Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Attorney Singh Has A Drugged Driving Case Amended To Inattentive Driving And Also Has Two Cases Completely Dismissed


Prescription drug cases are very difficult. They require a general understanding of how certain chemicals may affect a person’s motor skills. Because of the plethora of prescription medication available, these types of cases require a great deal of research. Often, when someone is arrested for drugged driving, numerous medications may be involved. Such was the case for RLK. RLK was (and still is) suffering from a life-threatening illness, which requires a copious number and combination of prescription drugs. Some of these drugs affect her ability to operate a motor vehicle. It was shortly after taking her medications that RLK was forced to leave the house to seek her son, who was supposed to have been home several hours prior. While searching for her son, RLK was stopped by police and subsequently arrested for intoxicated driving. She contacted Attorney Sarvan Singh to help with her situation. Attorney Singh reviewed her conditions, her medications, and presented an alternative resolution to the prosecutor. The prosecutor, familiar with Attorney Singh, went along with amending the charge of drugged driving to a simple inattentive driving citation. RLK could not believe her luck and repeatedly expressed to Attorney Singh how fortunate she was to hire him. Having the charge amended allows RLK to focus on her health and working on getting better.


There are times when a traffic stop just doesn’t smell right. For example, SSS was driving home with three other friends after watching the dirt track races when he was stopped because the front seat passenger supposedly did not have his seat belt fastened. Keep in mind the officer observed this from behind the vehicle at around midnight. The officer pulled SSS over and subsequently arrested him for Operating While Intoxicated, first offense.  SSS sought out Attorney Singh to help him with his case. Attorney Singh reviewed the video, but determined it was inconclusive. However, during their meeting, SSS described the appearance and operation of the seatbelt, which differed significantly from the officer’s report. Attorney Singh had SSS take pictures of the seatbelt and filed a motion challenging the stop. During the hearing, the officer’s testimony was consistent with his report, which is exactly what Attorney Singh wanted. Attorney Singh then showed video and pictures of the actual seatbelt, and explained how it completely contradicted the officer’s testimony. The judge, after hearing all the evidence, threw the case out and SSS walked away feeling vindicated.


An OWI third offense is very serious charge. A conviction may result in up to a year in jail. That’s why NED hired our firm. He was facing an OWI third offense with a unique set of circumstances: He wasn’t driving the vehicle. In fact, the officer arrested him as he was walking up to his house. NED tried to explain the circumstances to the officer, but the officer simply didn’t believe him and arrested him for drunken driving. NED hired Attorney Singh and told him what happened, which was while his car was found in a ditch a mile away from his residence, his buddy was the one who put it there. In fact, NED explained that the last time he actually drove was much earlier in the day. Attorney Singh read the reports, watched the video, and spoke with NED’s friend who had actually operated the car. Despite the officer’s insistence otherwise, there was no evidence to show anything NED said was untrue. Armed with this information, Attorney Singh approached the prosecutor and laid out his case, essentially showing that there was very little chance he could prove his case. The prosecutor agreed and dismissed the case completely.