---

andrewdeeganlaw (Junior Member) Registration Date: 10-28-2021 Date of Birth: 02-02-1981 (44 years old) Local Time: 03-12-2025 at 10:25 PM Status: Offline

andrewdeeganlaw's Forum Info Joined: 10-28-2021 Last Visit: 10-28-2021 09:52 AM Total Posts: 1 (0 posts per day | 0.09 percent of total posts) (Find All Threads — Find All Posts) Time Spent Online: 2 Minutes, 35 Seconds Members Referred: 0 Reputation: 0 [Details] andrewdeeganlaw's Contact Details Homepage: https://www.andrewdeeganlaw.com Email: Send andrewdeeganlaw an email. Private Message: Send andrewdeeganlaw a private message. ICQ Number: AIM Screen Name: Yahoo ID: MSN ID:

Additional Info About andrewdeeganlaw Sex: Male Location: Bio: What Is an Affirmative Defense? The Texas Penal Code lists several affirmative defenses that can be asserted in the right circumstances divorce lawyers fort worth. An affirmative defense admits some or all of the criminal allegation, but presents facts or circumstances that justify the crime. There are statutory defenses authorized by law. Examples of affirmative defenses are duress, mistake of fact, or insanity. It is unlikely that insanity would arise as an affirmative defense to DWI. However, insanity defenses don’t arise that often in general, and I’ve learned to never rule anything out. Most of the defenses that arise in DWI cases are not affirmative defenses. In most DWI cases, the defenses do not admit the underlying conduct. Many of the defenses in DWI cases attack the reliability of the blood test or the breath test or the dependability of the field sobriety tests. Defenses to DWI charges often revolve around reasonable doubt and how the evidence brought forth by the state is insufficient to support a conviction. The defendant does not have to prove anything. The defense does not have to put on any evidence. The state has the burden of proof. The state has to prove its case, and if this case can be attacked successfully, that is all it takes to get to Not Guilty. What is a Reasonable Doubt Defense? fort worth dwi lawyer This defense will attack several aspects, or one aspect, of a state’s case, and argue that the state has not provided enough proof to convict. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard of proof in criminal cases, and it is a high standard. There is no legal definition, but it is the most demanding standard in the legal system. While there is no legal definition, the dictionary definition, at its essence, means doubt based on reason. Reasonable doubt is about logic, and not about size. During jury selection, I illustrate this point by discussing Tylenol with the jurors. I ask them if in this bottle of 100 Tylenol capsules, there is a chance that one capsule in this bottle could be laced with arsenic, would they be comfortable giving a Tylenol from the bottle to a family member? The answer will be a hard and firm "no" for all prospective jurors. Then, the bottle size is hypothetically increased. What if they bottle had 1,000 pills, and there was a chance that one is laced with arsenic? What if the bottle had 10,000 pills? This example, taken from David Ball's book on Criminal Defense, teaches the idea of reasonable doubt to jurors very well. The reasonable doubt that one pill will not be safe does not disappear despite the fact that the chance is very small. If In DWI cases, the state must prove every element of DWI beyond a reasonable doubt.[ii] At the time the traffic stop is made, the standard is different. The standard is lower. For law enforcement, the standard of proof needed by a police officer to arrest someone for DWI is probable cause. To have probable cause, a police officer needs to show is that more likely than not a crime has been committed. In closing arguments, I remind the jurors that the standards are different, and that their standard to convict is much higher than the police officer’s standard to arrest. This is a great way to defend a DWI without undermining the integrity of the police. Many jurors believe in police officers, and get turned off by defense attorneys who attack and undermine the police. It is crucial to be conscious of this. Always know your audience. Of course, for reasonable doubt to be an effective defense, it must be tied to the facts. Bloodshot Eyes? Slurred Speech? Odor of Alcohol? Fort Worth Criminal Lawyer In a police report, there are three things that can be counted on in almost every DWI report: bloodshot eyes and odor of alcohol and slurred speech. These three signs appear so often in my cases that I’m surprised when they are not there. So what do these things mean? How can they be explained? How can they be accounted for? A person could have red because they are tired, because of cigarette smoke, because of wind, because of allergies or other irritants have caused them to rub and itch their eyes. What does it mean to slur speech? The police officer will admit that he or she has not met the defendant before, and has no idea how the defendant usually speaks. For odor of alcohol, the police officer will have to admit that drinking alcohol and driving is not illegal. Once again, although the police officer may have probable cause to arrest, there may not be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict. It doesn’t work in every DWI case. It must fit. This can be a powerful defense, but the defense lawyer must powerfully weave the narrative.

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 MyBB Group.