Judge’s Ruling on a Procedural Flaw Could Affect 80 Sullivan County DUI Cases
There has been a glitch in the way DUI cases have been processed in Sullivan County for the past 20 years. Until recently, no one took notice that Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure were not being followed in Sullivan County, which could lead to the dismissal of at least 100 pending DUI and appellate cases, and it could have an impact on past cases.
The way the process is supposed to work is that when a deputy sheriff in Tennessee arrests a citizen for DUI, he is required to deliver an affidavit of complaint under oath in writing to a magistrate, a “neutral and detached” clerk of court or their own sworn deputy who is authorized by Rule 4 to make a probable cause determination and allege the essential facts constituting the offense charged.
In Sullivan County, rather than making an oath before a magistrate during after-hours arrests, the arresting officers sought the services of a notary public from within the sheriff’s office. Notaries are not authorized to issue a warrant for arrest. Deputies did not swear an affidavit of complaint before a magistrate because Sullivan County did not have any magistrates.
When a case came before Judge James Goodwin where a motion to dismiss was made, based on the arresting officer’s failure to comply with Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure, the failure of the Sullivan County system became exposed.
Judge Goodwin voided several affidavits in May and this ruling has caused defendants in pending cases to file motions requesting to have their cases dismissed. Barry Staubus, District Attorney for Sullivan County, has said “We went back and remedied all the cases we could. We started a temporary system where county clerks were working outside normal business hours to make them more available.”
The county has hired four magistrates who will be trained and on call nights and weekends and holidays when the court clerk’s office is closed. When an officer makes an arrest, the magistrate will meet face to face with the arresting officer to review their presentation and then approve or deny the officer’s probable cause to support that arrest.
Still in question, however, is whether or not the more than 20 years of DUI cases, which were not processed properly, can be challenged. Will there be remedies for those who spent time in jail on arrests that did not follow the law?
If you been charged with a DUI, and you need solid representation, please contact the Law Offices of Adrian H. Altshuler & Associates immediately. One of our experienced, Franklin DUI defense lawyers will protect your rights. We have additional offices in Columbia and Brentwood to better serve you.