Attorney Luke Thomas Heck's Legal Cases

DUI and DWI

CIty of Gwinner v. Vincent

Apr 06, 2017

OUTCOME: Affirmed

Vincent appealed a judgment entered upon a conditional guilty plea after his motion to suppress evidence was denied. Vincent argued a deputy violated his right to speak with an attorney before decid ... ing whether or not to take the chemical test. He argued any evidence from the chemical test should be suppressed. The City of Gwinner argued Vincent failed to clearly ask to speak with an attorney before deciding to submit to a chemical test. The district court found Vincent's statements about an attorney were unclear, and Vincent did not make an affirmative indication that he needed to talk to an attorney. The district court denied his motion to suppress evidence. On appeal, Vincent argued the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because he made an affirmative indication that he needed to talk to an attorney before taking the chemical test.

DUI and DWI

Washburn v. Levi

Dec 22, 2015

OUTCOME: Affirmed in favor of Washburn

The Department of Transportation (DOT) and Casey Washburn both appealed after the district court reversed the revocation of Washburn's drivers license. According to testimony at the administrative h ... earing, while on patrol, an officer came upon a parked vehicle with its door ajar. After approaching the vehicle, the officer smelled alcohol and discovered Washburn sleeping in the driver's seat. The officer arrested Washburn for DUI. The officer read the implied consent advisory three times, and each time Washburn responded he did not understand. Taken with Washburn's argumentative behavior, the officer testified he understood this as a refusal. At the hearing, the parties offered conflicting testimony, with Washburn's mother testifying the keys to his vehicle were in his bedroom and the arresting officer testifying he saw the keys in the vehicle. The officer testified Washburn asked to talk to an attorney but clarified that he only wished to call his dad. The hearing officer suspended his driver's license after concluding there was probable cause to believe Washburn was in actual physical control of the vehicle and the officers did not violate Washburn's right to counsel. On appeal to the district court, after concluding the officers did not violate Washburn's right to counsel, the court concluded there was not probable cause to believe he was in actual physical control of the vehicle. The court reversed the revocation of Washburn's driver's license. On appeal, the DOT argued the district court erred in reversing the revocation because there was probable cause to believe Washburn was in actual physical control of the vehicle. Washburn argued the district court erred in concluding the officers did not violate his right to counsel.

Luke Thomas Heck's Legal Cases (12)

CIty of Gwinner v. Vincent

Washburn v. Levi