Client was a passenger in a car stopped for suspicion of DUI. Following driver's arrest for DUI, passenger removed from vehicle and searched for weapons and drugs. Baggy containing marijuana found in his jean pocket. Motion to Suppress the search filed prior to trial to get the search of the passenger suppressed based on a questionable stop of the vehicle. Prosecutor agreed that the stop had legal issues that could make it difficult to prosecute. The charge was amended to a Jay Walking violation and a $100 fine assessed. Client, who had a prior Possession conviction, avoided another conviction, a year supervised probation, periodic drug screens, a fine, and trial fees in the 1000s. I can count on him for future referals.
October 2023
Arresting officer did not follow the guidelines for breath-testing of a suspect in a DUI arrest. The officer started the required 20-minute deprivation period without having his eyes on my client. Client burped during the period, which requires a new deprivation period to start over. But the officer failed to start a new one and therefore the suspension can not stand. Read On
October 2023
Client charged with DUI after driving off the road and over a retaining wall in a shopping district parking lot. Client taken to hospital and refused a blood draw. Evidence confirmed client had only 2 Gin and Tonics over 3 hour period. Officer testimony included initial observations of client's bloodshot eyes and odor of alcohol on his breath. Client testified in his own defense that he was distracted when he drove off road and that he otherwise felt fine to drive. Following a 3-hour bench trial, the Judge ruled the city had not proven the DUI case beyond a reasonable doubt. Client was acquitted of the DUI but found guilty of causing a collision when he drove off the road and collided with parked vehicles. Read On
September 2023
Filing a motion to suppress evidence is the smart course of action when the video from the police cruiser does not indicate "lane violations" or "weaving" as many arrest reports claim. Motions should be filed in order to force the prosecutor to defend the officer's actions. A careful review of the police dash camera (In-car) will provide the basis for deciding whether to challenge the stop. In the case where the defendant does not qualify for diversion, then the video review becomes more important to determine whether to challenge the city or state's case. Read On
October 2022
Officer's mistake of law regarding tag light requirements was unreasonable and therefore the stop was illegal. A tag light-even one operable light-that illuminates the rear registration plate and is legible from 50 feet satisfies state law. There is no requirement for two operable lights over the plate. The plain language of the city ordinance is clear and unambiguous. Judge granted defendant's motion to suppress all evidence following the stop. Read On
August 2019
State charged client with DUI and possession of marijuana. We filed a Motion to Exclude "expert" testimony relating to field testing and the state agreed to dismiss the DUI charge. Client entered a plea on the Possession charge but avoided the mandatory jail term related to the DUI. Read On
May 2019
Underage client charged with MIP following a fight with her roommate. My client called the police before matters escalated. She, and the others present at the house, were charged with MIP. All had been drinking together prior to the disturbance. Case was dismissed following plea discussions with the city prosecutor. Read On
May 2019
Client charged with felony DUI due to two prior out-of-state DUI convictions. We filed a Motion to Challenge criminal history based on the current case law that states the courts are to look at the elements of the comparable DUI statute in order to determine whether the elements are comparable enough to K.S.A. 8-1567. Read On
May 2019
Client charged with Domestic Battery following altercation with his 18-year old son. Following pre-trial plea discussions, we persuaded the state to dismiss after reviewing the evidence and posturing the case as one of "mutual combat," meaning both parties were equally at fault and therefore no "real" victim and no crime. Plus, no real sign of injury to either party. Read On
December 2017
Client charged with 2nd MIP offense in three years. He plead Guilty to the amended charge of public consumption of alcohol and paid a $200 fine with no license suspension. Read On
November 2017
Driver had a very poor record with numerous driving while suspended convictions that caused his license to be suspended for several years. We petitioned several courts to remove the convictions and allow for new plea bargaining on the charges by showing that the driver did not have competent or aggressive representation when he plead guilty to the charges. This driver now has a valid license and has obtained auto insurance for the first time in years. Read On
September 2017
Client charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession following a car check after a tire blowout. A passenger was found to be holding a glass jar with marijuana and the driver admitted to smoking weed earlier in the day. The prosecutor agreed to dismiss the charge after reviewing our Motion to Suppress on legal principle that client did not "possess" the drugs nor was he impaired after smoking weed earlier in the day. Read On
August 2017
Client charged with DWI after being found asleep in his car with the engine running. Client passed field tests but refused the breath test. DWI amended to defective equipment after plea discussions with the city prosecutor. Client can now proceed with citizenship process free and clear of any alcohol related offenses. Read On
June 2017
Following a lawful stop of client's vehicle, client charged with DUI after performing well on multiple field sobriety tests. The court sustained (ruled in favor) our motion to suppress the breath test, finding the officer lacked probable cause to arrest. DUI dismissed and client pled Guilty to a simple lane violation and refusal of a preliminary breath test. Based on this the client did not lose his driver's license. Read On
May 2017
Client was a passenger in a vehicle that was stopped illegally for an alleged turn signal violation. Following a search of the car due to odor of marijuana, client charged with misdemeanor possession. Prosecutor agreed the stop of the vehicle was questionable since the driver used the turn signal prior to changing lanes. Thus, the stop of the car was illegal and the search of the car illegal as well. Read On
May 2017
Defendant placed on DUI diversion but subsequently tests positive for alcohol. The state moves to revoke the diversion. Prior to the revocation hearing we reach an agreement with the prosecutor that requires my client to complete a 2 day "in custody" alcohol class in exchange for the motion to get recalled and the diversion remains in place. A win-win resolution. Read On
February 2017
Client charged with Domestic Criminal Damage to Property. Plea agreement reached with the state on the date of trial and charge was amended to Disorderly Conduct, a Class C misdemeanor. Read On
February 2017
Felony DUI charge amended to a misdemeanor DUI after we successfully challenged the client's prior Missouri DWI convictions. A new Kansas Supreme Court case, State vs. Stanley, ruled that out-of-state DWI statutes must contain similar language to the Kansas statute in order to use the prior conviction against the accused DUI offender. Read On
December 2016
Client charged with Possession of Paraphernalia, a glass smoking pipe, after his admission of ownership while seated in the backseat of a patrol vehicle. Arresting officer failed to read defendant the Miranda warnings prior to asking questions related to the pipe and therefore defendant's admission was not admissible under the Miranda principles. Read On
December 2016
Client charged with Domestic Battery and Destruction of Property. After a bench trial, the court found Defendant Not Guilty of battery but Guilty of damage to property. Effective cross-examination of the witness, including the arresting officer, opened the door for the Not guilty finding. Read On
October 2016
Client charged with driving without having an interlock device in vehicle, facing a 90-day extension of his current restriction/suspension. Charge was dismissed after negotiations with the prosecutor. Read On
Mr. McLane´s clients benefit from his experience and reputation of being a respected, professional attorney with a strong work ethic who is committed to successfully resolving every client´s legal challenges in a Timely and Professional manner.
