Rochester DWI Lawyer Ed Fiandach Has First Successful Challenge to Tough New DMV Regulations
Rochester, New York (PRWEB) July 16, 2013 -- On June 30th, 2013, in People v. Daniel C. Luther (2013 WL 3467329 (N.Y.Just.Ct.), 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 23223) the East Rochester Town Court found that the imposition of regulations imposed upon those previously convicted of DWI, violated the ex post facto prohibition contained in the United States Constitution. In short, the Court agreed with defense counsel, New York DWI defense attorney Edward L. Fiandach, that to impose regulations that did not exist at the time of the Defendant's plea of guilty, imposed a sentence greater than that which existed at the time the offense occurred or the plea was entered.
The crux of the matter concerned certain regulations which were promulgated by the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles to weed out repeat offenders. These regulations imposed periods of two years to life for those convicted of multiple DWI (DUI) offenses over a twenty-five year “look back period.” First made effective as so-called “emergency regulations” in September of 2012, they were later amended on February 22nd, 2013. It was this latter amendment which created problems for Fiandach’s client. “The regulation accelerated the revocation period from two years to five years after he pled guilty but before his sentence actually became effective,” Fiandach explained.
"I'm thrilled to have brought the first successful challenge to these regulations," commented Fiandach. In an interview in the Rochester New York Daily Record, Fiandach said, "I think it was a courageous decision and very well written."
Speaking quite candidly, Fiandach commented that when he was first approached by the Defendant, the situation seemed quite bleak. "I did not represent the motorist at the time of his guilty plea and quite frankly, given the fact that he was facing the regulations, I never would have done so." While Fiandach explored various means to defeat the imposition of the new regulations, he ultimately settled on a motion to overturn the conviction as a violation of the motorist's Constitutional rights.
The conviction, however, was not the only problem Fiandach’s client had to face. "The motorist had refused to submit to a chemical test. This created yet another basis for revoking his license and drawing him into the regulation. Fortunately, the prior lawyer did not waive the refusal hearing which, when rescheduled, we ultimately won."
When asked what all this meant for others with multiple convictions, Fiandach was somewhat circumspect. Fiandach, who is noted nationwide as an authority on DWI, an author of several treatises on the subject, an expert DWI litigator and a tenacious appellate advocate for those accused of DWI, observed that "while it is a start, these regulations are far from dead."
Despite this victory, the fight may be far from over as the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office has vowed to appeal.
Edward Fiandach, Fiandach & Fiandach, http://www.nydwi.com, 585.244.8910, [email protected]
Share this article