The potalyzer device, created by researchers at Stanford University, can detect THC in an individual's saliva as well as the concentration level of the component. The researchers say that using a person's saliva to determine THC levels is less invasive than other forms of testing and may have a stronger connection to impairment than THC found in blood or urine. After collecting a cotton swab of saliva from an individual, magnetic biosensors are used to locate any THC molecules. Within three minutes, the results of the test can be obtained from a laptop or smartphone.

Even though there is no general agreement as to what THC measurements in the body causes impairment, studies have supported a range of 2 to 25 nanograms per milliliter of saliva. The device is able to detect THC concentrations that fall in the range of 0 to 50 nanograms per milliliter of saliva. However, before the test can be approved, states will need to set limits of how much THC can be present in a driver's saliva.

If a driver is suspected of driving while intoxicated because of marijuana, a criminal law attorney may be able to demonstrate that the presence of THC in the body does not always correlate to impairment. A lawyer could also negotiate a plea bargain if it is not possible to get the charges dropped.

Experts suggest that a combination of good household rules and community standards related to drinking and driving play a major role in the choices of young drivers. More than one-third of teens surveyed indicated that they had avoided parties involving alcohol in the previous 30 days because of clear rules in the home about this activity. While the rest of the responding teens indicated that they had attended such events, their likelihood of consuming alcohol at these events was 38 percent lower if their parents had imposed those types of rules.

Prevention of teen drinking is a key strategy in curbing drunk driving incidents among young people. This survey indicates that greater clarity in parental rules about drinking can directly impact the choices of teen drivers. As these teens make good driving decisions, their communities can benefit through reduced instances of drunk driving accidents and fatalities. Researchers indicate that further study could provide insight about the best types of rules for impacting teen alcohol use and driving.

A minor who has been handed a DUI charge could face severe penalties if a conviction is ultimately obtained. In addition to fines and potential jail time, future educational and job prospects could be impacted. As such, having the assistance of legal counsel may be advisable when attempting to refute the allegations.

In order to prove accomplice liability, a prosecutor must be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a number of different elements of the offense. It must be proven that a different person committed the crime, that the defendant aided, counseled, encouraged or abetted the other person to commit the crime and that the defendant had the required mental state at the time of the actions.

Being an accomplice to a crime is different than being accused of conspiracy. Conspirators work together with others to plan future crimes, and they may be convicted even if the offense isn't actually committed. Accomplices act while the crime is being committed, providing encouragement or assistance to the person who commits the offense. Examples of accomplices include getaway drivers for robberies, giving someone a gun when a person knows that it will be used to commit a crime or turning off alarm systems to make it easier for a robber to enter a store.

People who are charged with crimes in Kentucky may want to talk to criminal defense attorneys for advice about how they might proceed. Legal counsel may analyze the evidence and the police reports in order to provide an honest and objective assessment of what the best strategy would be.

According to authorities, a 36-year-old East Bernstadt man was driving a GeoTracker with a 35-year-old Dry Ridge woman as his passenger. The man reportedly crashed into a utility pole, causing the electrical lines to fall and disturbing a beehive that was apparently attached to the pole.

Witnesses reported that the man ran out of the car screaming as a swarm of bees attacked both him and his passenger. The 35-year-old passenger told responding law enforcement officers that both she and the driver had taken Klonopin, suboxone and neurotin before getting into the vehicle. Both were transported to the hospital for treatment of their bee stings and accident injuries. The man was charged with driving under the influence along with additional traffic violations. The woman was charged with public intoxication.

If a person is facing a drug crime charge for driving while under the influence of prescription drugs, a criminal defense attorney might look at the drugs that were taken to determine if they have side effects of impairment. If the person has a valid prescription, he or she might argue that the amount that was ingested was insufficient to impair the person's ability to operate a motor vehicle. He or she may also be able to negotiate a plea to a lesser offense in order to obtain a more favorable outcome for his or her client. In some cases, an attorney may be able to win a dismissal of the charges.

If a person's legal representation is found to be incompetent, then a guilty verdict might be dismissed. However, courts operate from the presumption that an attorney's conduct is professional, so a defendant must take significant steps to demonstrate this incompetence.

The first thing that must be proved in such a case is that the representation was so inadequate that the lawyer did not meet the standards for counsel as set by the Sixth Amendment. The second thing that must be proved is that the lawyer's incompetence in turn damaged the person's defense and resulted in the person not receiving a fair trial.

People who feel that they have had inadequate representation may want to contact another attorney if they receive a guilty verdict. Whether a person is facing a situation like this or is looking for an attorney for the first time, there are a number of aspects to consider such as how many cases the lawyer has successfully handled and what kind of reviews the attorney has online. Once people find an attorney they have a rapport with, there may be a number of strategies available to avoid a criminal conviction depending on the specifics of the case.

The onus is on authorities to inform people of their rights. Further, it must be clear that a detained party understands these rights. If they convey their understanding but proceeds to talk, their speech might be used as evidence. Waiving these rights can occur through making statements on a voluntary basis. An explicit statement of intent, in other words, is not required.

In some detention situations, an individual suspected of illegal activity might not have the mental capacity to clearly understand Miranda rights. While field sobriety testing in a possible DUI situation might be warranted, statements made in such a case might be questionable because of the intoxicated state of an individual. Similarly, questioning a juvenile or an individual with a mental disability might result in evidence problems because of a lack of understanding of one's Miranda rights. Failure of an official to inform a party of their Miranda rights could also undermine the admissibility of statements made during a confrontation.

A criminal defense lawyer might evaluate police reports, video evidence, and a client's explanation of the actions leading to a detention and charges to determine whether protocols have been followed. In some cases, errors in procedure might be used to argue for charges being dismissed. In other cases, certain elements of a prosecutor's case might be weakened as violations of Miranda rights are addressed.

Settling a case outside of the courtroom may be in a prosecutor's best interest as it keeps the court's case load moving in a timely manner. As judges want to keep cases moving and prosecutors want to stay in a judge's good graces, a plea bargain may be a better alternative than going to trial unnecessarily.

From the perspective of a judge, a plea represents an agreement mutually bargained for by both sides. This means that it is more likely than not that each side will adhere to the agreement. Doing so generally reduces the chance of a future dispute that may need to be resolved in front of a judge. If a dispute does need to be resolved in court, it could take months or years for a trial date to be set.

People who have been charged with crimes in Kentucky may want to speak with a criminal defense attorney to see if plea negotiations would be appropriate. In addition to possibly providing the chance for lessened penalties, a plea bargain could benefit a defendant in other ways. For example, if as part of the agreement a felony charge is reduced to a misdemeanor, it could have less of an adverse effect on the defendant's future employment prospects.

As an example, theft is a crime that requires that the person not only steal something but also intend to keep it permanently. Someone who takes a person's cellphone but intends to return it would technically not be stealing. If the taking of an object can be shown to be done with the purpose of depriving the owner permanently, then the definition of theft could be met.

Another example that illustrates a lack of intention would be a battery case in which the defendant insists that the attack was accidental. The person did not intend to grab the person in an offensive or harmful way. A desire to cause harmful contact must be proven to justify the charge.

When a person is charged with crimes in Kentucky, the right to legal representation can be exercised. A criminal defense attorney will base a strategy to use at or before trial on the nature of the charges and the circumstances of the case. For example, embezzlement charges require that a prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant who was lawfully in possession of another person's property had the specific intent of converting it to his or her own use or that of a third party. An attorney could seek a dismissal of the charges if such intent can not be proven.