Jan. 2nd 2012
Its 2012, and many people in Connecticut are looking at the unfortunate need for a DUI lawyer after their holidays turned sour with a DUI arrest. When you are looking for a DUI lawyer to represent you one of the subjects you may be concerned with are the attorney fees. You may see advertisements in the newspaper, yellow pages, the internet or a billboard promoting low attorney fees. Many of these ads may be misleading much like those automobile ads screaming out how you can lease a new car for only $99 per month. It is important for you to find out exactly what your attorney fees cover. The defense of a DUI case may involve multiple layers. You not only will have court appearances to decide how you might resolve your case short of trial if possible. Further you may want the attorney to represent you in your motor vehicle operator’s license hearing and seek their help in obtaining a worker’s permit or Interlock device for your car that may result in a shorter license suspension. It is important to understand that an attorney’s fees are not universal. Some may charge you by the hour, by the court appearance and bill you separately for the administrative hearing on your license and some may quote you an “all-inclusive” upfront fee for everything but a Trial. At Ruane Attorneys we have a flat, upfront and totally transparent fee plan. When you come into our office, we will show you exactly what your fee is and what it will cover. We have the same fee for cases regardless of what you drive or how much we think you can afford. Our fees are set based on the amount of work that goes into a case, nothing else.
When you meet with a DUI lawyer it is important to find out exactly what the cost is going to be and what services your fees will in fact cover and to determine if that fee schedule meets your needs. You also need to determine what will the additional costs involve should you elect to take your case to trial.
Dec. 22nd 2011
It is important to consider what constitutes a local DUI attorney and how you can make the best decision regarding your legal representation. A local DUI attorney is not just one who happens to work out of a storefront office near a courthouse. Many courthouses are less than a twenty minute drive from one another. Therefore a local DUI attorney includes those that operate central offices in different parts of the State and are ready to represent you. There is one universal set of statutes governing DUI offenses in Connecticut in every courthouse so the skills of an experienced trained attorney you choose is more important than their location. The laws involving DUI are technical, complex and frequently changing. So when you are choosing a local DUI attorney you would be well served by one who devotes a large share of the practice to DUI defense and stays current on the changes in legislation, attends and teaches DUI training. Some local DUI attorneys may in fact be general practitioners who take DUI cases to supplement their practices or to help friends and family who have been charged with DUI. So the fact that a DUI attorney may be local is not as important as their experience and knowledge in the multifaceted DUI laws which are frequently being changed or updated. Choose your DUI attorney whether local or not after you have met with them to determine if that attorney can offer a first rate defense.
Nov. 21st 2011
Interesting story from Oklahoma where a routine Oklahoma DUI arrest end in the trooper shooting and killing the suspected Oklahoma DUI driver. My friend, Oklahoma DUI lawyer John Hunsucker explains on his blog, www.duioklahoma.blogspot.com what not to do when you are being stopped for a DUI.
http://duioklahoma.blogspot.com/2011/11/what-not-to-do-when-being-stopped-for.html
Jul. 20th 2011
Click on the Pay with a Tweet Button to post a message to twitter or facebook and gain access to the downloadable medical guide for free. No harvesting of email addresses. Just a little tweet or FaceBook post and the guide is all yours
Thanks!
Jay Ruane
Jun. 28th 2011
Here are some recent decisions released by our appellate Court: The biggest issue for criminal defense attorneys is Number 1, AC 31049 State v. Buie.
AC31049 –
State v. Buie (“In this appeal, we must determine whether the apparent authority doctrine, which is an exception to the warrant requirement, is constitutional under the constitution of Connecticut.”)
AC31965 –
State v. Butler (“The petitioner, James L. Butler, appeals following the denial of his petition for DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) testing of certain evidence that had been introduced by the state in his criminal trial, pursuant to General Statutes § 54-102kk. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the trial court improperly concluded that he failed to establish that a reasonable probability existed that he would not have been prosecuted or convicted if exculpatory results obtained through DNA testing had been available at his criminal trial.”)
AC31865 –
State v. Cote (“The petitioner, Roger P. Cote, appeals following the denial of his petition for DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) testing of certain evidence that had been introduced by the state in his criminal trial, pursuant to General Statutes § 54-102kk. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the trial court improperly concluded that he failed to establish that a reasonable probability existed that he would not have been convicted if exculpatory results obtained through DNA testing had been available at his criminal trial.”)
AC32074 –
State v. Chavarro (“On appeal, the defendant claims that the court abused its discretion in denying his motion because (1) prior to accepting his plea, it did not inquire as to whether his attorney had advised him of the deportation consequences of his plea, (2) after accepting his plea, it made statements that rendered the § 54-1j advisement ambiguous, and (3) it failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing on his motion sua sponte. In addition, the defendant claims that he was denied the right to a fair trial.”
AC31572 –
State v. Milner (“The defendant claims that (1) there was insufficient evidence for the court to find by a preponderance of the evidence that a probation violation had occurred, (2) the court discouraged him from exercising his right to allocution during the dispositional phase of the probation revocation hearing and (3) the court abused its discretion when, during the dispositional phase, it revoked his probation and sentenced him to forty-eight months imprisonment.”)
Jun. 23rd 2011
In the 2011 Update to Innovative Trial techniques Connecticut DUI Attorney Jay Ruane is featured on page 4:12 for his trial tactic of using a blank piece of paper as a supplemental police report for cross examination purposes. He is the only Connecticut attorney featured in the book, available from James Publishing.
May. 26th 2011
This doesn’t necessarily play out with our clientele in our office, but it is an interesting idea which we should investigate.
May. 25th 2011
A new study shows the dramatic impact on your insurance rates if you even have one speeding ticket. View more here
May. 25th 2011
Yesterday, May 24 the Connecticut Legislature took up an amendment to the DUI bill which would strike the home confinement portion of the Governor’s bill on DUI. By a resounding margin, the amendment was defeated. This sets the stage for the bill to go the Connecticut senate, which will take up the bill later this term. Should the bill be passed, we expect the Governor to sign it and it would allow for home confinement for all DUI cases rather than jail. You can read more about the bill here: http://articles.courant.com/2011-05-24/news/hc-offenders-dui-release-0525-20110524_1_ignition-interlock-dui-offenders-drunken-drivers
Mar. 24th 2011
Its official – based on popular vote within the office (and it was unanimous!) Wheat Thins have been selected as our law firm’s official snack food. Congrats to @CrunchisCalling
