How long before you can appeal drunk driving case?

St3ve

Hi all.

Dont hate, im not a drinker and was not caught drinking.

I am a ex heroin user and I was on a methadone program at the time of arrest because
the guard lied but im not gonna get into that, he just didn't like me i guess!

I was pulled over on William st in Limerick when after been parked talking to my dad on the phone ( Sorry I pulled over to pick up the call) I was clean off of ALL illicit drugs inc drink, benzos and anything with codeine in it. All I had in my system was 40 mils of Methadone (Says on label do not drink if taking if you feel sleepy or drowsy do not drive) I was perfect felt 1million Euro heh but he told the judge I could not put any sentences together that I was slurring my words that my eyes were dilated the usual bull crap..the LIE on d bible too. If I was sioooo outta it how did I drive from Caherdavin to my methadone pharmacy back to caherdavin to realize I had no door key, So drove back into town on a Friday traffic very bad. To go lookin for my mam and dad, boom my phone rang so I pulled over outside boots chemist on my own even do the Guard said to the judge under oath he directed me to pull over there, hehe i was there 5/10 mins b4 he even walked down d road anyway all I wanna know is how long before you can appeal a case for drink driving? It was half im not sure now and need a car big time.

I really hope someone can help as I need some advise as to when I can appeal my case after half or more then half....?

Cheers all.

monument

Moved from commuting and transport.

GM228

Were you actually done for drink driving as per the title??

Sounds odd because what proof did the Guard provide to the court? The Guards word alone is not enough when drink driving is concerned, there must be a sample etc to prove you were over the limit.

Where you arrested and brought to a Garda station before hand and samples taken etc?

Was there an impairment test etc?

seamus

GM228 wrote: »

Were you actually done for drink driving as per the title??

Sounds odd because what proof did the Guard provide to the court? The Guards word alone is not enough when drink driving is concerned, there must be a sample etc to prove you were over the limit.

Where you arrested and brought to a Garda station before hand and samples taken etc?

Was there an impairment test etc?

Actually, with drug-driving cases the Garda's word is enough. If the person has tested positive for drugs or admitted to having drugs in their system at the time, and a Garda gives testimony describing how they observed the defendant driving in a manner which indicated they were impaired, that will usually be enough to secure conviction.

The level of the drug in one's system is irrelevant.

When you can apply for your licence back depends on how long the ban you got was?

lawred2

St3ve wrote: »

Hi all.

Dont hate, im not a drinker and was not caught drinking.

I am a ex heroin user and I was on a methadone program at the time of arrest because
the guard lied but im not gonna get into that, he just didn't like me i guess!

I was pulled over on William st in Limerick when after been parked talking to my dad on the phone ( Sorry I pulled over to pick up the call) I was clean off of ALL illicit drugs inc drink, benzos and anything with codeine in it. All I had in my system was 40 mils of Methadone (Says on label do not drink if taking if you feel sleepy or drowsy do not drive) I was perfect felt 1million Euro heh but he told the judge I could not put any sentences together that I was slurring my words that my eyes were dilated the usual bull crap..the LIE on d bible too. If I was sioooo outta it how did I drive from Caherdavin to my methadone pharmacy back to caherdavin to realize I had no door key, So drove back into town on a Friday traffic very bad. To go lookin for my mam and dad, boom my phone rang so I pulled over outside boots chemist on my own even do the Guard said to the judge under oath he directed me to pull over there, hehe i was there 5/10 mins b4 he even walked down d road anyway all I wanna know is how long before you can appeal a case for drink driving? It was half im not sure now and need a car big time.

I really hope someone can help as I need some advise as to when I can appeal my case after half or more then half....?

Cheers all.

What were you doing driving with methadone in your system?

How you 'felt' was irrelevant.

Most drunk drivers feel great too.

GM228

seamus wrote: »

Actually, with drug-driving cases the Garda's word is enough. If the person has tested positive for drugs or admitted to having drugs in their system at the time, and a Garda gives testimony describing how they observed the defendant driving in a manner which indicated they were impaired, that will usually be enough to secure conviction.

Correct which is why I asked for clarification if it was drink driving as the title and the OP suggests at the end of the post. My post was specific to drink driving!

A bit confusing it is according to the OPs post.

lawred2

Sorry - my post was not helpful.

Pro Hoc Vice

GM228 wrote: »

Correct which is why I asked for clarification if it was drink driving as the title and the OP suggests at the end of the post. My post was specific to drink driving!

A bit confusing it is according to the OPs post.

There is no such offence in Ireland as drink driving nor is there an offence of drug driving. The relevant offence is intoxicated driving.

Pro Hoc Vice

St3ve wrote: »

Hi all.

Dont hate, im not a drinker and was not caught drinking.

I am a ex heroin user and I was on a methadone program at the time of arrest because
the guard lied but im not gonna get into that, he just didn't like me i guess!

I was pulled over on William st in Limerick when after been parked talking to my dad on the phone ( Sorry I pulled over to pick up the call) I was clean off of ALL illicit drugs inc drink, benzos and anything with codeine in it. All I had in my system was 40 mils of Methadone (Says on label do not drink if taking if you feel sleepy or drowsy do not drive) I was perfect felt 1million Euro heh but he told the judge I could not put any sentences together that I was slurring my words that my eyes were dilated the usual bull crap..the LIE on d bible too. If I was sioooo outta it how did I drive from Caherdavin to my methadone pharmacy back to caherdavin to realize I had no door key, So drove back into town on a Friday traffic very bad. To go lookin for my mam and dad, boom my phone rang so I pulled over outside boots chemist on my own even do the Guard said to the judge under oath he directed me to pull over there, hehe i was there 5/10 mins b4 he even walked down d road anyway all I wanna know is how long before you can appeal a case for drink driving? It was half im not sure now and need a car big time.

I really hope someone can help as I need some advise as to when I can appeal my case after half or more then half....?

Cheers all.

First off the time to appeal a conviction in the District Court is 14 days from conviction.

I assume what you want is an early restoration. That can be applied for after 1/2 of ban has been served but the restoration can only come in to effect when 2/3 of ban is served. From your post you would have got a minimum ban of 4 years. So if court grant restoration then it will after 32 months.

By the way it is not good to drive while in you system any drink, or drug including legal aswell as illegal drugs. If you get restoration and drive while on a drug you will risk a 6 year ban.

GM228

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

There is no such offence in Ireland as drink driving nor is there an offence of drug driving. The relevant offence is intoxicated driving.

It is not intoxicated driving, but rather driving (or being in control of a vehicle) whilst under the influence of an intoxicant whilst not having full control of a vehicle or driving over the legal limit for alcohol, you can be over the limit, but not intoxicated. The Gardaí/RSA recognise that "drink driving" is when driving over the legal limit, and legislation specifically regards it as "drink driving" in relation to FCPNs.

Pro Hoc Vice

GM228 wrote: »

With regards drink driving it is not intoxicated drivinge, but rather driving over the legal limit, you can be over the limit, but not intoxicated. The Gardaí/RSA recognise that "drink driving" is when driving over the legal limit, and legislation specifically regards it as "drink driving" in relation to FCPNs.

Read the act, there are two forms of intoxicated driving the first is having any intoxicant and been unable to have proper control of a MPV. The second and more usual one is to have specific readings of drink in blood, urine or breath. As the OP was not drinking limits do not apply. But the offence remains intoxicated driving.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2010/act/25/section/4/enacted/en/html#sec4

Section 4 is driving section 5 is in charge but intending to drive. So in fact neither drink nor driving can found a conviction under section 4 or 5.

melissak

Does this law cover prescription medication. Valium etc

Pro Hoc Vice

melissak wrote: »

Does this law cover prescription medication. Valium etc

Yes and over the counter medication.

GM228

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Read the act, there are two forms of intoxicated driving the first is having any intoxicant and been unable to have proper control of a MPV. The second and more usual one is to have specific readings of drink in blood, urine or breath. As the OP was not drinking limits do not apply. But the offence remains intoxicated driving.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2010/act/25/section/4/enacted/en/html#sec4

Section 4 is driving section 5 is in charge but intending to drive. So in fact neither drink nor driving can found a conviction under section 4 or 5.

I had amended the post whilst you replied and yes there are two offences, but they are not actually for driving whilst intoxicated as such, they are more or less exactly as you describeed:-

1. Drive or be in charge of a vehicle (not just an MPV - I take it that was a typo!) whilst under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle.

2. Drive or be in charge of a vehicle whilst over the legal limit for alcohol.

It's worth noting that you can be under the influence of an intoxicant and legally drive a vehicle if you have proper control of the vehicle unless your system has certain drug types (or over the alcohol limit obviously).

Also with regards to the drugs requirements my brother tells me that a Guard can't charge someone for an offence of drugs without proof of drugs in the system the same as proof requirements for alcohol, it's only their opinion of not having proper control of a vehicle that they don't have to prove. He says that if someone is arrested after failing an impairment test they then undergo further testing in the station just like being arrested for drink driving.

Which brings me to the last point, legislation specifically refers to a FCPN for "drink driving" in relation to someone who receives a FCPN under section 4 or 5 of the act.

Pro Hoc Vice

GM228 wrote: »

I had amended the post whilst you replied and yes there are two offences, but they are not actually for driving whilst intoxicated as such, they are more or less exactly as you describeed:-

1. Drive or be in charge of a vehicle (not just an MPV - I take it that was a typo!) whilst under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle.

2. Drive or be in charge of a vehicle whilst over the legal limit for alcohol.

It's worth noting that you can be under the influence of an intoxicant and legally drive a vehicle if you have proper control of the vehicle unless your system has certain drug types (or over the alcohol limit obviously).

Also with regards to the drugs requirements my brother tells me that a Guard can't charge someone for an offence of drugs without proof of drugs in the system the same as proof requirements for alcohol, it's only their opinion of not having proper control of a vehicle that they don't have to prove. He says that if someone is arrested after failing an impairment test they then undergo further testing in the station just like being arrested for drink driving.

Which brings me to the last point, legislation specifically refers to a FCPN for "drink driving" in relation to someone who receives a FCPN under section 4 or 5 of the act.

MPV not a typo just short hand for "mechanically propelled vehicle" which is what is set out in the act.

I accept what you say about FCPN but I would still say intoxicated driving for two reasons 1 it is the original section carried through from section 49 to the new section 4. 2 it reminds people that driving with drugs both legal and illegal can lead to a ban.

Yes AGS must have evidence of an intoxicant that will be either blood or urine sample. I believe a breath test may be coming in for drugs but currently I do not believe the tech is in place.

GM228

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

MPV not a typo just short hand for "mechanically propelled vehicle" which is what is set out in the act.

Worth noting that having proper control of a vehicle whilst under an intoxicant isn't restricted to a mechanically propelled vehicle, it also applies to animal drawn vehicles and cyclists, but yes alcohol limits only apply to mechanically propelled vehicles.

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I would still say intoxicated driving for two reasons 1 it is the original section carried through from section 49 to the new section 4. 2 it reminds people that driving with drugs both legal and illegal can lead to a ban.

Personally I think "drink driving" or "drug driving" sounds better as I think those sayings give a better message, intoxicated driving will possibly give people the idea that it's OK to drink/take drugs and drive until they are intoxicated which isn't always the case as some people will be over the limits but not intoxicated etc-never ever drink/take drugs and drive is a better message than never ever be intoxicated and drive in my view.

Anyway the sad fact is no matter how you put it people are still doing it and being caught for it.

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I believe a breath test may be coming in for drugs but currently I do not believe the tech is in place.

My brother understands that roadside testing equipment is coming this year.

Pro Hoc Vice

GM228 wrote: »

Worth noting that having proper control of a vehicle whilst under an intoxicant isn't restricted to a mechanically propelled vehicle, it also applies to animal drawn vehicles and cyclists, but yes alcohol limits only apply to mechanically propelled vehicles.



Personally I think "drink driving" or "drug driving" sounds better as I think those sayings give a better message, intoxicated driving will possibly give people the idea that it's OK to drink/take drugs and drive until they are intoxicated which isn't always the case as some people will be over the limits but not intoxicated etc-never ever drink/take drugs and drive is a better message than never ever be intoxicated and drive in my view.

Anyway the sad fact is no matter how you put it people are still doing it and being caught for it.



My brother understands that roadside testing equipment is coming this year.

I have never seen a bicycle or animal draw vehicle case but it would be crack to see one run.

Ya I must admit your point re Drink Drunk driving is a good one. Yes I have heard of the testing equipment but assume a blood or urine test will still be necessary, but will await the new legislation.

Peppa Pig

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I have never seen a bicycle or animal draw vehicle case but it would be crack to see one run.

Drunk with a sulky

Pro Hoc Vice

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Drunk with a sulky

Lol.

melissak

GM228 wrote: »

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

MPV not a typo just short hand for "mechanically propelled vehicle" which is what is set out in the act.

Worth noting that having proper control of a vehicle whilst under an intoxicant isn't restricted to a mechanically propelled vehicle, it also applies to animal drawn vehicles and cyclists, but yes alcohol limits only apply to mechanically propelled vehicles.

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I would still say intoxicated driving for two reasons 1 it is the original section carried through from section 49 to the new section 4. 2 it reminds people that driving with drugs both legal and illegal can lead to a ban.

Personally I think "drink driving" or "drug driving" sounds better as I think those sayings give a better message, intoxicated driving will possibly give people the idea that it's OK to drink/take drugs and drive until they are intoxicated which isn't always the case as some people will be over the limits but not intoxicated etc-never ever drink/take drugs and drive is a better message than never ever be intoxicated and drive in my view.

Anyway the sad fact is no matter how you put it people are still doing it and being caught for it.

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I believe a breath test may be coming in for drugs but currently I do not believe the tech is in place.

My brother understands that roadside testing equipment is coming this year.

Add your reply here.
Not a horse and cart surely. If The horse is sober of course

St3ve

lawred2 wrote: »

What were you doing driving with methadone in your system?

How you 'felt' was irrelevant.

Most drunk drivers feel great too.

Before I answer any questions and explain more I would like to know why @lawred2 thinks
I taught it was irrelevant to drive wile on my methadone script fo=rom my doctor that saved my life!

Cant wait to hear your knowledge on this matter!

P.S

Yes I was don under the drink driving law and I gave blood and all that
was found was methadone. A drug that has a warning on its bottle same as any cough meds

seamus

St3ve wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

What were you doing driving with methadone in your system?

How you 'felt' was irrelevant.

Most drunk drivers feel great too.

Before I answer any questions and explain more I would like to know why @lawred2 thinks
I taught it was irrelevant to drive wile on my methadone script fo=rom my doctor that saved my life!

Cant wait to hear your knowledge on this matter!

P.S

Yes I was don under the drink driving law and I gave blood and all that
was found was methadone. A drug that has a warning on its bottle same as any cough meds

Because if you're under the influence of anything, legal or illegal, and a Garda believes that it has compromised your ability to control a vehicle, then you can be charged with an offence.

It doesn't matter if it was prescribed to you, it doesn't matter if you can buy it off the shelf and the bottle says, "This is safe to take while driving". If you had drank five litres of red bull and were tweaking off your head, you could be charged for it, even though nobody gives a second thought to drinking caffeine and driving.

GM228 wrote: »

My brother understands that roadside testing equipment is coming this year.

My understanding is that there's no real equivalent test for drugs as there is for drink. At the roadside they will use swabs which are analysed by a machine which basically gives a yea or nay for the presence of coke, hash or heroin, regardless of the amount.
You can then be arrested and brought for a blood test to confirm the presence of said drugs.

However, there still won't be any legal limit. If the Garda says you were all over the place, and the test says you had any level of drugs in your system, you're nicked.

GM228

St3ve wrote: »

Yes I was don under the drink driving law and I gave blood and all that was found was methadone. A drug that has a warning on its bottle same as any cough meds

Having any warning etc on the bottle would be irrelevant, and what type of drug, i.e legal or illicit, prescription, over the counter etc is irrelevant.

Unfortunately the only "proof" required is:-

1. that you had a drug in your system and

2. that you were under the influence of that drug to an extent you hadn't got control of the vehicle as already discussed.

There needs to be actual proof of a drug in your system via urine/blood etc (which I assume you confirm there was) but the only proof required for the second part is the word of the Gardaí via the impairment test.

It's unfortunate but unless you can show otherwise the word of the Gardaí is always accepted as true and unfortunately I doubt you have any way of disproving the word of the Gardaí.

GM228

seamus wrote: »

My understanding is that there's no real equivalent test for drugs as there is for drink. At the roadside they will use swabs which are analysed by a machine which basically gives a yea or nay for the presence of coke, hash or heroin, regardless of the amount.

You can then be arrested and brought for a blood test to confirm the presence of said drugs.

However, there still won't be any legal limit. If the Garda says you were all over the place, and the test says you had any level of drugs in your system, you're nicked.

There may be legal limits, but the machines they are getting will detect for seven types of drugs and will have max cut off limits as follows:-

AMP 50 ng/mL D-amphetamine
MAMP 35 ng/mL D-methamphetamine (MDMA 75)
COC 20 ng/mL Cocaine
OPI 20 ng/mL Morphine
THC 5 ng/mL D9-tetrahydrocannabinol
BENZO 15 ng/mL Diazepam
MTD 20 ng/mL Methadone

http://www.draeger.com/sites/assets/PublishingImages/Products/cdi_drugtest_5000/US/DrugTest%205000%20Analyzer_06_14_2013_Drug%20Test%205000%20Analyzer%20low%20res.pdf

melissak

seamus wrote: »

Because if you're under the influence of anything, legal or illegal, and a Garda believes that it has compromised your ability to control a vehicle, then you can be charged with an offence.

It doesn't matter if it was prescribed to you, it doesn't matter if you can buy it off the shelf and the bottle says, "This is safe to take while driving". If you had drank five litres of red bull and were tweaking off your head, you could be charged for it, even though nobody gives a second thought to drinking caffeine and driving.


My understanding is that there's no real equivalent test for drugs as there is for drink. At the roadside they will use swabs which are analysed by a machine which basically gives a yea or nay for the presence of coke, hash or heroin, regardless of the amount.
You can then be arrested and brought for a blood test to confirm the presence of said drugs.

However, there still won't be any legal limit. If the Garda says you were all over the place, and the test says you had any level of drugs in your system, you're nicked.

This is unfair for drugs that stay in your system long after use imo. I am not opposed to an impairment test.

Pro Hoc Vice

St3ve wrote: »

Before I answer any questions and explain more I would like to know why @lawred2 thinks
I taught it was irrelevant to drive wile on my methadone script fo=rom my doctor that saved my life!

Cant wait to hear your knowledge on this matter!

P.S

Yes I was don under the drink driving law and I gave blood and all that
was found was methadone. A drug that has a warning on its bottle same as any cough meds

It's very relevant that you drove with methadone in your system, as to do so risks a conviction as you are now aware.

Again your conviction was not for drink driving as it would have been impossible to do so as you say you had no drink taken. You where done under section 4(1) which is driving while under the influence of an intoxicant (methadone is an intoxicant.) to such an extent as not having proper control of your car. You mention cough meds, it's the same for some of them as it is is for some pain killers. The blood or urine is tested for a number of intocicants if the result is positive then with Garda evidence of inability to have proper control a person may be convicted. I say may as in any case I have run I have not had a conviction as it is very difficult for AGS to prove the offence, not impossible but difficult.

Icepick

Methadone has a much worse effect on the body than heroin so kudos to the guard for getting a dangerous driver off the road.

Also OP's question has already been answered.

melissak

Icepick wrote: »

Methadone has a much worse effect on the body than heroin so kudos to the guard for getting a dangerous driver off the road.

Also OP's question has already been answered.

Add your reply here.
How so? Drivingwise or in general?

colm_mcm

outside Boots is a taxi rank. hardly surprising you caught the Gardas attention.

ohnonotgmail

melissak wrote: »

Add your reply here.
How so? Drivingwise or in general?

they cause drowsiness. not a good thing to happen while driving.

St3ve

Ok the first time I went to a methadone clinic was 8 years ago. I was driving two cars around that time a Toyota Altezza Super charged... and a Blue Coupe 2.0LT PETROL BMW. In the four year roughly I had them I never once had an accident on methadone, After that I ain't even gonna get into explaining what car I was driving n crap im just going to say that anyone that knows anything about Heroine addiction and Methadone maintenance that says you would be not Abel to drive on 40 mil of methadone per day knows diddily squat Nada nothing zip zero about the subject.


As long as I have drove since I was 16 I am now 33 I have never one time had a tip not a tip of another car, no accidents nothing so the methadone might have been helping me drive better lol.

Anyway I was talking too my solicitor yesterday and I will be back driving im thinking a Audi I like them in 7 months :-D Justice prevails.............................................

All the guys that HATED on me for driving on methadone get it right, not everyone is the same no addict is the same. Peace and love too all I respect the good comments, helpfull and even the hating comments.

Bye all.
s

Pro Hoc Vice

St3ve wrote: »

Ok the first time I went to a methadone clinic was 8 years ago. I was driving two cars around that time a Toyota Altezza Super charged... and a Blue Coupe 2.0LT PETROL BMW. In the four year roughly I had them I never once had an accident on methadone, After that I ain't even gonna get into explaining what car I was driving n crap im just going to say that anyone that knows anything about Heroine addiction and Methadone maintenance that says you would be not Abel to drive on 40 mil of methadone per day knows diddily squat Nada nothing zip zero about the subject.


As long as I have drove since I was 16 I am now 33 I have never one time had a tip not a tip of another car, no accidents nothing so the methadone might have been helping me drive better lol.

Anyway I was talking too my solicitor yesterday and I will be back driving im thinking a Audi I like them in 7 months :-D Justice prevails.............................................

All the guys that HATED on me for driving on methadone get it right, not everyone is the same no addict is the same. Peace and love too all I respect the good comments, helpfull and even the hating comments.

Bye all.
s

It has clearly been said it is not an offence to drive when a drug is in your system. You where convicted because AGS proved that a drug was in your system AND you were incapable of having proper control of your car. If as you claim the Garda lied in the Court you must have appealed to the Circuit Court so two judges accepted the evidence.

When you get your licence back do not drive with any drug in your system as if caught you will face a much longer ban and possible jail.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

melissak wrote: »

Add your reply here.
How so? Drivingwise or in general?

they cause drowsiness. not a good thing to happen while driving.

I'm glad to see so many pharmacists are replying in this thread. Just because you are taking methadone daily doesn't necessarily mean that it will make you drowsy.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm glad to see so many pharmacists are replying in this thread. Just because you are taking methadone daily doesn't necessarily mean that it will make you drowsy.

Drowsiness is a common side effect. why would take something that has a common side effect of drowsiness and then drive?

JimsAlterEgo

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm glad to see so many pharmacists are replying in this thread. Just because you are taking methadone daily doesn't necessarily mean that it will make you drowsy.

I see them every day around the streets outside clinics and I would want any of them near a car.

Pro Hoc Vice

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm glad to see so many pharmacists are replying in this thread. Just because you are taking methadone daily doesn't necessarily mean that it will make you drowsy.

It matters not what it might do. What matters is if a person is detected with an I oxidant in their system and there is proof of lack of control of a MPV that person is at serious risk of a ban and more.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Drowsiness is a common side effect. why would take something that has a common side effect of drowsiness and then drive?

If you are taking a regular, stable dose of methadone. You shouldn't get drowsy!

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

If you are taking a regular, stable dose of methadone. You shouldn't get drowsy!

ah the classic irish defence of "ah sure, i'm normally grand your judge, i dont know what came over me."

nuac

/Mod//

Some useful replies here. Thanks to all.
I see the poster is in touch with his solicitor.
We are moving onto pharmaceutical issues so I think it is time to close this