\ Click to Call Click to Text
Categories
STS&G News

Motorists who paid abusive driver fines to be offered refunds

The Virginia Supreme Court will send letters this week to some of South Hampton Roads’ worst drivers, offering them refunds for drunken- and reckless-driving fees.

Some were convicted of eluding police during the commission of a crime, while others were caught behind the wheel after lower courts had already revoked their licenses and ordered them not to drive.

At least 4,204 drivers convicted in the five cities as of the end of 2007 will be told the special fees they were once asked to pay are forgiven, according to the state Supreme Court. Those who have already paid hundreds of dollars of those extra fees will be getting refund checks.

The bad drivers are still obligated to pay their original fines for DUI, reckless driving and other offenses. They still have to pay court costs and suffer the burden of higher vehicle insurance because of their offenses.

But they’ll no longer pay the “abusive driver fees” because last month Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was persuaded by a public uproar to sign the repeal of a law that he and the General Assembly had hoped would help finance millions in interstate maintenance projects.

The fees were a small part of a huge 2007 transportation bill and were intended to punish the worst drivers with a new category of fine – a “civil remedial fee” – that would apply to crimes or misdemeanors committed while driving.

Simple traffic infractions such as ignoring a highway sign or failing to yield were not subject to the harsh new fees.

The law ensnared an estimated 58,000 Virginians who were ordered to pay the fees after the law went into effect on July 1, 2007, said Katya Herndon, director of legislative and public relations for the Supreme Court.

About 23,000 of them had begun making payments, she said.

Some of the fees were eye-openers.

Reckless driving brought three fees of $350 each that had to be paid to the Department of Motor Vehicles within 14 months of conviction. A manslaughter conviction arising from driving while intoxicated brought three annual fees of $1,000 each.

But the fees were withdrawn under an onslaught of public anger, driven in part by an online petition signed by an estimated 180,000 Virginians who wanted the law repealed. Many were confused over what offenses were included, while others objected to a provision that limited the fees to Virginia drivers only.

The repeal will force Virginia to repay $7.32 million to bad drivers, said Virginia Controller David Von Moll, of the Department of Accounts. The Virginia Department of Treasury will print the checks, he said. State officials had not yet computed how much of that money will be refunded to drivers in Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk and Virginia Beach.

“We’re trying our best to make sure that we get a check to the person who paid the fee,” Von Moll said.

The high court did not reveal the names of those convicted, but the data it did provide offered insights into driver behavior in South Hampton Roads.

More tickets were issued in Norfolk for driving on suspended or revoked licenses than in any other South Hampton Roads city, while Virginia Beach led in abusive driver fees for driving while intoxicated, records show.

Mike Goodove, coordinator of southside Virginia Mothers Against Drunk Driving, is discouraged that the fees were eliminated.

Goodove, who lost his 19-year-old brother Jeffrey to a drunken driver, felt remedial fees would have saved lives if given a chance.

“But we’ll never know now,” he said. “I thought they got a lot of people’s attention. When you get people in the pocket, it can affect their decision-making process.”

Goodove said the arguments from opponents that the fines were unfair or overly expensive “pale in comparison to the damages done by drunk drivers on the road.”

The repeal of the abusive driver fees, one of two major portions of the transportation bill of 2007 that were struck down this winter, represented a major setback for lawmakers who have struggled to develop a long-term solution for funding improvements to Virginia’s ailing transportation network.

The fees would have generated about $65 million a year for highway maintenance.

In a separate action, the state high court on Feb. 29 struck down the centerpiece of the transportation bill, saying regional transportation authorities do not have the power to impose taxes on localities. That responsibility rests solely in the hands of elected leaders, the justices said.

The ruling meant that Hampton Roads suddenly had no means to finance six long-sought transportation projects that have thus far proved impossible to build.

Virginia Beach lawyer Sonny Stallings, a former Democratic state senator, derided the civil fees as a “ridiculous attempt that was all smoke and mirrors” designed to hide the need for a statewide tax increase.

Stallings said defense lawyers in Hampton Roads benefited from the law.

“It was going to bolster our business, because the people could not pay,” he said. “If they were convicted and didn’t pay, then they’d lose their license and get a ticket for that. Then they’d be back to us again. It was a lawyer’s moneymaker.”

Categories
Archive 2007 STS&G News Goodove in the News Virginian-Pilot

Drunken Driving Fatalities Up In Virginia

Virginian-Pilot, The (Norfolk, VA)

Deaths due to drunken-driving accidents in 2006, up from 322 the year before. However, Hampton Roads deaths went down from 32 in 2005 to 22 in 2006.

For city-by-city breakdown, see Page 5. By Jen McCaffery

The Virginian-Pilot

Virginia police officers will be out in force looking to nab drunken drivers this Labor Day weekend, the third-most-deadly holiday for alcohol-related deaths.

The annual Checkpoint Strikeforce efforts are happening as state statistics show that for the first time in several years, the percentage of people killed by drunken drivers in Virginia has increased.

In 2005, there were 322 deaths in alcohol-related accidents, compared with 374 deaths in 2006, according to figures from the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles. However, in most South Hampton Roads cities, the number of fatalities from alcohol-related accidents during the same time period decreased, DMV statistics show.

Twenty-two people died locally in 2006, compared with 32 in 2005.

“Perhaps our friends in Hampton Roads are just listening a little better,” Virginia Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell said.

McDonnell, a former Virginia Beach legislator, helped implement a package of new laws that reformed the state’s DUI restrictions in 2004 .

They include harsher punishments for repeat offenders and mandatory jail time for some drunken-driving offenses.

According to the DMV report, Virginia Beach was the only city that recorded a significant increase in the number of fatalities from alcohol-related crashes .

Last year, Virginia Beach had 15 fatalities connected to people driving under the influence of alcohol.

In 2005, there were 10 deaths , DMV statistics show.

“We’ve come a long way, but the increasing number shows that impaired driving is a serious and high priority for both MADD and law enforcement,” said Mike Goodove , president of the Southside chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving .

The resort city’s DUI statistics don’t reflect the work of the Virginia Beach Police Department, which Goodove described as a model for the nation when it comes to impaired driving enforcement.

Virginia Beach police make about 10 percent of all DUI arrests in the state , said Sen. Kenneth Stolle, R-Virginia Beach, who used to work for the department.

In 2005 and 2006 , the department, which has two units dedicated to DUI enforcement, averaged about 2,000 arrests , spokesman Adam Bernstein said.

“The Virginia Beach Police Department does a great job of enforcement, but they can’t be everywhere,” Virginia Beach Commonwealth’s Attorney Harvey Bryant said.

He estimated that for every driver who is arrested on charges of driving under the influence, another 25 to 35 are on the street driving drunk.

McDonnell said he doesn’t believe that the state’s recent uptick in the percentage of fatalities statewide will become a long-term trend.

Over the past five years, the number of injuries related to people driving under the influence has decreased, he said.

Stolle, who notified next-of-kin about DUI-related deaths when he worked for the Virginia Beach Police Department’s fatality team, said it’s too soon to tell whether the numbers in South Hampton Roads reflect the impact of the new legislation.

“I would hope what you’re seeing is the beginning of a downward trend,” he said.

Jen McCaffery, (757) 446-2627,

jen.mccaffery@pilotonline.com

Memo:
lives lost in 2006

Copyright (c) 2007 The Virginian-Pilot
Record Number: 17792698

Categories
STS&G News

looking down on lindsay

WHEN IT COMES to the bad (young) girls of Hollywood messing up and seeking redemption, usually for thousands of dollars at a secluded rehab clinic, there’s never a dearth of stories, from singer Brandy’s vehicular manslaughter charges earlier this year to Paris Hilton’s jail stay.

So nary an eyebrow raised when actress/singer Lindsay Lohan got charged with her second DUI in just two months (May 27 and July 24), prompting the former Disney princess to enter yet another drinking rehab facility, this time in Utah.

Even though young adulthood can be the most rebellious period in a person’s life, when it comes to this rule-breaking stage for Hollywood’s elite teens and young adults, their actions can have a far greater impact on their adoring fans and how they deal with the news. Some say Lohan’s status of being a sweet, innocent role model has been flushed down the toilet along with her sobriety.

“Lindsay Lohan thinks that since she is famous, she can do whatever she wants and get away with it,” said Rachel Allensworth, 17, a rising senior at Hickory High School in Chesapeake.

“She is portraying this idea that it’s OK to do drugs and drink and drive, be punished for a few days and then just go out and do it again,” said Shelby Green, 15, a rising sophomore at Nansemond River High in Suffolk.

When you’re in the public eye, said Mike Goodove, coordinator of the Southside Mothers Against Drunk Driving, it’s important to be a model for fans. “She’s sending a bad message to those that look up to her.

“Anyone that drinks and drives and says after one chance (she) ‘learned her lesson,’ but doesn’t, sets an awful example,” Goodove said.

Lohan’s in her third stint in rehab, and people are paying attention to what happens next.

“She’s setting an example of what not to do, what can happen if you drink and drive – it could have been a lot worse,” said Ridgley Ingersoll of Virginia Beach, mother of two boys, 11 and 17.

“If someone told me that they looked up to her, I’d ask them about their personal goals and standards. She’s irresponsible,” said Dustin Goodwin, 16, a Hickory rising sophomore.

Kayla Robinson, 17, a rising senior at Granby High in Norfolk , added: “I’d look at someone funny if they considered her a role model. It doesn’t make any sense to invest ideas in her because she’s in rehab.”

Categories
Archive 2006 STS&G News Goodove in the News Virginian-Pilot

Man pleads guilty to manslaughter in fatal crash

Virginian-Pilot, The (Norfolk, VA)

NORFOLK – As Shane Williams prepared to leave the party, several people tried to stop him from driving.

Shaun Lawhorn asked for Williams’ keys. Lawhorn’s wife, Kate, the designated driver that evening, offered Williams a ride. Several people tried to give Williams their cards for Safe Ride , a Navy program that pays for cab fare.

They made the efforts because Williams had been drinking at a series of gatherings since 11 a.m., and had consumed beer, mixed drinks, gin and shots of Jagermeister. He refused their offers and left in his white Ford pickup about 11 p.m. on Feb. 24.

Just after midnight, Williams crashed head-on into a car driven by Anthony Dominic Wilson on Interstate 264. Williams was driving the wrong way, headed east in the west bound lanes. Williams told police and paramedics that he’d had two or three drinks.

Wilson, 26, died on the highway. When paramedics told Williams, he started crying.

“Oh God, help me please,” he said.

“Please forgive me. I don’t know what’s going on. Please forgive me, Lord.”

In Norfolk Circuit Court on Thursday, Williams, 30, pleaded guilty to aggravated involuntary manslaughter for Wilson’s death. Wilson’s parents cried quietly in the courtroom.

Prosecutor Ron Batliner wrote the account of Williams’ activities before the wreck based on interviews with people at the parties, witnesses at the roadside, and on investigations by State Police, Norfolk Police, and the Navy Criminal Investigative Service. Williams was in the Navy at the time of the crash.

Several people saw Williams driving the wrong way on I-264 before the crash. One woman called 911. Another swerved out of Williams’ way, only to see the collision in his rear-view mirror. Williams told people who had stopped to help that he had come from the HOV ramp.

The ramp was 200 yards away from the wreck, which happened near Newtown Road. Witnesses and State Police said the gates were down.

Batliner did not present evidence of Williams’ blood-alcohol concentration.

But Michael Goodove, an attorney representing Wilson’s family, said it was more than twice the legal limit considered evidence of intoxication.

Wilson was an only child, and the father of a 5-year-old boy, Goodove said.

nReach Michelle Washington at (757) 446-2287 or michelle. washington@pilotonline.com.

Memo:
next

Shane Williams faces a maximum of 20 years in the traffic death of Anthony Dominic Wilson. Williams’ sentencing is scheduled for January. He remains free on bond until then.

Copyright (c) 2006 The Virginian-Pilot
Record Number: 13616275

Categories
STS&G News

Mother of Va. Beach man killed in crash sues driver

CHESAPEAKE – The mother of a 31-year-old Virginia Beach man killed in a July 16 single-car crash in Chesapeake is suing the driver of the vehicle for being reckless and intoxicated.

Candace Wright filed the lawsuit recently in Chesapeake Circuit Court against Michael D. Conover, a 34-year-old Virginia Beach man who pleaded guilty earlier this year to involuntary manslaughter. Conover was sentenced to a year behind bars for the crash on Interstate 64 that killed Jonathan Dale McGlue.

McGlue was one of two passengers in a 1999 Isuzu Rodeo that Conover was driving when he lost control on westbound I-64 at the Greenbrier Parkway interchange. The vehicle flipped several times.

The lawsuit seeks $5 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. Wright, through her attorney Michael Goodove, filed the suit on behalf of the estate of her son.

The lawsuit accuses Conover of operating the vehicle in a reckless, negligent manner at excessive speeds. It also said Conover was under the influence of intoxicants.

McGlue was ejected from the sport utility vehicle . He died at Chesapeake General Hospital, police said. A front-seat passenger, who was the owner of the SUV, also was injured.

Conover had a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.24 – three times the legal limit for driving – prosecutors said during his criminal prosecution.

Categories
Goodove in the News Virginian-Pilot Archive 2006 STS&G News

Charge withdrawn in homeless man’s death

THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT VIRGINIA BEACH — Prosecutors on Tuesday withdrew a murder charge against a Norfolk man who was accused of shooting a homeless man at the Oceanfront last year.

Lamar A. Sinclair, 22, of the 900 block of Lexington St. in Norfolk, had been charged with first-degree murder in the death of Ronald Wood Jr., 34.

Wood was shot May 26 near the intersection of Baltic Avenue and 24½ Street, police said.

Prosecutors did not explain either in court or after the hearing why they decided to withdraw the charge.
They said they could refile the charge against Sinclair sometime in the future.
He is expected to be released from jail this afternoon.
Another man also was charged in Wood’s murder.
Derrick D. Harrison of the 5200 block of Novella St. in Norfolk is scheduled to stand trial starting March 28.
Categories
Archive 2005 STS&G News Goodove in the News Virginian-Pilot

Some question lawyer’s melding of cause, career

THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT

BY JON FRANK

NORFOLK – Almost 15 years ago, Michael L. Goodove was a law school student when his legal career and life were altered forever.

On a February morning in 1990, Goodove’s younger brother, Jeffrey, was riding in a car that was hit by another vehicle on a narrow, hilly road in Charlottesville.

Jeffrey, a University of Virginia student, was killed instantly.

The driver of the other car was drunk.

Goodove received the tragic news at George Mason University from his mother via telephone.

“I got the call nobody wants to get,” Goodove recalled in a recent interview. “I had never experienced death until my brother was killed. It was the first funeral I ever went to.”

That combination – drunken driving and tragedy – profoundly changed Goodove’s personal life. His family, especially his parents, were never the same.

“It is extremely unnatural to bury a child,” said Goodove, who is now married with three children . “That is something no one should ever have to go through.”

The experience of loss also came to define much of Goodove’s professional life, providing both controversy and a cause – as well as a source of commerce – to his vocation as a lawyer .

In the years since his brother’s death, Goodove has become a lawyer who represents people injured by drunken drivers and a prominent spokesman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving. He has been the group’s leader for the past 12 years.

In that capacity, Goodove has helped many families navigate the legal system after loved ones were injured or killed by DUI offenders.

“I consider what he does to be a real public service,” said Kaye Walsh, whose daughter, Robin Gustafson, was killed by a drunken driver in Virginia Beach in 1997. “He pulled us through the whole process.”

Goodove also has lobbied the General Assembly tirelessly to stiffen penalties for people convicted of DUI. Virginia now has some of the toughest drunken-driving laws in the country.

Through the years, Goodove became the face of Mothers Against Drunk Driving in South Hampton Roads, an implausible development because Goodove clearly is not a mother.

But his regular appearances in court and on television have made Goodove’s good looks and quiet confidence well-known among those interested in or personally touched by drunken driving.

A recent television advertisement by his Norfolk law firm – Rabinowitz, Swartz, Taliaferro, Swartz & Goodove – focuses on Goodove’s personal story of tragedy.

The blending of commerce with crusade makes some in the legal community uncomfortable. They say Goodove uses his advocacy role, in part, to get business for his law firm.

But some lawyers support Goodove’s ability to turn a passionate personal interest into something that helps him in his professional life.

“I don’t see any conflict,” said Michael I. Ashe, a Virginia Beach lawyer and avid cyclist with a long history of representing fellow cyclists in personal-injury cases.

The advertisement, Ashe said, is only “stating that you are a lawyer who happens to know this particular field backward and forward.”

Other lawyers say Goodove’s level of commitment to the organization makes conflict allegations ridiculous.

“If he had to pay money to be involved with MADD, he would do it,” said Norfolk lawyer Larry Cardon. “He has a passion for this.”

To Goodove, the criticism is unfounded.

For one thing, he said, he always provides drunken-driving victims a list of other lawyers who could represent them in any legal proceeding. Those who choose him are a very small part of his legal practice, he said.

“Never once did I have any financial motivation for getting involved in it,” Goodove said. “I felt that I had a tool that would really help these victims that no one else had.”

It wasn’t always that way.

Early on, Goodove was as carefree and selfish as most recent college graduates. He wanted a glitzy career on Wall Street, not a job where grieving was an integral part of every working day.

He attended law school at the urging of his parents. Law would provide a profession he could always fall back on, they said.

His legal training had hardly begun when his brother was killed. It was a tremendous shock. “He was not just my brother; he was my best friend,” Goodove said.

The family gathered at home in South Hampton Roads to bury Jeffrey, hoping to bring the person who had killed him to justice. Soon, however, the reality of Virginia’s lax drunken-driving laws became depressingly apparent.

They found the police had botched the evidence collection. The drunken driver had been allowed to dispose of the beer in his car before he was questioned by authorities. That led prosecutors in Charlottesville not to pursue criminal charges.

The Goodove family persevered. Eventually, they had to be satisfied with a wrongful-death lawsuit. Criminal charges were never filed.

At that point, Goodove recalled, he began to “detach” from the situation to escape the tragic memories haunting the rest of his family. Returning to George Mason University, he plunged back into his law studies.

But he was troubled by the way he and his family had been treated by authorities. He thought the system was out of whack. He thought it cared little for bringing DUI offenders to justice and nothing for victims.

Soul searching followed, along with an internship in the Fairfax County prosecutor’s office.

“I discovered that I was good in court and liked wearing the white hat and being the good guy,” Goodove said.

When he returned to his hometown of Virginia Beach, he decided to devote his career to helping victims. He went to work for a personal injury law firm and contacted the state chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving .

After starting a local chapter , attending conferences and talking to others, he concluded that drunken driving was a societal problem, deeply imbedded in the culture, cutting across economic strata.

The key problem was that most drunken drivers were walking away from even fatal accidents with rarely more than a slap on the wrist .

“The problem we faced was not so much the convictions but the punishment,” Goodove said.

Goodove’s goal was to build an organization with staying power that would help reshape attitudes over the long term.

That presence has allowed Mothers Against Drunk Driving to keep the image of victims before the media and public. Eventually, it has swung public opinion toward stiffer penalties, especially for repeat offenders.

Another victory was the acceptance of victim-impact statements after convictions. Under the old system, DUI offenders would walk away with probation, without the victims’ families being able to say how the injury or death had affected them.

Once victim-impact statements became part of the law, penalties became harsher. “They can be very powerful,” Goodove said.

Goodove strived to become a bridge between victims and prosecutors, leading the uninitiated through the maze like legal process that had so frustrated his own family.

Initially, Goodove faced opposition. Some judges thought Mothers Against Drunk Driving wanted to abolish alcohol use and that Goodove was a teetotaler who did not want to be around drinkers.

Neither was true.

Goodove drinks occasionally but makes certain he always has alternative transportation. And Mothers Against Drunk Driving has no intention of trying to stop people from drinking, only drinking and driving.

Today, when contacted by a DUI victim, Goodove meets the family and counsels them about what to expect. He provides them with support and advice and helps them prepare victim-impact statements at the appropriate time.

As the number of DUI accidents increases, so do the organization’s membership and donor rolls.

“Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a tragic event to make it close to your heart,” Goodove said.

Victims who survive have a simple choice, Goodove said: “You can vent angrily and let that dominate you, or you can use the pain in a cathartic manner to do some good.”

* Reach Jon Frank at 222-5122 or jon.frank@pilotonline.com.

{CAPTION} Michael L. Goodove’s brother was killed by a drunken driver 15 years ago. Goodove, right, a lawyer who also heads the local chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, has championed his cause and worked for tougher laws in Virginia.

Mort Fryman The Virginian-Pilot

Copyright (c) 2005 The Virginian-Pilot
Record Number: 7828775

Categories
STS&G News

Beach nightclub sued over wreck that killed 4 suit: Peabody’s responsible for drunken driver

Three lawsuits stemming from a deadly highway collision in 2001 were filed Thursday against Peabody’s, a popular Oceanfront nightclub where the driver responsible for the wreck had been drinking.

Enrique Lopez, a 21-year-old sailor serving aboard the carrier George Washington, was driving his Ford Mustang the wrong way on Interstate 264 on May 11, 2001, when he slammed into another vehicle that was traveling in the opposite direction.

Three women in the other car – including 19-year-old Debra Van Sickle, an expectant mother – were killed. Lopez also died.

The lawsuits seek a total of $36.05 million in damages and attempt to hold Peabody’s responsible for contributing to the accident.

Andrew M. Sacks, the Norfolk lawyer who filed the lawsuits in Virginia Beach Circuit Court, said during a news conference Thursday that Peabody’s employees threw Lopez out of the club because he was extremely drunk and had become disorderly.

The lawsuits maintain that once employees “took control” of Lopez, Sacks said, they should have turned him over to authorities.

“The crux of this is that once they observed him, they took immediate steps,” Sacks said. “But they failed to complete that duty.”

Sacks said the club took the attitude that “as long as he is not a problem to us, we don’t care what he does.”

Virginia is one of the few states without “Dram Shop” legislation, which holds bars and restaurants responsible for serving alcohol to customers who then commit crimes or cause accidents. The absence of such legislation shields many businesses in Virginia’s tourism and restaurant industries from lawsuits.

Michael L. Goodove, a Norfolk lawyer who is president of the local chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said at Thursday’s news conference that the lobby representing the state’s restaurants and bars has successfully fought to keep “dram shop” legislation from getting out of committees in Richmond.

He said 44 states have such laws and that Sacks’ suits address the vacuum by creating for bars an area of “special responsibility that is a long time in coming.”

The lawsuits do not allege that Peabody’s was negligent in serving Lopez, Sacks said. Instead, they argue that Peabody’s failed to protect the public from “carnage” caused by someone the club took control of and then released “into the stream of humanity.”

Lopez had a blood-alcohol level of 0.27 at the time of the accident, well above Virginia’s legal limit of 0.08, according to police. He also is named in the lawsuits as a defendant.

Richard H. Doummar, the Virginia Beach lawyer who represents the nightclub, said Thursday that although the situation was tragic, “Peabody’s did everything they could as required by the law to do the right thing.”

Peabody’s is at 21st Street and Pacific Avenue. Doummar said the nightclub already has been cleared by the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

“It is just a tough situation dealing with someone who is intoxicated,” Doummar said.

Two of the lawsuits were filed on behalf of 24-year-old Earl A. Sanders IV.

Sanders’ mother, Shirley J. Vinson, 44, was killed in the accident, as was his fiancee, 30-year-old Beverley S. Carter.

A suit in Vinson’s name asks for $15.35 million. The one for Carter asks for $5.35 million.

The third suit, which also asks for $15.35 million, was filed on behalf of Henry Sanders, who was injured in the crash. Sanders now lives in Fort Worth, Texas, and still suffers from his injuries, Sacks said.

Van Sickle’s survivors are represented by Virginia Beach attorney William R. “Buster” O’Brien, who said he filed a suit against Lopez last year. He did not name Peabody’s as a defendant.

Van Sickle was on the way to the hospital at the time of the accident to possibly deliver her baby

Categories
STS&G News

Legal system’s flaws let drunken drivers get back behind wheel evidence problems, loopholes in laws, lenient judges leave some repeat offenders free to return to the streets

An urgent question lingered after Roy Lee Everett was charged in a Norfolk car crash last month that killed a 16-year-old boy.

Why was he even behind the wheel?

Everett, it turned out, had been charged with driving drunk six times before and convicted three times. He now has three DUI cases pending.

The system usually stops repeat offenders before it’s too late, authorities say. But some, like Everett, have avoided severe punishment because of legal loopholes, problems with evidence and lenient judges.

Most have not hurt anyone. Yet they are out there, and they pose a threat: Alcohol was a factor in 41 percent of vehicle deaths last year in Virginia.

In South Hampton Roads, 428 people were convicted of their third or subsequent DUI offense between 1999 and 2002, according to an analysis of Virginia Supreme Court data.

In recent years, court records show, others have amassed even more drunken-driving convictions than Everett:

A Portsmouth man has racked up nine DUI arrests and seven convictions in two decades. His latest charge came in May, while he was free on bond and awaiting sentencing on his seventh conviction.

A Virginia Beach man was sentenced to a year in jail for his fifth DUI in 20 years. A month later, a different judge in the same city gave him 10 days for his sixth offense.

Another man at the Beach was convicted of his sixth DUI in nine years. He was sentenced to two state rehabilitation programs for a year and received a suspended prison term.

Privacy laws make it difficult to determine how many drivers have similar records.

“It’s not a matter of whether they’re drinking and driving,” said state Sen. Kenneth W. Stolle, a Virginia Beach Republican and lawyer. “It’s a matter of whether we catch them when they’re drinking and driving.”

Old laws and judicial discretion allowed Van Ivan Malone to compile his DUI record.

Between 1988 and 1998, Malone’s final sentence on five DUI convictions never exceeded six months in jail, according to court records. One reason: The offenses happened before the General Assembly made a third or subsequent DUI conviction a felony with stiffer sentences.

Last summer, after four years without a charge, Malone was arrested when Portsmouth police stopped him late one night for driving with the headlights off. Because of his record, he was not supposed to be driving at all.

He pleaded guilty to felony DUI in November. His sentencing was scheduled for February, and he continued to be free on $500 bond.

The court date was delayed four times, including once when the judge was out for health reasons.

Meanwhile, Malone was caught on the road last month and again charged with DUI. This time, a Portsmouth officer heard him squeal his tires and saw him swerve.

Malone, 45, now is being held without bond. Last week, Portsmouth Circuit Judge Johnny E. Morrison again delayed sentencing on the seventh conviction. The judge said he wanted to determine whether Malone would have transportation to work from jail.

Mary Harris, the prosecutor handling the case, told the judge that Malone should be put behind bars.

“Everything has been tried with Mr. Malone,” Harris said. “He still doesn’t get it, and nothing is working on him.”

Malone is scheduled to be sentenced today. Morrison said he could not comment on the case because it was pending, and Malone declined to be interviewed.

His wife, Isobel Malone, said her husband had a difficult childhood in West Virginia. His mother left when he was 4, she said, and his father regularly brought him to bars when he was young.

He has struggled with alcohol ever since, but he has been mostly clean for the past several years, she said.

Malone is a construction company supervisor, and he supports his wife and their 5-year-old daughter. He drinks occasionally, when he goes bowling on the weekends or is under stress, Isobel Malone said.

Although she wants her husband to return home, she said he deserves to be punished and needs help.

“He’s very remorseful: `Why did I do this? Why have I done this to us?’ ” she said. “The only thing I’m thankful for is nobody is hurt.”

Under state law, punishments for DUI are supposed to increase with each conviction.

To win a new conviction against a repeat offender, prosecutors must prove that the person was found guilty of DUI before and that the earlier cases were handled properly.

If there are problems with evidence or if the paperwork from previous convictions is incomplete or unavailable, repeat offenders can receive sentences that do not reflect their history.

Jeff Alan Morelen, 41, had four convictions when he was arrested in August 1999 on another DUI charge in Virginia Beach, according to court records.

Six months later, he was arrested yet again. A magistrate scrawled “Danger to Society” on his paperwork and recommended no bond.

For his fifth DUI conviction, Morelen was sentenced in April 2000 to 12 months in jail.

His next case came up a month later, and it was unusual, according to Ronald G. Reel, the Virginia Beach prosecutor who handled it.

Reel had to show that the offense was committed after July 1, 1999, the date fourth-offense DUI became a felony in Virginia.

Reel said he neglected to establish the year of the offense during the trial. He feared that overlooking such a detail would lead the judge to dismiss the case. So he negotiated a plea agreement.

For the original felony charge, Morelen faced up to five years in prison. Instead, the sixth charge was reduced to DUI second offense, a misdemeanor.

Virginia Beach Circuit Judge A. Bonwill Shockley sentenced Morelen to 12 months in jail, with all of the time suspended except 10 days. Morelen also received probation and a $200 fine, and his license was suspended for three years.

Shockley could not be reached for comment.

In an interview, Morelen said he turned to alcohol when he had problems. He said he would drive home after a night of drinking and shooting pool.

“I’d think about it, but I was right there by the house,” he said. “I was not incoherent.”

He never consented to blood-alcohol tests when stopped by police, he said.

Sometimes, like after Christmas parties, he got a hotel room rather than drive home drunk, he said. He also said he had one accident, when he hit a telephone pole on a rainy night.

Though Morelen escaped the maximum punishment, he did lose his job, at least temporarily. For 20 years, he had worked as an electrical engineer. He said he lost his government security clearance because of the DUI convictions.

“I regret what I did, drinking and driving,” he said. “It ruined my life pretty much.”

Virginia has minimum sentences for each DUI conviction. But judges have broad discretion in setting penalties.

Ricky Lee Breiholz, 44, had five DUI convictions when he was arrested in December 1999 on another DUI charge and a related count, according to court records.

Six months later, Virginia Beach Circuit Judge Kenneth N. Whitehurst Jr. assigned him to probation and to attend two state-run residential programs, which focus on rehabilitating nonviolent offenders through employment, community service, education, substance-abuse treatment and military-style discipline.

Breiholz also was fined $250, and his license was suspended for six months. He was ordered not to drink and to enter substance-abuse treatment, according to court records.

The judge sentenced him to a total of nine years in prison for the DUI charge and the other count. All of the time was suspended.

Whitehurst has since retired from the bench and could not be reached for comment.

Harvey L. Bryant III, the Virginia Beach commonwealth’s attorney, said the decision in Breiholz’s case was unusual.

“I’m certain it would not happen today,” he said. “I don’t know why it happened then.”

Patrick J. Connolly, the prosecutor in Breiholz’s case, said he did not recall the details of the sentencing hearing but said his office probably would have asked for jail time under such circumstances.

Breiholz has since been charged with violating his probation, and Connolly said he would ask for the full nine-year prison term if he found that Breiholz had been caught drinking and driving. “That would be a no-brainer,” he said.

In an interview from the Chesapeake City Jail, Breiholz said nine years would be too stiff a punishment. He never wrecked a car or hurt anyone while driving drunk, he said, and people who commit more serious offenses are sentenced to less time.

Breiholz said there was an eight-year period during which he would drink up to two cases of beer a week. He said he avoided driving if he was stumbling or thought he would make the car swerve.

“You can tell if you can’t drive, if you’ve had too much,” Breiholz said. “I would leave my car there if I was too drunk.”

Breiholz said the state rehab programs inspired him to turn his life around.

But last year, he violated the judge’s order by getting drunk, according to court records. On a visit to a parole and probation officer, Breiholz’s blood-alcohol concentration was .25 percent – slightly more than three times the legal limit.

A probation and parole officer wrote that Breiholz “is still consuming alcohol, most likely still driving,” and “this officer is greatly concerned and strongly feels that he needs to be taken off of the streets immediately.”

Since 1999, state law has required at least a year in jail for a fourth DUI offense within a decade. A year later, the punishment for a third offense was changed to at least 10 days in jail.

Both charges are felonies with a maximum punishment of five years in prison.

Some lawmakers, activists and prosecutors say DUI laws should be tightened further. They suggest requiring the presence of prosecutors in all DUI court cases, withholding bond from anyone charged with a third or subsequent offense and increasing mandatory minimum jail sentences.

“Judges have to stop making so many arbitrary decisions,” said David Kelly, public policy liaison for Virginia’s Mothers Against Drunk Driving organization.

Others say judges should be able to base decisions about bond and sentences on individual cases.

“We should have the faith in them to do the right thing,” said Lawrence Cardon, a local defense attorney.

Since Roy Lee Everett’s crash last month, local judges have felt increased pressure to be stricter with suspected drunken drivers.

“I think the judges are doing a good job in changing the landscape,” said state Del. Kenneth R. Melvin, a Portsmouth Democrat and defense attorney.

But Michael Goodove, president of MADD’s local chapter, said repeat offenders tend to continue their dangerous habits unless they are locked up.

“Someone that has three, four, five DUIs,” he said, “usually ends up maiming or killing somebody.”

Categories
STS&G News

Driver faced DUI charge three weeks before crash after posting bond on Norfolk charges, he was free from jail

A man facing his seventh drunken-driving charge after the crash Tuesday that killed a high school student was charged with driving drunk three weeks ago, but regained his freedom within hours by posting a $1,000 bond.

Roy Lee Everett, 30, was charged Tuesday with running a red light, driving under the influence and 10 other violations in the crash that killed 16-year-old Landon Chambers and injured his brother, Barney.

Everett is being held without bail in the Norfolk City Jail.

Everett has been behind bars before. He has three previous DUI convictions in Virginia Beach. And he was arrested for drunken driving most recently on April 14.

That’s when, court records say, Norfolk Officer W.E. Whiteside stopped him for driving recklessly at the wheel of a Jaguar.

Whiteside smelled alcohol.

“I asked if he had been drinking and he stated yes, 4 Mike’s Lemonades in an hour,” Whiteside wrote in papers filed in Norfolk General District Court.

A Department of Motor Vehicles records check showed Everett’s three prior convictions for DUI, Whiteside noted, as well as three previous convictions for driving on a suspended license.

In addition to the third-offense DUI, Whiteside charged Everett with driving after his driving privileges had been suspended.

Magistrate J.D. Bullock Jr. set Everett’s bond at $1,000 at 3:16 a.m. on April 14, according to court records. Everett posted bail through a bonding company at 4:57 a.m. and was freed.

Michael Goodove, an attorney and president of the Southside Chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said anyone charged with a third-offense DUI, a felony, should not be allowed to post a bond and be freed from custody.

“Our position is the criminal justice system’s paramount responsibility is to protect lives,” he said. “Research has shown that your hardcore, repetitive drunk-driving offenders are the folks most

likely to injure or kill somebody.”

Three weeks after his release, police contend, Everett drove a pickup through a red light at North Military Highway and Azalea Garden Road into the path of the Chambers brothers, who were traveling in a Honda Civic. The impact crumpled their car and flipped the pickup on its side. Witnesses said Everett climbed from the pickup’s rear window and ran. Citizens cornered him behind a carpet store until police arrived to arrest him.

Bullock could not be reached for comment.

Chief Magistrate Beth B. Pennington said she spoke with him briefly about the bond and intends to meet with him in the coming week.

“At this point, I have to trust the magistrate’s judgment,” she said. “He’s been a magistrate for a while.”

By setting bonds, magistrates try to ensure that defendants show up in court, she said, noting they don’t determine guilt or innocence. She said they consider the length of time a defendant has lived in the area, family ties, any prior record and their likelihood to appear in court.

“No matter how high it’s set, a person can still bond out,” Pennington said.

This week’s DUI charge is the latest in a long list of serious driving infractions for Everett, stretching back to at least 1994.

During the past eight years, Everett has been convicted multiple times for a variety of charges, including reckless driving and speeding.

Everett’s three DUI convictions in Virginia Beach started with a charge in 1994. Five years later, in May 1999, Everett was charged with DUI, second offense.

In December 1999, he was charged again with DUI, second offense.

That last charge resulted in Everett getting the maximum jail penalty for second-offense-DUI – 12 months in jail, according Judge Albert D. Alberi, who sentenced Everett in Virginia Beach General District Court.

But Alberi suspended 11 months of the time and allowed Everett to serve the resulting monthlong sentence on weekends in the Virginia Beach City Jail.

It was not clear on Friday why Everett was not charged that December with DUI, third offense.

DUI, third offense, became a felony when state law was changed by the General Assembly in July 1999. It carries a maximum prison sentence of five years and can be lodged against any drunken driver who has two prior DUI convictions within the past 10 years.

Mark T. Del Duca, a Virginia Beach lawyer and former Beach prosecutor, explained Friday that Everett’s December DUI charge in 1999 may have occurred before his May 1999 offense had made its way through the court system.

If that were the case, it may have been impossible for Everett to be charged with DUI, third offense, in December 1999, Del Duca said.

Everett also was charged with second-offense DUI in Norfolk in January 1998, but the count was dismissed, online court records say.

Another DUI charge, in Emporia in August 1997, was dismissed, according to online court records.