Impact of McRae DUI case debated

July 19, 1999
Section: Local
Page: 1B

Berry Pamela

By Pamela Berry/Clarion-Ledger Staff Writer

Attorneys say Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Chuck McRae's successful defense of a second drunken driving charge won't cause an increase in breath test refusals.

But others, including lawmen, predict people's perception of McRae's July 7 acquittal will mean more will try to get around the state's drunken-driving laws by refusing to take the DUI test.

"The truth is that it doesn't matter whether they put their mouth on the machine and pretend to blow or refuse to blow at all, they are still guilty of refusing to take the test," said Hinds County Sheriff's Deputy Michael Ivy. "We're going to continue to act in the same manner that we've been acting. I don't see any change in the way we enforce the law."

On May 18, McRae and Jackson lawyer William B. Kirksey were riding motorcycles northbound on I-55 when a state trooper stopped McRae. McRae was charged with speeding, DUI and refusing to take a breath test. Kirksey was not charged.

Earlier this month, Hinds County Justice Court Judge Clyde Chapman found McRae innocent of the second DUI charge after ruling there was insufficient evidence in the case to prove he was impaired.

However, McRae still faced a separate action of a one-year driver's license suspension for allegedly failing to adequately blow into an Intoxilyzer machine for a breath test during the traffic stop.

McRae's attorneys sought to have the license reinstated, citing McRae's acquittal on the DUI charge.

Two days later, McRae's license was reinstated after prosecutors and Mississippi Highway Patrol officials agreed to drop the suspension.

But one lawmaker says authorities' stance on returning the license in light of McRae's acquittal sends the wrong message to others facing a DUI refusal charge.

State Rep. John Reeves of Hinds County said when the Legislature meets in six months, he plans to introduce a bill that will close a loophole in the DUI-refusal law created by officials' response to McRae's acquittal.

Reeves said the DUI-refusal law was intended to be a separate action from any criminal DUI charge. He said that regardless of the outcome of a criminal case, if a person refuses to submit to a breath test or took the test but failed to blow, they should still face a license suspension.

"I plan to make it clear that if a person refuses to take the test, he will get his license suspended for a year, and if he drives while it is suspended, he will go to jail," Reeves said. "The law ought to apply to people equally, regardless to their station in life. What will happen is that people will start to use what happened to McRae as a defense. The judge would be duty bound to do that same thing as in this case because of the equal protection clause that people have to be treated equally. The lawyers are going to use that, and you will see cases come up on appeal."

Rodgerq Moore, executive director of Mothers Against Drunken Driving, also foresees negative changes are a result of McRae's case.

"We will be looking at it and tracking it through the statistics to see how many people begin refusing tests," Moore said. "Unfortunately, it will be six months before we see anything. But I think you will see an increase in the number of refusals and as a result, more crashes that will involve alcohol. More people will think they don't have to follow the law."

Kevin Camp, a Jackson attorney who handles DUI-related cases, disputes the belief that DUI refusals will grow.

"It's very common for people to take the test and not blow hard enough or not get a result," Camp said. "Probably a third of the people arrested are charged with DUI refusal because of that. But most people don't go into a situation thinking about that because they are involved in something that has never happened to them. By the time they are arrested and taken to the station, they aren't thinking about the Chuck McRae situation. They don't take the test and they don't blow because they are afraid and in shock that they are there."

Camp said the DUI laws are biased against people because it sets up the perception that you are guilty until proven innocent. "If more people were aware of how easy it is to get charged, it would take some of this perception away. Each situation needs to be examined and looked at. That's why we're always going to school and trying to learn new ways to help our clients and attack the different tests. It's an ongoing process because the state officials are doing the same thing to convict them."

DUI attorney Vic Carmody Jr., one of 11 attorneys nationwide who founded the Harvard Law School-based National College of DUI Defense, said that while he doesn't expect an increase in DUI refusals, he does expect to see more people being educated on their rights during a DUI traffic stop.

"When you get stopped, you don't have to tell them where you've been," said Carmody, of Jackson, who has 20 years experience as a DUI attorney. "You don't have to take field sobriety tests. You have the right to refuse. Because if the officer pulls you over and smells alcohol, he will take you down anyway so you don't have to do all that other stuff at the scene. A lot of people look at the McRae case and say the message is don't take the test. I know what I would do and I simply will not say. I will let people decide on their own what to do. But McRae was found not guilty because you don't have to provide evidence against yourself."

Photo Mug McRae Pullout Quote

"I plan to make it clear that if a person refuses to take the test, he will get his license suspended for a year, and if he drives while it is suspended, he will go to jail."

- State Rep. John Reeves

photo mug Reeves