August 19, 2017

Leominster, MA OUI, DUI, DWI Attorneys

Leominster District Court

Client is a 26 year old man from Leominster, MA who was charged with Operating Under the Influence of Drugs also known as OUI, DUI, DWI and drugged driving, Leaving the Scene of Property Damage, Uninsured Motor Vehicle, Number Plate Violation, Negligent Operation, and Possession of a Class D Substance.

The client was observed by several witnesses to be operating his vehicle in a parking lot near the local mall when he struck a parked vehicle causing damage to it and drove off. The client’s vehicle had two different license plates on it and was unregistered and uninsured. Two sets of witnesses in separate vehicles then chased after the client and caught up to him at a stop sign and parked in front of and behind him to block him from traveling any further.

Multiple civilian witnesses as well as three police officers made observations that the client appeared lethargic, his speech was slow and that his pupils were fixed and constricted. The police smelled a strong odor of burnt marijuana emanating from the vehicle. The client admitted he had smoked a blunt earlier in the day. 

Inside the vehicle police discovered approximately 27 grams of marijuana and a pipe that smelled of burnt marijuana. The client also admitted to one of the officer’s that he had taken some Percocet.

During the jury waived trial Attorney Damian Riddle argued that there was no evidence of when any drugs were consumed, their quantity, or what their effect on the client was. The client was so scared that several people chased him down and blocked his vehicle in that he was shaking and petrified.

The client admitted prior to trial that he had left the scene of an accident and operated negligently and drove an uninsured vehicle. Those matters were continued without any finding for one year with unsupervised probation. The client admitted he made a mistake by leaving the scene of an accident, but at trail the client denied he operated his motor vehicle under the influence of drugs. The Commonwealth presented no expert testimony such as a Drug Recognition Expert or D.R.E. The client was found Not Guilty of Operating Under the Influence of Drugs.

Not Guilty.