Pennsylvania state lawmakers recently passed a bill that calls for stiffer penalties for those who are convicted of two or more driving under the influence (DUI) offenses. Now families of victims who have lost their lives in drunk driving crashes are championing Deana's Law. If passed, it would make it even harder for individuals previously convicted on DUI charges to ever behind the wheel of a car again.
Last year, you made a stupid mistake. You were out at a bar with friends. You ended up drinking more than you’d expected, but you still decided to chance it and drive yourself home. Fortunately, you didn’t get into an accident, and nobody got injured, but you did get pulled over. Now your license is suspended.
If you are going 90 on a 60-mph highway, you could be charged with reckless driving. The same goes for texting while driving. The state of Pennsylvania takes reckless driving seriously, which makes it come with fairly heavy consequences.
It happens at almost every college party at least once. It's late. Everyone's been drinking heavily, and inhibitions are slow. Suddenly, someone erupts into anger over a perceived offense by another person. They start to argue, and before you know it, they're rolling around on the ground in a full-on fight.
You and your friend decide to go on vacation to Florida together. You fly to Ford Lauderdale, and your friend rents a car. It's cheaper if you only put one driver on the rental contract, so you agree to keep yourself off of it.
The majority of personal injury cases involve negligence--e.g., a doctor failing to properly diagnose a patient, or a driver falling asleep at the wheel--which results in pain and suffering for the plaintiff. However, some types of personal injury are inflicted intentionally.
In a previous post, we discussed some of the ways a criminal record can create challenges for a person throughout their life. It has been widely understood that a criminal record-which anyone who has ever been arrested has, regardless of whether they are convicted-can be a major obstacle to gaining employment.
In a recent study, researchers examined drug-sniffing dogs and their handlers. They conducted an experiment in which handlers were sent with their dogs into different environments to seek out drugs.
If you've ever hired a lawyer, you're entitled to certain protections under lawyer confidentiality and attorney-client privilege. But what happens when your lawyer-and their devices-go through border security? What mechanisms are in place to protect your confidential information in this case?
Where does a defense lawyer's responsibility lie? Is it their duty to obey their client's wishes, or are they obliged to act in whatever way they believe has the highest likelihood of a positive outcome for their client? What happens when these two objectives conflict with each other?