Case Wins

R. Michael Vang, P.C. makes no guarantee as to the outcome of any case. Each case is different including facts, circumstances, and situations.

2019

Case: Client charged with running red light, failing to maintain single lane of travel and DUI. After receiving discovery and video recording of the stop and arrest, pretrial motions are filed on the client's behalf. After reviewing the discovery, the State agrees to amend DUI charge and to grant first offender treatment.

Result: DUI charge is amended and client is granted first offender treatment on amended charge, with possibility conviction for amended charge will go away, if client does not violate terms of unsupervised probation.

Case: Client is stopped and charged with running a red light, which is captured on video. Client is required to do field sobriety maneuvers and is arrested for DUI. While at jail, client requests to speak with attorney prior to submitting to any chemical tests, which Trooper advises in not possible under Wyoming's implied consent law. Because client refuses to provide breath or blood samples without speaking to an attorney, client is also charged with interference with a peace officer. Pretrial motions are denied and case is set for jury trial.

Result: Prior to jury trial State dismisses the interference with a police officer charge. Jury finds client guilty of running red light but not guilty of the DUI charge.

2018

Case: Client stopped from driving without headlights close to bar. Client charged with being under the influence for alcohol t a degree incapable of safely driving after producing a breath test with a BAC of .07%. Client offered first offender deferred prosecution in exchange for guilty plea and client rejects plea offer and goes to jury trial
Result: Jury Acquits client of driving under the influence to a degree incapable of safely driving.

Case: Client accused of failing to maintain a single lane of travel and arrested for driving under the influence by main Trooper in charge of teaching other law enforcement how to administer and assess standardized field sobriety maneuvers. Client has commercial driver's license and DUI in non-commercial vehicle would result in loss of commercial driver's license for one (1) - year. After filing pretrial motions, Court agrees that Trooper failed to comply with rules and regulations for breath testing and suppress a BAC measurement of 0.15%.
Result: State dismisses DUI charge and client pays fine and court costs for the failure to maintain a single lane of travel charge.

Case: Client charged with disturbing peace, interference with a peace officer, possession of controlled substance and driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs. After filing pretrial motions and right before motion hearing, State agrees to dismiss all charges, but the disturbing a peace charge, if client will plead "no contest" to disturbing peace.
Result: All charges but disturbing peace are dismissed and client pays fine and court costs.

Case: Client charged with running a red light and is arrested for second offense DUI-charge. Client allegedly provides blood samples with 0.15% BAC. After filing pretrial motions, trial court agrees chain of custody problems with blood samples and suppresses blood test results.
Result: Two (2) - weeks prior to jury trial State offers to dismiss DUI charge if client pleads to running red light, which is captured on video. Client accepts offer and second offense DUI charge is dismissed and client is fined for traffic offense

Case: Off-duty police officer, who claims to be a drug recognition expert, calls in client for REDDI report, because officer claims client appeared to be under the influence of drugs while parked in a bank parking lot. Other officer arrives and after performing field sobriety maneuvers arrests client for being under the influence of drugs. The trial court denies all pretrial motions and case goes to jury trial.
Result: Jury acquits client of driving under the influence of drugs

Case: Client is accused of possession of controlled substance - marijuana, after being stopped by Wyoming Highway Patrol Trooper for failing to maintain a single lane of travel. After obtaining discovery in case and filing various pretrial motions, State agrees invalid stop in this case.
Result: All charges dismissed by prosecutor.

Case: Client accused of engaging in a fight and charged with battery. Because there is no possibility of jail time with the offense, there is no right to a jury trial and the case is set for a bench trial to the court.
Result: After watching videos of interviews with clients and the alleged victim and hearing the testimony of witnesses the trial court acquits client of battery charge.

Case: Client stopped for speeding by Wyoming Highway Patrol and is charged with possession of controlled substance-marijuana; and, being under the influence of drugs (DUID) (marijuana). After receiving discovery file pretrial motions in the case. State agrees cannot prove the DUID charge and agrees to consent to first offender treatment for client's possession of controlled substance charge.
Result: DUID charge is dismissed and client is granted deferred prosecution of possession of controlled substance charge.

2017

Case: Client stopped from driving without headlights close to bar. Client charged with being under the influence for alcohol t a degree incapable of safely driving after producing a breath test with a BAC of .07%. Client offered first offender deferred prosecution in exchange for guilty plea and client rejects plea offer and goes to jury trial
Result: Jury Acquits client of driving under the influence to a degree incapable of safely driving.
Case: Client accused of failing to maintain a single lane of travel and arrested for driving under the influence by main Trooper in charge of teaching other law enforcement how to administer and assess standardized field sobriety maneuvers. Client has commercial driver’s license and DUI in non-commercial vehicle would result in loss of commercial driver’s license for one (1) – year. After filing pretrial motions, Court agrees that Trooper failed to comply with rules and regulations for breath testing and suppress a BAC measurement of 0.15%.
Result: State dismisses DUI charge and client pays fine and court costs for the failure to maintain a single lane of travel charge.
3. Case: Client charged with disturbing peace, interference with a peace officer, possession of controlled substance and driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs. After filing pretrial motions and right before motion hearing, State agrees to dismiss all charges, but the disturbing a peace charge, if client will plead “no contest” to disturbing peace.
Result: All charges but disturbing peace are dismissed and client pays fine and court costs.
4. Case: Client charged with running a red light and is arrested for second offense DUI-charge. Client allegedly provides blood samples with 0.15% BAC. After filing pretrial motions, trial court agrees chain of custody problems with blood samples and suppresses blood test results.
Result: Two (2) – weeks prior to jury trial State offers to dismiss DUI charge if client pleads to running red light, which is captured on video. Client accepts offer and second offense DUI charge is dismissed and client is fined for traffic offense
5. Case: Off-duty police officer, who claims to be a drug recognition expert, calls in client for REDDI report, because officer claims client appeared to be under the influence of drugs while parked in a bank parking lot. Other officer arrives and after performing field sobriety maneuvers arrests client for being under the influence of drugs. The trial court denies all pretrial motions and case goes to jury trial.
Result: Jury acquits client of driving under the influence of drugs
6. Case: Client is accused of possession of controlled substance – marijuana, after being stopped by Wyoming Highway Patrol Trooper for failing to maintain a single lane of travel. After obtaining discovery in case and filing various pretrial motions, State agrees invalid stop in this case.
Result: All charges dismissed by prosecutor.
7. Case: Client accused of engaging in a fight and charged with battery. Because there is no possibility of jail time with the offense, there is no right to a jury trial and the case is set for a bench trial to the court.
Result: After watching videos of interviews with clients and the alleged victim and hearing the testimony of witnesses the trial court acquits client of battery charge.
8. Case: Client stopped for speeding by Wyoming Highway Patrol and is charged with possession of controlled substance-marijuana; and, being under the influence of drugs (DUID) (marijuana). After receiving discovery file pretrial motions in the case. State agrees cannot prove the DUID charge and agrees to consent to first offender treatment for client’s possession of controlled substance charge.
Result: DUID charge is dismissed and client is granted deferred prosecution of possession of controlled substance charge.

2016

FELONY "SERIOUS BODILY INJURY" DUI CHARGE IS DISMISSED AFTER FILING PRETRIAL MOTIONS ON CLIENT'S BEHALF

Case: Client and another individual are injured on an all-terrain-vehicle (ATV) and after both individuals recover from injuries sustained in accident and the Client is eventually charged with a felony serious bodily injury DUI charge. The Client hires another attorney, who allows the matter to be set for jury trial. The matter is set for final pretrial conference and Mr. R. Michael Vang enters his appearance and reviews discovery. Mr. Vang files a number of pretrial motions and requests a motion hearing. After an initial hearing concerning the motions and resetting the matter for further hearings and a jury trial, the State of Wyoming admits it cannot prove the charge and the matter is dismissed and the jury trial is vacated.

Result: The Felony "Serious Bodily Injury" DUI charge was dismissed after Mr. Vang was substituted as counsel and the State reviewed Mr. Vang's suppression motions.

2016

Laramie "Aggravated Offender" DUI Ordinance "[f]louts the uniformly applicable statutes governing traffic regulation"

On New Years Day in 2011, the City of Laramie began enforcing its new "aggravated offender" DUI ordinance, which created minimum mandatory jail sentences for anyone accused of having a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) result of 0.15% or more. The minimum mandatory jail sentences were significantly harsher than the sentences created for the exact same behavior under Wyoming's DUI law.

Because the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance requires a minimum mandatory jail sentence upon a conviction, Mr. Vang has argued that the BAC level of 0.15% or more is an element of the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance, which must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Vang has also argued that an accused is entitled to a lesser included offense jury instruction for allegedly having a BAC level of 0.08% or more in any case where the City of Laramie proceeds to trial with an "Aggravated Offender" DUI charge.

Finally, Mr. Vang has argued that the minimum mandatory jail sentences created by the City of Laramie's "aggravated offender" DUI ordinance cannot be enforced, where City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance treats citizens in the State of Wyoming differently for the exact same behavior in an area of law that is highly regulated by the Wyoming Legislature and requires uniformity.

On October 20, 2015, the Wyoming Supreme Court accepted review of two (2) of Mr. Vang's "Aggravated Offender" DUI cases to answer the legal questions concerning whether the 0.15% or more BAC level, which triggered the minimum mandatory jail sentences created by the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance, was an element of the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance that required a proper lesser included offense instruction. The Wyoming Supreme Court also agreed to determine whether the City of Laramie's "aggravated offender" DUI ordinance was otherwise conflicted with Wyoming law.

Although the City of Laramie admitted that the BAC level of 0.15% or more within the City of Laramie's "aggravated offender" DUI ordinance was an element that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in order to enforce minimum mandatory jail sentences and would require a proper lesser included offense instruction, if requested; the City of Laramie continued to maintain that it could continue to enforce the harsher penalties of the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance.

On June 10, 2016, the Wyoming Supreme Court agreed that the City of Laramie's "Aggravated Offender" DUI ordinance "[f]louts the uniformly applicable statutes governing traffic regulation", Wofford and Walters v. City of Laramie, 2016 WY 59, ¶ 1 (Wyo. 2016), and determined that "Laramie Municipal Ordinance 10.24.030(H) is therefore void." Wofford and Walters v. City of Laramie, 2016 WY 59, ¶ 1 (Wyo. 2016). As a result of the Wyoming Supreme Court's decision, the City of Laramie can no longer treat people differently in the City of Laramie than they are treated elsewhere in the State of Wyoming for the exact same behavior.

Taylor Wofford v. City of Laramie
Date: June 10, 2016
Citation: 2016 WY 59
Docket Numbers: S-15-0226, S-15-0227


Blood Samples Ruled Inadmissible in DUI case.

The Campbell County Circuit Court ruled that the chemical test results for the DUI case were not admissible, where the State of Wyoming could not establish proper chain of custody for the blood samples of interest. Indicating that the suppression of evidence would require the State of Wyoming to dismiss the underlying DUI charge, the State of Wyoming is currently appealing the suppression ruling.

DUI/Reckless Driving Charges Dismissed

After Mr. Vang entered appearance and questioned law enforcement's claim that the accused was impaired by drugs, based upon law enforcement's alleged specialized knowledge and training to detect drug and alcohol impairment and questions the validity of any chemical test measurements/results from mandatory urine testing, the Lincoln County Attorney's Office agrees to dismiss pending criminal charges based upon lack of sufficient proof to proceed with the case.

2015

Client Charged with DWUI

Case: Client was arrested and charged with DWUI

Jury Verdict: Guilty

Appeal: After denying Mr. Vang's client's request to have the following question certified to the Wyoming Supreme Court: "If, under Missouri v. McNeely, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not establish a per se exigency, does W.S. § 31-6-102(a)(i) facially violate Article 1 § 4 of the Wyoming Constitution and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution?"; the District Court overturned the DUI conviction holding that Wyoming's implied consent law did not apply to the facts of the case, given the lack of evidence to place the accused upon a "public street or highway", which is a necessary condition for admitting a chemical test result in a DUI case pursuant to Wyoming's implied consent law.

Client Charged with "Aggravated Offender" DWUI

Case: Client was arrested and charged with "aggravated offender" DWUI for allegedly having a BAC result of 0.15% or more in violation of LMO 10.24.030(H).

Jury Verdict: Not Guilty

Client Charged with DUI (4th Offense)

Case: Client was arrested for having actual physical control of a motor vehicle with an alleged BAC result of 0.15% after a REDDI report had been made claiming the client had run a stop sign and almost hit a vehicle prior to contact with law enforcement.

Outcome: Not Guilty

Client Charged with Failure to Maintain Lane and DWUI (Subsequent Offense)

Case: Client was arrested for driving while under the influence of alcohol (DWUI), after the client was discovered trying to remove a vehicle from a ditch. Client admits to talking on cell phone resulting in loss of control on a dirt road. Client cited with failure to maintain a single lane of travel and client allegedly provided a BAC result of 0.13% on the Intoximeter EC/IR.

Outcome: Not Guilty on all charges

Client Charged with Failure to Maintain Lane, Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) and Possession of a Controlled Substance

Case: Client was arrested in commercial vehicle after a REDDI report alleged that client had been weaving in and out of traffic on Interstate-80. Trooper claims client impaired by drugs and arrests client for Driving under the influence of Drugs (DUID) and also cites for failure to maintain a single lane of travel as the basis for the stop. A search of the vehicle discloses a homemade pipe and synthetic cannabinoid, which result in an additional charge of possession of controlled substance.

Outcome: Not Guilty of DUID and Failure to Maintain Single Lane by jury. Prosecution agreed to dismiss possession charge as there was no evidence the substance was illegal to possess in Wyoming at that time.​