LICENSE AND REGISTRATION PLEASE

Thursday June 12, 2019, a date that will live in infamy for traffic lawyers in Miami-Dade County, came the decision, irrevocable and final, that driver histories cannot be displayed to private attorneys on the in-court Spirit system.  (**Gasp!**). 

"Sir! Step away from the terminal. Stop reviewing your client's traffic history. Put the cell phone down. Put the ipad down. Put your brief case down. Take the Apple watch off. Put the starbucks latte down and raise your hands in the air and slowly turn around and walk away from the terminal."

And now, the email from Judge Slom that broke the tragic news. A copy of this email has been preserved in the Justice Building court archives for historians: 

Dear Ms. Estlund:

For distribution to all lawyers immediately.

Thank you.

To all privately retained attorneys who handle traffic matters:

Effective this morning, to our surprise, DHSMV stopped permitting driver histories to be displayed to privately retained  lawyers on the in-court Spirit system.

Per the DHSMV attachment below, (since private attorneys no longer have access through SPIRIT in court to view driver histories,) there are several options available for attorneys who wish to purchase their client’s driver histories:

·        Mail a request to Tallahassee, allowing 2-4 weeks of processing time, using the following form: https://www/flhsmv.gov/pdf/forms/90511.pdf

·        Purchase the transcript from a third party vendor, which will charge an additional fee for this service. A list of providers can be found at:

https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-license-id-cards/driving-record-history

·        The website https://www.add123.com (autodirect.com), driver histories can be purchased, once an account is set-up. This website seems to be more affordable.

Please know that this policy implemented by DHSMV was their decision alone and we had no idea that they were going to take this action on today’s date. We understood that at some point this might occur but we had no idea DHSMV was going to take such measures without stuffiest notification of the implementation date.

I truly regret any inconvenience this may have caused.

Thank you.

Judge Sam Slom

Administrative Judge, County Court Criminal Division 

Of course this tragedy gives rise to the lyrics from the famous song:

"Don't know much about history

Don't know much biology 

Don't know much about the French I took

Don't know much about a science book

But I do know that I don't fear-it

If I could see your traffic history in court on Spirit, 

what a wonderful world this would be..."

Sam Cooke, Don't know much about history. 

DHSMV DISASTER!

UPDATED: A DUI MAVEN RESPONDS BELOW

We received this emergency communiqué from the Colonel Of County Court:

Rumpole- get this out right away.

Comminque' from the field from the Colonel of County Court:

Listen up soldiers, there is a new offensive that we need to counter.

For those of you who practice DUI you know that there are two ways your client can lose his or her license. There is the obvious way when the court suspends the license if the client enters a plea to DUI. There is also the hearing at the Department of Highway Safety Motor Vehicles (DHMSV).

When the client is arrested for DUI the officer will take the client's driver's license. The client or their lawyer then need to schedule a hearing at the DHSMV. Prior to July 1, 2010, the driver had the right to subpoena the arresting officer. If the officer did not appear, the client would win and get their driver's license back. This was in the rules of the DHSMV.

Starting July 1, 2010, the DHSMV has ordered all of its hearing officers to no longer reverse the suspension of the driver's license if the subpoenaed officer fails to appear. Now, if the officer fails to appear, the attorney must then spend approximately $250.00 and file a petition in the Circuit Court to enforce the subpoena. If the officer fails to appear at the DHSMV hearing and the attorney does not seek enforcement of the subpoena, the client will lose his/her driver's license.

So now basically officers will no longer ever show at the DHSMV initial hearing unless and until the attorney now takes the separate step of filing an additional civil lawsuit in Circuit Court. Now every DUI attorney must be able to file civil suits in order to do a good job representing their clients.

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!!

The DHSMV is ignoring their own rules and screwing the criminal defense bar and the drivers of the state of Florida. The concept of due process and the right to contest the unilateral suspension of a driver's driving privileges has gone out the door.

The Colonel calls upon his special forces- the DUI attorneys of Dade, to unite and rally together and form a concise and lethal counterattack to this latest attack by the petty bureaucrats who have no legal training and no desire to see fairness enter the hearings at the DHSMV.

The Colonel awaits the response of his army.

Rumpole says: We've never done this type of work, but this new development seems distressing. We would like some DUI lawyers to write in and tell us how they intend to address this issue.

BOBBY REIFF TO THE RESCUE!!!!

Bobby Reiff said...

Dear Rumpole:

The rumors appear to be true, with confirmation of this policy change having been received across the state from both hearing and police officers. Perhaps we will need to attempt to re-open the federal lawsuit filed in 1990 challenging the constitutionality of the statute [322.2615].

In their reply brief, counsel for DHSMV responded to the brief Scott Fingerhut and I authored by stating that "[a]micus challenges the constitutionality of section 322.2615 on the ground that it denies confrontation of the evidence and cross-examination of witnesses, including the arresting officer. This argument is fallacious [because the plaintiff's] suspension was invalidated when the arresting officer failed to appear at the hearing." See SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES IN ESSEN V. MELLON, Case No. 90-2243-Civ-Moreno, at p. 9 (emphasis added). I am no expert on the subject but I intend to see if we can file a motion to re-open that matter before Judge Moreno after I return from my vacation.

Enjoy the holiday!

Bobby Reiff

RUMPOLE SAYS: Now there's a lawyer!! This guy has reply briefs from 1990!!! We can't even find most of the discovery on our open cases. Any federal guys have any opinion on whether the 1990 lawsuit can be reopened? It is now clear to us what has occurred: The DHSMV has waited like snakes in the grass for the last twenty years...just waiting to strike when they felt the uproar had faded. But they never counted on Bobby Reiff who apparently has a memory that just won't quit. We say ""Go get'em!!"