Houston DWI Law Blog : Houston DWI Lawyer & Attorney : Johnson Johnson & Baer Law Firm : Texas DUI Defense & Criminal Law

I had an interesting conversation with a police officer today after an ALR / Driver's License Hearing today related to a client's DWI arrest.  We spoke briefly about the defendant and the facts of the case that we had the hearing on today. 

The police officer went on to thank me for my previous cross examinations of him in the past.  He said that he has changed the way that he conducts his DWI investigations and the way in which he writes his DWI case reports.  Unlike some that we encounter, this police officer takes a great deal of pride in his work and truly wants to "get it right."

Believe it or not, I want police officers to have pride in what they do and do their jobs well.  It was refreshing to hear a police officer thank me for a rigorous cross examination, which is not the norm.  It is also refreshing for the officer to recognize that we all have a job to do in the criminal justice system.  Their job is to investigate and arrest suspects, the district attorney prosecutes and we have a duty to defend.  Thank you officer for recognizing this.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Let's set the stage.  The Government schedules the Administrative License Revocation hearings - the driver's license suspension hearings that accompany a DWI arrest.  The Government scheduled Jordan Lewis to appear for an ALR in Richmond, Texas on April 22, 2010 at 10:00 A.M.  The Government also scheduled Jordan Lewis to appear for an ALR in Montgomery, Texas on April 22, 2010 at 10:00 A.M.

For those not familiar with the Houston metroplex, Richmond and Montgomery are 70 miles apart and according to Mapquest 1 hour and 25 minutes apart.  Now you are probably beginning to understand my question. 

So what does Mr. Lewis do?  He files a motion for continuance on the case in Montgomery because he physically can not be in two places at once. 

Stephen J. Burger, Administrative Law Judge (title he signs his name with), denies the motion for continuance and writes in his denial, "Insufficient good cause."  Did he really say insufficient good cause?  I can't think of much better good cause than the same governmental entity ordering you to be in two distinct locations over 70 miles apart at the exact same time.  Get with the program Burger and start acting like a "Judge" instead of some bureaucrat that doesn't have a clue.  Remember, these are real people's lives you are messing with.

Needless to say the case is now on appeal.  Let me know if this offends you, even the most pro-law enforcement of you would agree that this is simply not right.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link