A Police Chief facing DUI charges has been granted a venue change, so that he can be assured a fair trial, as reported by the Times Daily
Police Chief D.L. requested the trial to be moved because he had been facing increasing publicity in two different counties
The date of the trial, scheduled for June 27, has remained the same.
The circuit court judge in the case granted the motion on March 24, 2011.
D.L. was arrested on December 5 for driving under the influence. He allegedly ran his vehicle into a mailbox while intoxicated.
The defense attorney has contended that his client’s case has received more attention than a murder case would. The attorney ruled out two counties due to the publicity.
D.L. was convicted of DUI in a municipal court on March 10, 2010. The conviction was then appealed to circuit court.
The Judge is now on the hunt for another courthouse for the trial that would be the least inconvenient for the witnesses to travel to. The judge stated that the trial, which is expected to last three days, would be best served in a county that already has a jury term scheduled for the same week of June 27.
The judge hopes to avoid having to assemble a pool of potential jurors for D.L.’s trial alone. The judge himself plans on presiding on the case.
It is only a jury that he will need in the county he selects.
The decision, as to where the trial will be, is expected to be made at the next hearing on May 31.
The defense attorney is pleased that the judge has agreed to find a new courtroom in another county and said, “We think it's the right decision. We feel very good about it.”
The prosecutor, who was also the prosecutor at D. L’s municipal court trial, expressed that moving the trial would not present any problems and stated, “We're prepared to try it wherever it goes.”
The original prosecutors in the case asked to be excused, as they know the defendant.
The judge will be hearing arguments in a motion to dismiss the DUI charge, also during the May 31 hearing, because the defense claims that the law D.L. is charged with violating is no longer valid.
They are contending that the public was not made aware that the city had re-adopted the particular law in 1995.
The prosecutors plan to argue that the law is valid, and, that the public was notified of it properly.
D.L. was suspended from his police chief position but was allowed to return to work March 2010. His driver’s license was not suspended by the state’s department of public safety as they claim that the municipal court conviction records were not sufficient.
If you have been charged with a DUI, DWI, OUI or OWI, contact a DUI attorney in our directory to plan your defense. If your anonymity is also in question, a change in venue location may be requested.