New Records Show Over 2,000 Drunk Driving Prosecutions Dismissals
Houston Watch recently revealed that the Harris County District Attorney’s Office “dismissed more than *thirty* drunk driving cases at trial in the past two months alone.” This post came on the heels of coverage exposing that “*in 2022 alone* Ogg’s prosecutors suffered not guilty verdicts in at least thirteen additional driving while intoxicated cases.”
The District Attorney’s Office has now complied with a public records request that Houston Watch filed, handing over a spreadsheet of outcomes in all drunk driving cases that the office has prosecuted between January 2022 and June 2023.
That data reveals that the DA’s Office has dismissed over 2,000 drunk driving cases in the past eighteen months. There are outlier cases involving a defendant who died before trial and cases where the office later refiled charges. However, the overwhelming pattern that emerges from the cases in the District Attorney’s spreadsheet is that Ogg’s prosecutors do not have the skills, resolve, or both to keep repeat drunk-drivers—some of whom keep drinking while out on pretrial release—off of the roads.
In one case, the defendant was charged with drunk driving with a child in the vehicle. The Grand Jury returned an indictment. Yet, the prosecutor simply dismissed the case before trial explaining that there were issues with “warnings given prior to requesting a blood test [that] would likely result in a blood test not being admissible.” In other words, the prosecutor didn’t go through the process of litigating these issues pre-trial, or even present jurors with other evidence at trial. It doesn’t get lazier than that.
Or does it? In another case, also involving a defendant charged with drunk driving with a child in the vehicle, the prosecution dismissed the case before trial, explaining that he “cannot prove that the child was in the vehicle at the time of intoxicated operation.” Why trouble with litigating the case to the end? Or even screening more carefully and filing a regular drunk driving case that didn’t require proving that the child was in the car? It’s all just too much effort for Ogg’s prosecutors.
And then there are an avalanche of repeat drunk driver cases. For example, one dismissed case involved a man with three prior drunk driving convictions. Then, during this prosecution—his fourth drunk driving case—the defendant violated the conditions of his bail on multiple occasions. Records from the case show that the defendant “did not follow curfew on 3/21, 3/24, 3/25, 3/26, 3/27.” Prosecutors ultimately dismissed this case.
Here are four additional cases that Ogg’s prosecutors dismissed:
One defendant had three prior drunk driving conditions. He also violated the conditions of his pretrial release in this case—his fourth drunk driving prosecution—by blowing four blood alcohol readings on his interlock device, which is the device that stops his car ignition from turning on when he’s consumed alcohol. Further, he “has a total of 11 skipped tests.” Prosecutors dismissed this case.
One defendant had two prior drunk driving conditions. He violated the conditions of his pretrial release for “failing to comply with curfew requirements” and because his alcohol monitoring device “detected alcohol.” Specifically, “the defendant had multiple unapproved leaves and unapproved enters on the following days: 4/26, 5/1, 5/2, 5/3, 5/4, 5/5, 5/6, 5/7, 5/8 , 5/9, 5/10, 5/11, 5/12, 5/13, and 5/14.” The defendant’s “confirmed alcohol consumption event occurred on 4/23/23 at 4:02 PM.” Prosecutors dismissed this case.
Another defendant had two prior drunk driving conditions. He violated the conditions of his pretrial release in a new felony case by being arrested for what would turn into his third drunk driving prosecution. Prosecutors dismissed this case.
Yet another defendant had two prior drunk driving conditions. He also violated the conditions of his pretrial release in this case—his third drunk driving prosecution—by “not reporting to Pretrial Service and has not provided proof of Interlock Device.” Prosecutors dismissed this case.
The lesson to learn here is the same one that Houston Watch wrote about the first time that the publication covered the DA’s Office’s atrocious record in drunk driving cases—except more so now that it's clear that it's not dozens, but hundreds of cases that are involved:
Ogg recently told the Houston Chronicle that ‘Houston is ground zero for DWI fatalities’ and ‘really couldn't do worse.’ That’s not hyperbole. More people die from drunk driving in Harris County than in Los Angeles County, a jurisdiction with five million more residents. Ogg’s high profile losses in drunk driving cases might help explain why. The most important factor for deterring crime is accountability—creating the sense in the public that if you drive drunk, you will be found guilty. But in Harris County, under Kim Ogg, this is no longer true. Even if you’ve been convicted of DWI before, there’s a good chance that you can just walk out the door, head straight to the bar, and drive drunk again with no consequences. ‘No family should live with the pain of getting that knock on the door in the middle of the night,’ Kim Ogg told the Chronicle.
But she left out the even worse pain of knowing that the person who killed your loved one was never held accountable; and, in fact, is free to do it again.