this ohio supreme court judge has a record of dealing with drunk drivers in her court cases with an iron fist, but when she gets stopped for drunk driving its a different story. and she has the gall to say this is the first time in 22 years she has got drunk. yea sure! Original Article Ohio Supreme Court judge fights her arrest for DWI Alice Robie Resnick, 65, an Ohio Supreme Court justice pulled over for drunken driving, urged a police officer not to arrest her and cited her rulings in drunken driving cases, according to police videotapes. Resnick's blood-alcohol content registered 0.22 percent, more than twice the legal limit in Ohio of 0.08 percent. Resnick could get six months in jail and a fine up to $1,000. http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/news/stories/20050204/opinion/1954455.html Justice Knows Loophole for Drunken Driving drunken driving E D I T O R I A L Justice Alice Robie Resnick's refusal to take an alcohol breath test shows that drunken drivers still have a legal loophole. It's up to legislators to close it. Yes, it is appalling to see police video of a state Supreme Court justice casually driving off after police stopped her on suspicion of drunken driving. And it is even more offensive to hear her comment that she should have a personal police chauffeur. But the most disturbing thing about Justice Alice Robie Resnick's apparent drunken cruise Monday is that she used her knowledge of Ohio law in the worst way -- to find a loophole. Resnick refused to take an evidentiary Breathalyzer test, resulting in her driver's license being suspended for a year. However, a judge has the discretion to shorten the suspension. Undoubtedly, she has a high-priced lawyer looking to get her suspension reduced and contend nothing can prove she was drunk in the absence of the Breathalyzer. This is just an advertisement to drunken drivers that it's OK to get loaded and get behind the wheel -- as long as you make sure to cover your tracks by refusing the test. A Supreme Court justice should know better, and should set an example of integrity and not slippery legal tactics. If she was innocent, why not take the test and prove it? Why try to get around the system she was sworn to uphold? We hope the courts don't let Resnick off easy after refusing the test, and make sure her license stays revoked for the duration. The public needs to know that refusing the Breathalyzer is not a "get out of jail free" card. But more importantly, we hope that legislators will take this as a warning that our laws for drunken driving offenders has a big hole in it. Thankfully, law enforcement officials have realized how dangerous it is to drink and drive, and don't let offenders skate once they're pulled over. Our representatives need to make sure our legal system picks up where our police leave off. Those who refuse official breath tests must face harsher consequences, or the law will fail to deter Ohioans from drinking and driving. Originally published Friday, February 4, 2005 http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-arrest07.html Ohio justice tried to get out of DUI ticket February 7, 2005 Advertisement COLUMBUS, Ohio -- A state Supreme Court justice pulled over for drunk driving urged a police officer not to arrest her and cited her rulings in drunken driving cases, according to police videotapes. Justice Alice Robie Resnick, 65, of Toledo, is scheduled to appear in court today, one week after police pulled her over on Interstate 75 in northern Ohio. Her attorney filed a request last week indicating she wants to change her innocent plea. She is charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence. In the video, shot by a camera on the dashboard of the patrol car and released Friday, a police sergeant questioning Resnick in the front seat tells her he can smell alcohol on her breath. Resnick assures the officer she can drive safely, but he asks her to take a portable breath-analysis test. She then lowers her voice and says, ''I did have something to drink.'' Resnick also repeatedly asks to be let go, saying, ''My God, you know I decide all these cases in your favor. And my golly, look what you're doing to me.'' Resnick's blood-alcohol content registered 0.22 percent, more than twice the legal limit of 0.08 percent. But the portable test cannot be used as evidence in court. She refused to take a Breathalyzer test, which means an automatic one-year license suspension. AP http://www.chillicothegazette.com/news/stories/20050207/opinion/1963708.html Resnick should have used better judgment E D I T O R I A L The recent actions of Ohio Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick are below the standard of what Ohio expects from its top judges. Resnick drove off without permission after being asked to take a sobriety test, police and State Highway Patrol officials said. The officers had to pursue Resnick and pull her over on Interstate 75 near Bowling Green in northwest Ohio Monday. Resnick, 65, of Toledo, was arrested and charged with driving under the influence and driving outside marked lines, said Lt. Rick Zwayer, a patrol spokesman. This is unfortunate for someone in Resnick's position. She should have known better to drink and drive. Someone with her experience in the criminal judicial system must set a stronger example. But she still deserves a day in court. Resnick failed field sobriety tests, including registering an alcohol level of 0.216 percent on a portable breath test administered at the scene, according to a patrol report. The blood-alcohol legal limit in Ohio is 0.08. She refused to take an official evidentiary Breathalyzer test when she was taken to a patrol post and her driver's license was suspended for a year, although a judge can revise the suspension to a shorter period or up to three years. The portable breath test is not admissible in court. Resnick, who previously served as an assistant county prosecutor, a municipal judge and a state appeals court judge, has voted in a handful of drunken driving cases with the Supreme Court. In 1996, she wrote the majority opinion in a case that said police do not have to tell people suspected of drunken driving that they have the right to a second, independent blood alcohol test. Her arrest came just days after the conclusion of a long-running court battle over an unsuccessful attempt by business groups to unseat her in 2000. Last week, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce was forced to disclose who contributed to the advertising campaign. Resnick can rebound from these charges and should return to the bench to serve Ohio residents. She should use better judgment in the future. Email this story Originally published Monday, February 7, 2005 http://www.nbc4i.com/news/4172007/detail.html Judge Sentences Resnick Following Guilty Plea Supreme Court Judge Ordered To Jail Or Alcohol Treatment Facility POSTED: 12:42 pm EST February 7, 2005 UPDATED: 1:44 pm EST February 7, 2005 BOWLING GREEN, Ohio -- Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick changed her drunken driving plea to guilty on Monday afternoon. Alice Robie Resnick Bowling Green Municipal Court Judge Mark Reddin sentenced Resnick, 65, to three days in jail or 72 consecutive hours at an alcohol treatment center that she must complete by May 8. Resnick was also placed on a two-year probation and was fined $600. Her driver's license was suspended until July 31. SLIDESHOW: Resnick In Court SLIDESHOW: Judge Pulled Over Resnick, 65, of Toledo, did not give a statement in court. Sources close to NBC 4 said that Resnick was eager to get the events of this past week behind her. Resnick was pulled over on Interstate 75 in Wood County on Monday. Drivers alerted the Ohio State Highway Patrol to a possible drunken driver on the road because the Jeep Cherokee she was driving was weaving in and out of traffic. When Resnick agreed to take the portable alcohol test, she registered 0.216 percent, more than twice the blood-alcohol legal limit in Ohio of 0.08. The portable test can't be used as evidence in court. FeedRoom Police Video: Judge Arrested Justice Arrest On Tape The incident was taped from a trooper's squad car. "I don't believe that test," Resnick told a trooper. "Do you have another test I can take?" Resnick could have faced as much as six months in jail and a fine up to $1,000. She refused to take an official evidentiary Breathalyzer test, which means an automatic one-year license suspension and a three-year ban from driving state vehicles. She will need a driver to get to Columbus for hearings, but the court has said the service won't be state-paid. Resnick apologized in a statement last week, saying that she would come to court and then move on. Resnick, a justice since 1989, is the court's only Democrat. Watch NBC 4 and refresh nbc4i.com for continuing coverage. isnt that a crock. this ohio supreme court judge says that this is the first time in 22 years she has gotten drunk!!!!!!! http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050203/NEWS02/502030448/0/NEWS14 Article published Thursday, February 3, 2005 Resnick breaks silence on DUI arrest Justice extends 'regrets,' accepts 'full responsibility' By JIM PROVANCE BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU COLUMBUS - Ohio Supreme Court Justice Alice Robie Resnick yesterday broke her silence on her very public drunken-driving arrest Monday and said she accepts "full responsibility for my actions." "It is unfortunate that this situation has arisen after 22 years of sobriety," she said in a written statement. "For that, I extend my regrets to the citizens of Ohio. "The overwhelming outpouring of support and assistance during this difficult time has strengthened me to continue to do the important work of the court," she said. The 65-year-old Ottawa Hills resident, the only Democrat remaining in statewide office, declined to comment further. Her husband, retired 6th District Court of Appeals Judge Melvin L. Resnick, answered the phone at her home. "We've had these other problems with my mother, who's 97 years old," he said. "We had to take her into the hospital last night. That's part of the problem." Justice Resnick faces a March 2 date in Bowling Green Municipal Court on charges of driving under the influence and failure to stay within marked lines. The misdemeanor DUI charge carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail and $1,000 fine. The justice missed a second day of oral arguments on the court bench. Court spokesman Chris Davey said justices work 50 to 60 hours a week and are not asked to justify their time. Associate justices earn $131,519 a year. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer, in a statement, said he expects Justice Resnick to be back on the bench when the next oral arguments are heard Feb. 15. "I am concerned for her as she confronts this issue," he said. Although embarrassed by the arrest, which was caught on a highway patrol video later released to the media, Justice Resnick has long been considered a friend of those cracking down on DUI. "If you look at her voting record in both the [6th District] Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, I think she has come down on the side of law enforcement," said Perrysburg Chief Prosecutor Martin Aubry, a Mothers Against Drunk Driving volunteer who has lobbied for tougher drunken-driving laws. "Maybe it's because she was a former prosecutor," he said. In one case in 1987 while on the 6th District bench, she voted with the majority to allow police to pull over suspects based solely on witnessing weaving within or outside the driver's lane. That was the reason cited by the Ohio Highway Patrol in pulling her over Monday on I-75 South near Cygnet in Wood County. In another that she authored in 1990 on the Supreme Court, she voiced confidence in the accuracy of a field sobriety eye movement test that, 15 years later, she initially refused to take. "We hold that the [horizontal gaze nystagmus] test has been shown to be a reliable test, especially when used in conjunction with other field sobriety tests and an officer's observations of a driver's physical characteristics in determining whether a person is under the influence of alcohol," she wrote. Although she refused to take that test when first approached by police while parked at a gas station in Bowling Green, she ultimately did take it after being pulled over a short time later on I-75. The highway patrol said the results were one factor considered when the decision was made to arrest her. She registered 0.216 blood-alcohol content, nearly three times the legal limit of 0.08, on a portable field breath test, the results of which are inadmissible in court. At the Findlay patrol station, she refused to take an official Breathalyzer test, a decision that resulted in an automatic one-year suspension of her driver's license. "This just shows that it doesn't matter what the point limit is if we don't get tougher laws passed on refusing to take the Breathalyzer test," said Tilde Bricker, state victims' services specialist with MADD. In a sampling of other Supreme Court cases, Justice Resnick: Sided with the majority in holding that a defendant seeking to challenge the accuracy of a Breathalyzer test must first ask the court to suppress the evidence obtained from that test. Sided with the majority last year in agreeing that, while the results of a field sobriety test may not be admissible in court, the arresting officer can testify as to his observations of the defendant while taking the test. Contact Jim Provance at: jprovance@theblade.com or 614-221-0496.