, a convicted sex offender was taken into custody and arrested as a result of an anonymous tip provided to the police. The man, identified as Brian Liska, was located at a Boy Scout's meeting at Irving Elementary School in Bloomington, Illinois. Liska faces felony charges of being a child sex offender in a school zone.

At the time of his arrest, Liska was reportedly wearing a Cub Scout leader uniform. Procedure necessitated the uniform being taken as evidence in the ongoing investigation resulting from the felony charges. Bloomington police spokesperson Dave White stated that after the anonymous tip that prompted the authorities to confront Liska at the meeting, he was escorted away from the children at the meeting and arrested out of sight in a nearby hallway as to not alarm the children.

Sex Offender Registry

The police report that the Boy Scouts did the customary background check for all volunteers who work within their program, but the search did not uncover any such information about Liska's previous conviction. According to the Bloomington police the reason his sex offender status could not be located during the search was because the original offense had occurred more than 10 years earlier and therefore he was not listed with the state's online sex offender registry. By law, he was not required to be listed on the state sex offender registry. The terms of his conviction, however, mandated that he not be on any school property without first informing that school's staff so that a school official could escort him. The conviction for aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a victim 13 to 16 years of age occurred in 1997, when Mr. Liska was 23.

Prior to the tip, apparently neither the authorities nor the Boy Scouts knew of Liska's previous conviction for sexual abuse of a child. Had they known the organization says it would never have permitted him to volunteer with the group. After the arrest, the Boy Scouts of America issued a statement saying, "Consistent with scouting policies, upon learning of these matters, the Boy Scouts of America immediately revoked this individual's membership and he was removed from scouting."

At this time, there is no indication of any kind of inappropriate conduct between Liska and any of the Scout members with whom he associated. After he posted a $300 bond, Liska was released from McLean County jail and he was due back in court on November 4 for arraignment. He is likely facing a Class 4 felony charge.

Authority Figures and Juvenile Sex Offenses

The subject of inappropriate conduct with children has become a national topic lately due the allegations revolving around a former college football coach at Penn State University, as well as an assistant coach at Syracuse. Parents and community groups are looking closely at coaches, teachers, volunteers and others who work with children. In some cases, this may mean simply checking the offender registry. Other, more intensive background checks may also become commonplace as the fear of potential sexual abuse grows. More than ever, a person convicted as a child sex offender faces a lifetime of consequences. 

Embezzlement charges have been dropped against the former secretary of a Carpentersville, Illinois real estate firm after critical computer evidence in the case against her was destroyed by her past employer and defense evidence was stolen.

A client of the law offices of Michael T. Norris, Ltd., and John W. Callahan, Ltd., the woman faced up to 15 years in prison if convicted of felony theft and misuse of a credit card. She was accused of embezzling almost $1.1 million from Commercial Property Associates of Carpentersville between January 2001 and September 2006.

Defense attorney Michael Norris and John Callahan filed a motion with the court to dismiss the case because a loss of evidence compromised the accused woman's ability to defend herself at trial. The judge agreed and dismissed the case.

While the business owner denounced the decision, it was the business owner himself who had a duty to preserve the evidence in his possession. By taking an action that destroyed the evidence (whether that destruction of evidence occurred inadvertently or on purpose), he disobeyed a court order to preserve the evidence.

The an Assistant State's Attorney on the case stated, "... When the records that were central to the case were compromised, the judge had no choice but to dismiss the charges, and that was the correct decision under the law. The remedy for the destruction of evidence is dismissal."

Attorney Michael T. Norris has been a licensed criminal law attorney in Illinois since 1971, including five years working in the State Attorney's Office in Cook County. He has been featured in a television docudrama and his cases covered in numerous local newspaper articles.

Today, was a perfect example of why we should always file a petition to rescind a statutory suspension on a DUI no matter how high the blow.

A client of ours who came to us with a .232 breathalyzer result was told by other attorneys that he had no hope of beating the statutory summary suspension. This was in DuPage County. We filed the petition after realizing that there could be some possible defects in paperwork that would require he be suspended for six months.

When we got into court, there were some technical defects with the paperwork because the officer made mistakes when he filled out the paperwork, as well as the fact he did not show up for the first court date. This allowed our client to enforce his rights, and therefore our client will not be suspended on the DUI charge, despite the fact he blew a .232.

That is why it is important to always file a petition to rescind.

Gov. Quinn Signs Bill Requiring Chemical Testing of Drivers

Illinois drivers involved in auto accidents causing injury or death now face a higher risk of being tested for alcohol intoxication.

Earlier this week, Gov. Pat Quinn signed House Bill 1241 into law. As a result, Illinois now requires police officers to request chemical testing of alleged intoxicated motorists when they are involved in motor vehicle accidents that cause personal injury or death, as long as the officer has probable cause to believe alcohol was a factor. Prior law left chemical testing to the discretion of the officer.

The new law puts heightened scrutiny on drivers involved in car accidents causing injury, no matter how minor. For example, imagine a person responsibly consuming one alcoholic beverage with colleagues after work. The person does not feel intoxicated, so he or she drives home, but has a minor fender-bender along the way. When police arrive, the other motorist complains of neck pain resulting from the accident.

In this situation, the driver now faces a substantially greater risk of chemical testing than in the past. If the officer smells alcohol on the driver's breath or learns that the driver had a beer with colleagues, the officer may have probable cause to believe that the consumption of alcohol factored into the accident. The officer probably now feels compelled to request chemical testing, subjecting the driver to extremely severe DUI penalties.

While it has always been important to contact an experienced DUI defense lawyer when facing drunk driving charges, the new law helps prosecutors in obtaining convictions. If you are accused of driving under the influence, call a reputable criminal defense attorney to protect your rights and reputation.

If you were arrested anywhere in DuPage County or Kane County, Illinois -- call 1-877-FELONY-3 or e-mail Michael T. Norris and John W. Callahan for a free and confidential consultation. Our phones are answered 24 hours a day.