Roby Sentenced to Driver Intervention Program

By Kyle Rowland on April 29, 2014 at 10:51a
43 Comments

Bradley Roby pleaded guilty to physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs or alcohol Tuesday in Franklin County Municipal Court. The charge was amended from operating a vehicle while intoxicated, according to court records.

Roby was stopped April 20 in downtown Columbus after officers found him passed out behind the wheel.

Roby was sentenced to 180 days in jail, which was suspended on conditions that he take a three-day driver intervention program. He also was fined $375 plus court costs.

Roby's agent, Michael Perrett of SportsTrust Advisors, released the following statement to Eleven Warriors on Tuesday:

Though my client, Bradley Roby, maintains his innocence and feels he would have been completely exonerated had he taken this matter to trial, Bradley has accepted the prosecutor’s offer of a reduced charge to “physical control” to bring closure and finality to this situation ahead of next week’s NFL draft. A “physical control” citation is a non-moving violation that will not result in any points being added to his driving record and there will be no license suspension. Bradley is scheduled to complete a three-day alcohol educational class this week which will effectively terminate the case. This plea was accepted by the judge and entered into the record today. Bradley is very focused and is excited about starting his NFL career.

Roby was arrested after a 911 caller indicated a Dodge Charger drove up on the sidewalk, narrowly missing a group of kids. The caller then said the driver, in a car with Georgia license plates, was passed out.

Roby failed a field sobriety test. But a Breathalyzer test revealed Roby’s BAC was well under Ohio’s legal limit of .08. Urine test results are due in a few weeks.

Prosecutors said the plea agreement prevents the city from pursuing additional charges related to the urine test results. 

Roby is projected as a first-round NFL draft pick. 

43 Comments

Comments

Tony's picture

So, one can reasonably assume he knew the urine test was going to come back negative.

+3 HS
osu07asu10's picture

I would actually reasonably assume his lawyer believed the urine test would have come back positive for something that could impair your ability to drive and the plea deal wouldn't be on the table for the rest of the proceedings. This is a standard plea offered to most first time OVI/DUI offenders in Franklin County.

It is in Roby's best interest to have this legal situation cleared up and also his probation in Indiana prior to the NFL draft.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+8 HS
Unky Buck's picture

That's what I was thinking too, OSU/ASU. I doubt the urine test would've been drastically different than the breathalizer (but I am assuming this). The urine test would show anything else he's had and that likely was the cause of it. So plead guilty, get the deal, and move on.

...

+4 HS
osu07asu10's picture

His urine would have had to be absolutely clean for it to support his innocence.

With urine, traces of any number of drugs could be in his system that he had ingested up to a month ago that had no bearing on his ability to operate a vehicle but would be used against him in combination with the low levels of alcohol to prove the OVI.

Unfortunate situation but clear it up and move on. Not the first person with an OVI and not the last. Plus, weren't the bengals taking a hard look at Roby? He's just trying to fit in...

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+6 HS
hit_the_couch's picture

So, one can reasonably assume he knew the urine test was going to come back negative.

Sometimes they just throw that in there for good measure as part of a deal. It is possible something else could come up in the urine that had nothing to do with the incident, but could raise red flags for him at the draft.

And then I told her...i'm no weatherman, but tonight's forecast is calling for several inches!

skid21's picture

Why so long to see the result of the urine test? I work in a hospital and they can get results much sooner than "days".

osu07asu10's picture

Exactly how I expected it to go. 

Clear up the Indiana probation and get ready for the draft.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

GoBucks713's picture

I hope this program and this incident help him to realize that he shouldn't take his gifts for granted and finally takes action for his own decisions and becomes a better person because of it.

 

Also, enjoy the smaller paycheck....

-The Aristocrats!

+1 HS
d5k's picture

I doubt this affects his draft stock very much at all.

GoBucks713's picture

Oh, I know, that's why I used sarcasm font.

-The Aristocrats!

+1 HS
BoFuquel's picture

Next. GO BUCKS!

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then.

+1 HS
USMC11917's picture

Get you some of that "Conspiracy Theorists". There have been so many comments on this site talking about "Driving While Black" "Falsified Reporting" and basicly spreading the evidence (Where there was none) of further demonstrations of corruption that many could not reasonably believe that a man was just doing his job for the benefit of society. I have always defended our Buckeyes to the point that I have stated we all need to wait until further evidence is released before casting judgment. (Roby, Hyde, Klein) The officer in this case wasn't given the same consideration. In our rush to exhonerate a loved Buckeye some turned a blind eye to the posibility that he might be guilty. I really want to believe we are all better than that.

+2 HS
DJ Byrnes's picture

 

Californian by birth, Marionaire by the Grace of President Warren G. Harding.

osu07asu10's picture

Hahaha that is great DJ.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

Unky Buck's picture

This might also explain why he was so enamored with pizza and french fries that night...

 

...

+1 HS
Wilkins78's picture

Everyone is really missing the boat on this case.  Go read Ohio's OVI laws.  I doubt a urine test had any bearing on this other than not making the charges worse.  He had alcohol in his system, and he was behind the wheel of his car with his keys in reach.  Thus, he is subject to being charged with OVI or at least physical control as it can be reasonably inferred that he had been operating his car and that at the time he was doing so he was likely more impaired than the .008 that he blew during his interaction with the officer.  That's all it takes for this kind of citation.

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Everyone is really missing the boat on this case.  Go read Ohio's OVI laws.  I doubt a urine test had any bearing on this other than not making the charges worse.  He had alcohol in his system, and he was behind the wheel of his car with his keys in reach.  Thus, he is subject to being charged with OVI or at least physical control as it can be reasonably inferred that he had been operating his car and that at the time he was doing so he was likely more impaired than the .008 that he blew during his interaction with the officer.  That's all it takes for this kind of citation.

You are incorrect that the urine test wouldn't have any bearing on the outcome of the case (it also couldn't have made the charges any worse than an OVI regardless of what they found in his system).

The .008 BAC level by itself would not be enough to charge Roby with OVI. 

The .008 BAC (chemical) and the failed field sobriety test (physical) were enough to CHARGE Roby but those alone may not be enough to CONVICT Roby of OVI.

The reason being that field sobriety tests are subjective and the only field sobriety test that is scientifically accurate is the eye twitching for the "pen test" and even that has holes.

So the urine test is key because it would have either provided supporting chemical evidence (presence of other drugs that can impair driving) or it would have been a major piece of evidence for Roby in his defense that he was not impaired.

Ohio is not a zero tolerance state in regards to the amount of alcohol in one's system while driving and Ohio Law 4511.19 Operating vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs - OVI clearly states:

(a) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them.

(d) The person has a concentration of eight-hundredths of one gram or more but less than seventeen-hundredths of one gram by weight of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of the person's breath.

Which means the threshold is .08 BAC to be considered driving while impaired, and Roby did not meet that. The piss test could confirm the presence of other drugs which would constitute the combination and likely make the OVI charge stick.

 

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+5 HS
Wilkins78's picture

I disagree.  You left out the first part in your quote:

"(1) No person shall operate any vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley within this state, if, AT THE TIME OF OPERATION, ANY of the following apply:

(a) The person is under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of them."

You're right in that OVI may have been hard to prove, but physical control was pretty much a slam dunk.  These laws are broadly interpreted, and with the 911 call, the failed field test (likely the HGN as you mentioned), and how he was found, it is easy to infer that he was driving while impaired.  I imagine when the laws changed from DUI to OVI the limits were kept to help prosecute those who met them and to avoid any issues with those who had been convicted using them.  But the key point to the change was to be able to crack down and charge people who are driving impaired but may not necessarily meet the limits of the law with something more than reckless driving.  Essentially, you don't have to blow a .08 to be operating a vehicle while impaired.  I probably misstated it in my first post, but what I was trying to get at is that the urine test would not have been required for a physical control citation, and while not open and shut, an OVI case could have proceeded with what they had, though the urine test would have greatly strengthened an OVI charge.  I posted in another thread that it was very likely that this would end in a physical control violation as it seemed the most obvious charge.

+2 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Essentially, you don't have to blow a .08 to be operating a vehicle while impaired. 

I don't quite follow what you are trying to say but the law clearly states that impaired is considered .08 BAC or greater and Roby's BAC did not meet that threshold. You have to blow .08 BAC or greater to  be considered impaired OR there has to be the presence of other drugs of abuse in your system.

This is true for OVI and Physical Control, there isn't a lesser threshold for physical control.

In a criminal prosecution or juvenile court proceeding for a violation of division (A) of this section or for an equivalent offense that is vehicle-related, if there was at the time the bodily substance was withdrawn a concentration of less than the applicable concentration of alcohol specified in divisions (A)(1)(b), (c), (d), and (e) of this section or less than the applicable concentration of a listed controlled substance or a listed metabolite of a controlled substance specified for a violation of division (A)(1)(j) of this section, that fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

At probably 90% of arraignments for first time OVI offenders in Franklin County where no accident or injury occurred and the individual charged was generally respectful they offer a plea deal to amend the charge from OVI to Loss of Physical Control. 

Without knowing the results of the urine test, if there were witnesses to Roby's erratic driving, and also seeing the video evidence of his field sobriety tests...OVI and/or physical control were far from a slam dunk case.

 

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+2 HS
Wilkins78's picture

The law doesn't clearly state that, it lists several conditions, including one with no limits and says if any of these are met, then the charge applies.  Even what you cited said, "the fact may be considered along with other competent evidence in determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant."  I get what you are saying about there's no lower threshold for impairment between OVI and physical control as the difference essentially has to do with actually driving the car and just being in the car, but it's much easier to infer that someone sleeping in a car with any kind of BAC (and taking into account the smell of alcohol and failed sobriety test) started off in an impaired state than to infer or prove they were actually driving the car while in an impaired state.  Regardless, either charge, OVI or physical control, isn't the absurdity some are making it seem based on what has been reported.

 

osu07asu10's picture

The language you are referencing basically allows the arresting officer discretion as to what constitutes "under the influence" because of the physical evidence that they observed (field sobriety tests, odor, witnesses, slurred speech, etc). 

In the absence of any chemical evidence that supports the physical information, those charges would likely not result in an OVI conviction.

I think we're discussing two separate parts of the process; the way an arresting officer can bend the law to arrest someone for OVI and the actual evidence it would take someone to be convicted of OVI.

I won't argue what a cop can use to arrest you because they'll do and use anything they can to throw cuffs on someone. From a prosecution standpoint, Roby's case still had many holes unless the video evidence showed him falling all over the place, witnesses who will testify that they saw him almost hit people, or the urine test would show the presence of other drugs.

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

Wilkins78's picture

I think you are right and I agree with you.  Especially since we came to relatively the same conclusion on the outcome.

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Anytime you get into a discussion on the language of a law or ordinance...I think it's safe to say both have a handle on it. +1s

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
Ill_Buckeye's picture

should be sentenced to covering sammy watkins for 3 days

+9 HS
DefendYoungstown's picture

Does anybody really care about these updates on Roby.  While he did play for tOSU (everybody has their own opinion on whether he actually exerted effort last year or not) he is no longer on the team and I am not sure anybody cares.  Can we all just move on, focus on the current players and wish him a great career in the NFL. 

What we can't do in the air we'll do on the ground.

-2 HS
Ethos's picture

oh.  So obviously you don't read the buckeye updates on how they are doing in the NFL right?

He is a buckeye whether is he on the active roster or not, and he is a buckeye that is going to be drafted fairly high.  Therefore, he gets the buckeye nations attention when he makes us look good, and when he makes us look like assholes.

"What do you need water for, Sunshine?!" - Coach Coombs, if you don't love this man, you have no soul.

+2 HS
GoBucks713's picture

The Houndie is Dead. Long Live The Houndie.

-The Aristocrats!

+2 HS
DC-town's picture

Just an FYI, dude was picked up on 4/20...420 after going up on the curb having a .008 and failing a field sobriety test with what amounts to 'ah, singular' beer-

draw ur own conclusions, but my guess is that urine is coming back dirty 

'Piss excellence' -RB

+4 HS
hit_the_couch's picture

I've gone up on a curb after being completely sober and laughing at something on the radio; down in the Arena area I did it once too from staring at some of the ass on bar patrol down there. My, my there are some hotties. Thankfully I didn't come close to hitting anyone and no cop saw me.

And then I told her...i'm no weatherman, but tonight's forecast is calling for several inches!

+3 HS
osu07asu10's picture

own in the Arena area I did it once too from staring at some of the ass on bar patrol down there. 

HAHA that is great.  I lived on Woodruff back in college and some girls that lived on my floor freshman year rented the house next to us. We were on the front porch drinking and one of the pretty sexy girls  next door was bending over getting stuff out of her trunk on Woodruff and some dude drove by and side swiped some cars. Got out, admitted he was staring at her ass, got her number (haha!) and left. It was great.

This also seems to be a global problem...

 

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
nikolajz1's picture

Between not playing hard this year, off the field incidents last summer, and now this, I can't imagine a team wanting to take a risk early on Roby. 

+2 HS
Arizona_Buckeye's picture

I learned this after my run in with the law back in 1998 - field sobriety tests are optional so it is in your best interest to refuse to take one.  Many of them are highly subjective in nature, and the cop can make you take as many of them he/she deems fit.  Had Roby known this, he would have only been required to take the breathalyzer test, which he would have passed.  He most likely would not have been arrested since it was the failed field test that gave the officer probable cause.  Also, do not answer any of the officer's question surrounding any alcohol consumed, any food consumed, or any location you were at - all of these are meant to help them build their case against you.

The best thing about Pastafarianism? It is not only acceptable, but advisable, to be heavily sauced

USMC11917's picture

All of that information might be good for someone trying to hide something. I'm on the side of "follow the law" and you don't have to worry about the particulars. Don't drink and drive or partake of narcotics and then there is no reason not to submit to a test. What Roby should have done is stayed his ass at home especially after partaking of whatever would make his test pop dirty. What he should have or shouldn't have submitted would be inconsequential then. I just get irritated at all the folks that think they know best how to cover something up and instead of championing proper conduct they spend their time instructing others on how to get away with stuff.

-2 HS
Arizona_Buckeye's picture

Not trying to hide anything, however, it is idiotic to submit to something optional that is not in your best interest.  If you enjoy opening yourself up to unnecessary scrutiny because of some sense of 'honor', by all means, knock yourself out!  I spent 7 years working with all forms of law enforcement and know how they operate to trick/bully/push somebody to fess up to something that the cops really couldn't prove without a confession.  When I testified in court, it was answer the question with the minimal information and add NO extraneous details and that has served me very well in all areas of my life!

The best thing about Pastafarianism? It is not only acceptable, but advisable, to be heavily sauced

+1 HS
osu07asu10's picture

Must be pretty high up there on your horse...

"They don't know what they don't know." - Coach Mick

+1 HS
USMC11917's picture

I like to think of myself as "at sea level". Does following the law and expectations of society make me better than anyone? Hell no.

Toilrt Paper's picture

A cancer to the secondary last year.

-1 HS
Silver Bullet 10's picture

I disagree, especially considering he handled his business like a pro and mentored the younger guys under him. Dude gave 110% on special teams. Doing dirty work. He didn't even have to come back last year, but he did because he wanted to win. Yeah, his draft stock may have plummeted, but Roby was an asset to our secondary in the years he played. The secondary was terrible without him last year. Remember Iowa? Clemson? Michigan State (partly)?

Roby was a playmaker. He had that cocky attitude that you like in corners nowadays. I'm going to miss watching him fly around in the secondary.

 

Silver Bullet 10's picture

Can't wait to see the results of the dude's piss. #TheAnticipation #SoHyped

TraptnMI's picture

I've got a cop in the family whom i am quite fond of and he cannot help being a sarcastic dick. It's them against the world mentality. CPD got their money out of Robey. I call bullshit on the passed out reference. He obviously was catching a few winks. The only groups of people that would support the cops actions are cops and nonathletic cubical working evangelical nerds.

" It's real good whatcha done Anthony, real good ! "

Larrinator's picture

I still want the Bengals to draft him at 24. He has the most potential of all the CBs in the draft imo. 

Larson

+1 HS