Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

My Practice as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer in Michigan is resoundingly successful in terms of the percentage of cases I win. While I'm not trying to sound boastful, I win well over 90-some percent of the cases I file. Much of this has to do with screening potential Clients and making sure they meet the State criteria in order to win their Appeal. In other words, it means not taking on Clients who aren't yet "ready," in every sense of the word, to prove their case by the required "Clear and Convincing Evidence."

Over the years, I have won a lot of cases. And in every one of those cases, the Client has been awarded, at first, a Restricted License. This article will focus on how and why a person who files a License Appeal can pretty much forget about getting a Full, Unrestricted License right out of the gate.

Perhaps one of the most common questions I'm asked, as I take on a Client for a License Appeal, is something to the effect of "What's the chance of my getting a Full License?"

My answer is always the same: Essentially zero.

There's a reason for this. When a Restricted License is granted, the Secretary of State must require that the person install an ignition interlock (breath-tester) in any vehicle they will be driving. This gives the Secretary of State an opportunity to monitor a person as they get back on the road, and really amounts to a probationary half-step in the process of eventually returning a Full License. It's kind of like being kept on a "short leash."

When a Full, Unrestricted License is granted, there is no legal way to order an ignition interlock. In a very real way, the granting of a Full License requires the Secretary of State to completely "sign off" on a person as being a totally safe bet to remain abstinent from alcohol. I've never met the Hearing Officer who doesn't want at least a little ongoing proof before that happens. And a year on a Restricted License, while being monitored with a breath-test unit, is exactly how they can get that.

Accordingly, a person filing a License Appeal must be ready to accept that this is the case, because, as the saying goes, "that's just the way it is."

Continue reading "Winning a License Restoration Appeal in Michigan Means a Restricted License First" »

As a Driver's License Restoration Attorney, the most important part of what I must deal with in every case involving someone's License is their Driving Record. I need accurate and precise information about the actions taken by the Secretary of State. Sometimes, when I receive a call from a prospective Client, they are unable to give me the exact information I need to determine if they are eligible to file a License Appeal. The best way for me to make this determination is to read their Driving Record, especially the part at the very end under the heading "Administrative Action" which details exactly what Suspensions and/or Revocations have been imposed by the Secretary of State, as well as when and why they occurred.

A common question asked of either me or my staff is "Can you get a copy of my Driving Record?" This Blog article will explain exactly how a person can get a copy of their own Driving Record, and will have several links to the Secretary of State's website to help with those requests.

A significant share of my Practice includes helping people who've moved out-of-state clear up outstanding issues with their Michigan License. For these individuals, going to a Secretary of State Branch Office and making an in-person request for their Driving Record is impossible.

Other people are just too busy during regular business hours, and would prefer the convenience of being able to send away for their Record. The downside to mailed-in request is that it is not instant. In other words, the person walking into a Secretary of State Branch Office can pay $8 and walk out with their Record. Someone sending in for it must wait a bit, typically about 2 weeks.

Under no circumstances should a person use a 3rd party, or private information service which offers to sell you a copy of your Michigan Driving Record. Those records do not contain certain essential information (most don't even have and "Administrative Action" section at all!) that must be reviewed in order to determine a person's eligibility to Appeal, either to a Court, or to the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) for Restoration of Driving Privileges. Beyond costing more than an official Record from the Secretary of State, even if they're mostly accurate, they're never complete.

Continue reading "Getting a Copy of your Michigan Driving Record to Start a License Appeal" »

As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, a good chunk of the inquiries I receive comes from people who cannot be licensed in another state because of some hold on or problem with their Michigan Driver's License. Whatever other state they're currently living in, they discover that no License can be issued there until they "clear up" their Michigan License. This article will focus specifically on those cases where the reason for the Michigan hold or problem is multiple DUI's.

Under Michigan Law, 2 DUI's within 7 years results in the Revocation of the Driver's License for a minimum of 1 year. 3 or more DUI's within 10 years causes the Driver's License to be Revoked for a minimum of 5 years. When we say "for a minimum of" it means that the person cannot even file an Appeal for a License Restoration until that much time has passed, but will never be Licensed until such Appeal has been filed and won. In the real world, this means that many people, particularly those who are no longer living in Michigan, wait considerably longer than the minimum Revocation period to pursue their Appeal.

If a person is not completely clear about their eligibility to file a License Appeal, the first thing they should do is obtain a copy of their Michigan Driving Record. This link will help in that effort.

Once someone has moved out of Michigan, they are no longer eligible to Restore a Michigan Driver's License, and must instead obtain a "Clearance" from the Secretary of State in order to have a License issued in another state.

For the person who now has an address in a different state, there are 2 ways to go about the Appeal:

The first (and better way) is to file the traditional, Request-for-Hearing Appeal which requires them to reappear in Michigan for a reexamination. In my Practice, all such cases are scheduled for a Hearing at the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division's Livonia office.

The other method involves filing for an Administrative Review which allows the person to skip the Hearing and just submit the various and required documents and wait for a decision.

I am not a fan of the Administrative Review. In fact, I strongly discourage it.

It is my hope that in explaining this, the prospective Client will either see things my way, or at least trust my experience and judgment enough to be willing to come back to Michigan in order to properly handle (and win) their License Appeal.

What follows is an examination of why I favor in-person Hearings so strongly for those who have moved out of state and need to obtain a Michigan Clearance in order to have a Driver's License issued in another state:

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Problems for Those who have Moved out of State" »

In the previous Blog entry, we discussed the Misdemeanor Offense of Leaving the Scene of a Property Damage Accident (PD). This article will discuss the similar, but more serious Offense of Leaving the Scene of a Personal Injury Accident (PI).

Leaving the Scene of a Personal Injury Accident is typically spoken of as Leaving he Scene of a PI Accident. Like the related charge involving a Property Damage Accident, this Offense and its penalties are set forth in the Michigan Motor Vehicle Code. Leaving the Scene of a PI Accident carries a much stiffer potential penalty, however, of up to 1 year in the County Jail.

Again it would seem obvious why this is a Crime. There is a strong public interest in making sure anyone involved in an accident sticks around long enough to exchange information with anyone else involved and summon the Police, if necessary. The stakes are much higher if there is an injury, or even a potential injury. Doesn't everybody who ever gets a Driver's License learn that the first thing one should ask, after a collision, is if everyone is all right?

Imagine the potential consequences if a Driver leaves the scene of an accident after another person has been injured, and is unable to call for help. Given the stakes, making sure one person renders aid or contacts help for another who has been injured is, and ought to be, a matter of universal public policy.

In the real world, this charge comes up when someone collides with another vehicle, or pedestrian, and then panics and takes off. I think it's fair to say that most of the time this happens, the person who takes off truly believes that the other party is okay. In other words, most of the time, when one person knows they have really banged up another, they'll stick around and do the right thing.

As with PD accidents, there are two groups of people who Leave the Scene of a Personal Injury Accident:

1. Those who had been drinking and left the scene to avoid getting arrested for a DUI, and

2. Everybody else.

Continue reading "Michigan Traffic Offenses - Leaving the Scene of an Accident (Personal Injury)" »

One kind of charge that comes up somewhat regularly in my Practice as a Criminal Defense Lawyer involves the Misdemeanor charge of Leaving the Scene of a Accident. Actually, there are two different kinds of Leaving the Scene charges: The one we'll discuss in this first article, is Leaving the Scene or a Property Damage Accident. In the next installment of this Blog, we'll examine the other, similar (but more serious) charge of Leaving the Scene of a Personal Injury Accident.

Leaving the Scene of a Property Damage Accident is often referred to as Leaving the Scene of a PD Accident, and is a violation of what's known as Michigan's Motor Vehicle Code. The Motor Vehicle Code is the collection of all Michigan Traffic Laws. A violation of any provision of the Motor Vehicle Code is considered a Misdemeanor, punishable by up to 90 days in Jail, unless a different penalty is specified as part of a particular provision. Curiously, and somewhat redundantly, the specific provision of the Law concerning Leaving the Scene of a PD Accident includes a penalty of up to 90 days in jail for its violation.

The purpose of these Laws is relatively clear; to make sure people don't take off after an accident. Someone who's property has been damaged as the result of an accident, whether it's a car parked somewhere, or a mailbox, or whatever else, shouldn't be left "holding the bag" for those damages if the other driver was able to take off and get away undetected. In the vast majority of collisions (where a person was not driving while drunk, or high on drugs, or recklessly) the worst thing an at-fault driver faces is a Traffic Ticket for a Civil Infraction. In other words, the penalty for leaving is much worse than any possible penalty for whatever happened to cause the collision. The law applies equally to any driver involved in an accident, meaning that even a person who was clearly not at fault can't just leave the scene.

In the real world, there are 2 kinds of people facing this offense:

1. Those who had been drinking and left the scene to avoid getting arrested for a DUI, and

2. Everybody else.

A fairly typical real-life example involves someone hitting a parked car as the drive down a street. If the driver is sober, then, at worst, they might get a Traffic Ticket for their actions. If the driver has been drinking, however, they know that they're facing a DUI arrest, further complicated by the accident, if they wait around for the Police to show up. While even the most law-abiding citizen can become panic-stricken and make a poor decision and drive off, it's far more likely to happen when a person knows contact with the Police will certainly lead to a Drunk Driving arrest, for starters.

Continue reading "Michigan Traffic Offenses - Leaving the Scene of an Accident (Property Damage)" »

No one wants to go to Jail. In my Criminal Practice, I try everything possible to make sure my Client doesn't wind up there. In the overwhelming majority of Cases I handle, my Clients avoid any incarceration. In fact, it is, fortunately, a rare occurrence when my Client doesn't walk out of Court with me.

At the beginning of any Criminal Case, the person charged generally has one concern above all others; staying out of Jail. When a Client is told that Jail can be avoided, and they will, instead, likely be placed on Probation, they are usually very pleased. Really, would you doubt me when I say that pretty much everyone charged with a Crime says they'll do anything to stay out of Jail? I'd say the same thing if the situation was reversed.

Somehow, though, as both time and the Case march on, some Clients become secure in the idea that they're not going to Jail, and then their thoughts turn to the details and Conditions of Probation. What will I have to do? Will I have to report? How often? When and where? What if my boss won't let me get that much time off?

To fast-forward a bit, all this thinking usually winds up with the Client asking me if we can get "Non-Reporting Probation." And although the final decision in any case is up to the Judge, there are certain generalizations we can make about whether or not Non-Reporting Probation is likely to be ordered in any particular case.

First, when a person pleads guilty to or is otherwise convicted of a Felony, Non-Reporting Probation is highly unlikely. Even someone with no prior Criminal Record, and who works out some kind of a deal in a non-violent type of case can pretty much bank on getting Reporting Probation. It's kind of like asking "why do we shake hands with our right hands, rather than our left?" And the short answer is "because that's the way it is."

Misdemeanor cases, by contrast, run the gamut of possibilities, from "absolutely not" to "perhaps." Geography plays a role in all this, as well. Because I only handle Criminal Cases in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, my observations are limited accordingly.

Continue reading "Probation in Michigan - Everyone Wants Non-Reporting" »

This installment will return to the subject of 2nd Offense Drunk Driving, or Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) charges. As a DUI Lawyer, my actual Practice is limited to handling cases in the District and Circuit Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties. I point that out because what I write here is the product of my experience in these Courts. I have no idea how things are handled elsewhere, and the outcome of any case pending beyond the Tri-County area might be very different from what I describe here.

I think it's fair to say that everyone knows that there are essentially 3 kinds of DUI cases: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd Offenses. And everyone pretty much likewise knows that a 1st Offense is generally not that bad, and a 3rd Offense is a Felony, and a nightmare to boot.

What about 2nd Offenses?

The first thing to say about a 2nd Offense is that (if the case is not one of those few that are "beatable"), then how bad things will turn out for the Driver depends more than anything else, on where (what City) the case is pending. Certain Courts are just plain tougher on any DUI than others. In fact, a few Courts are WAY tougher on DUI's than all the others. In the interests of good Lawyer diplomacy, I'll say no more on that subject here.

Another very important thing about 2nd Offense cases, completely independent of where they're pending, is that they represent the crossroads between having a serious alcohol problem, or not. Statistically speaking, anyone facing a 2nd Offense DUI has a much-elevated likelihood of having an alcohol-problem compared with the general population. In fact, a 2nd Offense automatically causes a person to be categorized as a "Habitual Offender" under Michigan Law. Amongst the many implications of that categorization is the Mandatory Revocation of the Driver's License for at least 1 full year.

For anyone facing a 2nd Offense, beyond the relative leniency or toughness of the particular Court where their case is pending, the issue becomes whether or not this charge is the symptom of a much deeper alcohol problem, or is rather a case of repeat poor judgment. Try to imagine the Judge's perspective: Every single 3rd Offense Felony Drunk Driver was, before that, a 2nd Offense Drunk Driver who probably said something like "it won't happen again."

Continue reading "DUI 2nd Offense in Michigan - Am I Going to Jail?" »

This installment will deal with why a person cannot win back their Driver's License in Michigan if they are still on Probation or Parole. The first part of my job as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer is to "screen" a potential client. I want to know if they're eligible to file an Appeal, but even if they are, that doesn't mean that they're anywhere near being qualified, or able to win it. And one of the big obstacles to winning an Appeal is being on Probation (or Parole) at the time it's filed.

Let's be clear about it: If your License has been Revoked for 2 DUI's within 7 years (Mandatory 1-year Revocation), or 3 or more within 10 years (Mandatory 5-year Revocation), and you are on Probation (or Parole), you cannot win Restoration of your Driver's License from the Michigan Secretary of State Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), Period.

The is the case because the DAAD knows that whenever a person is on Probation or Parole, they are required to refrain from consuming any alcohol or controlled substances (without a prescription). Inevitably, the person is subject to either regular, or at least random testing. And if they test positive, the consequences (i.e., a Probation Violation, or a Parole Violation) can involve going to Jail, or back to Prison. This is a pretty strong deterrent to using while on Probation or Parole.

The DAAD calls this "living in a controlled environment."

Of course, for those who truly embrace recovery, their sobriety has nothing to do with being monitored and tested. In other words, people who really are clean and sober don't abstain from drinking out of a fear of getting caught; they remain sober because, as the saying goes, they "are sick and tired of being sick and tired."

The question then becomes, how can the DAAD separate those who are truly sober from those who are not drinking because they're being monitored and tested? And the unfortunate answer is that they cannot. Even those truly committed to recovery, and still on Probation or Parole, will have to admit that there is no definitive way to tell one group from the other. It goes without saying that this rather "sucks" for those who are part of the "truly recovering" group, but that's the way it is.

Once a person has been released from Probation, or Parole, and when they are no longer subject to testing, or to punishment for drinking or using, and they continue to remain clean and sober, then there is no longer any issue about them "living in a controlled environment." Their sobriety is unquestionably voluntary. At that point, once they become eligible to file a License Appeal, they have at least eliminated one insurmountable obstacle to regaining the privilege to drive in Michigan.

As common as Marijuana Crimes are in Michigan, it's not surprising that more than a few of them are for 2nd Offenses. I was recently asked, in my role as Criminal Defense Lawyer, about the penalties for a Second Offense Possession of Marijuana. And the answer to that question is not as clear as one might first think.

In an earlier Blog Post, we learned that Marijuana Possession can be charged as either a violation of a Local Ordinance, or a violation of State Law. Most local municipalities have a Marijuana Ordinance, and under their terms, Possession of Marijuana is designated as a Misdemeanor, punishable by no more than 93 days in Jail (and, as pointed out in that article, any Jail time, at least in a 1st Offense, is extremely unlikely) and a fine of up to $500 plus Court Costs. In addition, there are Mandatory Driver's License Sanctions (6 months Suspension of License; a Restricted License for the remaining 5 months may be granted by the Judge handling the case, after the first 30 days of the Suspension have passed) which must be imposed upon conviction.

Possession of Marijuana is also a Misdemeanor under State Law, but it is punishable by up to 1 year in Jail, and a fine of up to $2000. In addition, State Law violations also require the same mandatory Driver's License Sanctions.

Those are 1st Offense penalties. For a 2nd Offense, things can either take a turn for the worse, or not. If you think that's a curious observation, you're right. The truth of the matter is that what happens to anyone who is busted a 2nd (or even 3rd) time for Marijuana is really a matter of luck. If a person has already been convicted of Possession of Marijuana, and is then charged a 2nd time under State Law, the penalty rises to double that of a first State Law violation. This means a person can be charged with a Felony, punishable by up to 2 years in Jail, a fine of up to $4000, and even more severe License Sanctions (1 year Mandatory License Suspension, with no driving whatsoever for the first 2 months; The Judge handling the case may allow a Restricted License for the remaining 10 months, after the first 60 day Suspension has passed) than those that accompany a 1st Offense.

Even if a person has been convicted of Possession of Marijuana once before, and they are subsequently charged under a Local Ordinance, then there is no "Double Penalty" of any kind. That's why I noted above that whether a case goes one way or another is more a matter of luck than anything else.

Continue reading "Possession of Marijuana 2nd Offense in Michigan" »

It seems that the term "Free Consultation" is often misinterpreted as "Free Advice" or "Free Answers." To put this in perspective, let's talk about those Plastic Surgeons who do face lifts, certain enhancements, and other "nip and tuck" procedures. Often, they will advertise on the Radio or in the Phone book, and offer a "Free Consultation." It is clearly understood that they will spend the time with someone looking to perhaps use their services in order to assess what, if anything, they can do for that person.

No one would think to call them, set up an appointment, go in, and say "I don't have any money for a face lift, but I was wondering what you thought about these over-the-counter skin-firming products?" In the same way, who would go into a car dealership, pull into the service area, and meet with a mechanic to describe a "funny sound" their car was making, then tell they guy "I don't have the money to have you fix it, but if you'll tell me what to do, I am going to try it myself."

Yet amongst those who e-mail us everyday, we get any number of those who either outright tell us they don't have any money for a Lawyer, or whose e-mail is obviously seeking advice and direction with no intention of hiring me to do the work. I have tried, until now, to at least provide some help to those who ask for it, but the pressures of economic survival and the limitations of my own time, multiplied by the sheer number of such e-mails and calls, requires me to write this article explaining why I can no longer take the time away from paying Clients to advise those are not, and will not become, paying Clients.

The success of this Blog has been wonderful. I have tried, within the articles I write, to be as explanatory and helpful as possible, and, to be honest, I have yet to run across anything even remotely close to the information-loaded site I have put up. The payoff has been that any number of potential Clients find that I am more informative than any other Lawyer they have encountered. In the end, after a "consultation," they retain my services. This is how I pay for the employees, their benefits, the utilities and this Blog.

In addition to simply putting up a lot of information, I have repeatedly pointed out that my Criminal Practice (with the exception of Driver's License Restoration Cases) is limited to Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties. Even those willing to hire me outside the Metro-Detroit area should know that I do not handle cases anywhere outside of the Tri-County area, with the possible, and limited exception of certain cases in St. Clair, Lapeer, and Livingston Counties. Of Course, I can handle License Restoration cases that have anything to do with the State of Michigan, because I am able to schedule all Hearings in the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division's Livonia Office. I likewise handle Bankruptcy Matters from Macomb, Oakland, Wayne, St. Clair and Sanilac Counties because all those cases are heard in the Bankruptcy Court in Detroit.

So my purpose in writing this article is so that I have something to attach as a reply to those inquiries which are not seeking a "Consultation," but rather have a question or questions, or otherwise seek some direction in a Case which I will not be getting hired to handle, or to those asking about a case pending outside of the Tri-County area

A little math may help. Say we get 4 or 5 such "free" inquiries per day. And say I spend about 10 to 15 minutes reading, thinking about and responding to each. That totals nearly a little more than an hour a day, and over the course of a week, another 6+ hours of work for which I am not paid. Think of it this way; if your boss asked you to stick around for an extra hour everyday after work to just help out non-customers, and told you that you wouldn't be getting paid to do it, how quickly would you sign up for that program? You do, after all, want to go home, spend time with your family, and maybe help out with homework or whatever else your job as a parent requires.

Of course, my "Consultations" are still free, but the term "Consultation" needs to be understood in terms of an exchange of information to see if my services and someone's legal needs are a good match, and if those services will be retained in order to benefit the person and help their Legal situation.

In an earlier article on this Blog, I noted that there is a definite increase, at least in my Criminal Practice, in the number of cases involving prescription medication, and particularly in those involving Vicodin and Oxycontin. These drugs have, in recent years, become part of the menu of drugs used recreationally. In years past, it was more common to find someone with a residual habit caused by having to legitimately take these drugs for a real medical condition. In those cases, the reliance on the drugs continues after whatever condition for which they were originally prescribed has cleared up. Pretty much every celebrity in the papers reported going to rehab claims to have a problem with prescription painkillers as a result of some injury.

While the number of Possession of Analogue cases has skyrocketed, the number of cases arising from the act of getting, or trying to get these drugs, has also soared. Perhaps the most common charge is what is known as a Fraudulent Prescription charge. This can involve anything from trying to call in a phony prescription, pretending to be from a Doctor's office, to using stolen prescription pads, or just being the person who appears at the pharmacy to pick up a script.

Before we look at the legal implications of such a charge, let's look at some of the common telltale signs seen by pharmacy employees as they detect these kinds of fraud.

It goes without saying that there are certain drugs which raise suspicion far more than others. People don't get high on anti-biotics, so a phone call, supposedly from a Doctor's office, for a 7 day supply of an antibiotic is far less likely to arouse any curiosity than a phone call for a large supply of Vicodin.

I recently spoke with a Doctor who told me of a case where a local pharmacy had called him to verify a prescription in his name for 100 Vicodin. The Doctor confirmed the pharmacy's suspicion when he indicated that even in the most serious of injuries, he would never prescribe more than 60 at any time. The pharmacy thought the number was unusual, and the phone call confirmed that. The same Doctor told me how his prescription pads, with his DEA number on it, has been duplicated and stolen countless times, despite all the precautions he takes to safeguard against that.

Legally speaking, it is not uncommon for someone arrested for Fraudulent Prescriptions to subsequently be found to have been engaging in the practice for some time. In other words, once the Police start looking into the State database (formally known as Michigan's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, and it's tracking mechanism, called MAPS) where all prescriptions are archived, they often find a person has been prescribed an unusually large amount of these drugs, sometimes from the same Doctor's office to different pharmacies, other times from supposedly different sources to an even larger number of pharmacies. By the time many people resort to using phony scripts to obtain these drugs, they have developed a serious dependence on them.

Continue reading "Fraudulent Prescriptions in Michigan - Part of the Pill Problem" »

The issue of Probation Violations has been coming up more frequently in my Practice as a Metro-Detroit Criminal Defense Lawyer. Sometimes the person Violated is unable to attend all the counseling that was ordered as part of the their sentence, or provide all the urine samples required under the terms of the drug testing ordered by the Judge. Often, the person's problem has more to do with not having enough money to keep paying and paying for what seems like endless testing and classes rather than an unwillingness to comply with the Court's Orders.

A test is missed, or a class is skipped, and the person is told that they are being "Violated" and must re-appear before their Judge. Not good news. To make matters worse, the person is in need of a good Lawyer, but if a lack of money is the underlying problem, they realize that calling around to hire a Lawyer without money is like going to the Grocery store, having all your food rung up, and then asking to make payment arrangements. Perhaps reluctantly, some of these people ask for a Court-Appointed Lawyer figuring something is better than nothing. Others will find a way to scratch up enough cash to hire a Lawyer of their own choosing.

Then, on the day of the Probation Violation Hearing, the person is finally asked to admit or deny that they missed a test or test, or a class or classes. Usually, they admit the miss or misses, and seek to have their Lawyer convince the Judge to not just lock them up.

That's done, of course, by trying to explain to the Judge that any miss or misses were truly because of a lack of money, or a real threat of losing their job, and not some disregard of the Court's Probation Order. And it's at this point where the person is walking a very fine line between sympathy and impatience, at least from the Court's point of view. Let's face it, times are tough, and a lot more so here, in Michigan, than anywhere else. People are cash-strapped, and there just isn't enough money to go around. Those lucky enough to have a job need and want to keep it.

When someone is standing in front of a Judge to be Sentenced in a Criminal Case, they are pretty much worried about 1 thing; not going to Jail. No matter what else the Judge Orders, most people feel pretty good when they know they can walk out the front door of the Court, rather than being taken away through the back. Whether testing has been ordered once a month, once a week, or even 3 times per week, human nature leads people to believe they'll figure out a way to do whatever the Judge requires, despite perhaps already knowing that money is a problem.

Then, when the person is back home, settled into a routine, and there's just no money to go to testing or classes, they skip. When they feel they'll lose their job if they keep showing up late, or missing days, because they need to test, they skip. We know the rest of the story from there. So, how does the Court see these Violations?

Continue reading "On Probation in Michigan - Too Many Conditions to Handle " »

I doubt anyone I represent in Court has any intention of ever getting arrested again. As a Criminal Defense Lawyer for nearly 20 years, I can honestly say that I've heard the "it won't happed again" story thousands upon thousands of times. At the end of the day, however, a larger-than-you-might-expect number of Cases that I handle involve someone who is on Probation for one Offense getting arrested and charged with a new Offense.

And of course, they're afraid. In some cases, "freaking out" may be a more applicable term. Let's try to ease some of that apprehension by taking a look at what's really going on when this happens.

For starters, unless the new Offense involves some kind of Peace March, things are not going to be particularly good with the Judge to whom the person is on Probation. Generally speaking, any new criminal activity triggers a Probation Violation. It is beyond the scope of this article to define what does and doesn't constitute a Violation. On both my web site, and in another Blog article, I discuss Probation Violations in considerable detail. For our purposes, we'll assume the person arrested again is going to have to accept some kind of Plea deal on the new Case, thus guaranteeing a Violation on the old Case.

Okay, so when they call they're nervous. Often, however, I find that a person's concern is misplaced. In other words, while many individuals with whom I speak first express concern over what will happen in the new Case, it falls upon me to explain that the real cause for concern is with the old Case.

The plain fact of the matter is that Judges spend all day dealing with people who have prior Records. They're inclined to give a fresh look to someone who's new to them, unless of course the person has such a long prior Record that it begins to define who they are (think habitual offender...).

Continue reading "Michigan - Picking up a new Offense While on Probation for another" »

As a Practicing Criminal, DUI and Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I explain something about this area of the law, to at least someone, pretty much everyday. In this Blog, I have tried to address questions that I hear again and again, and this article will focus on one of those. Anyone facing a 2nd DUI within 7 years will eventually learn that there is a Mandatory License Revocation, meaning that their License will be completely taken away for at least 1 year. Concerned about their ability to work, or go to school, or go to the Doctor's, they ask:

"Can't I just go to Court to get some kind of Restricted License?"

Across the board, the answer is "No."

Prior to 1998, the Court hearing a DUI Case had to impose the Licensing Sanctions on the Driver. Different cases, and different Courts produced often very different results in similar circumstances.

In 1998, Michigan overhauled its Drunk Driving Laws. That overhaul came to be known as the "Habitual Offender" legislation. Among the sweeping changes to the DUI laws in Michigan was the transfer of authority over all DUI Licensing Sanctions away from the Courts, and directly to the Secretary of State. After the laws went into effect, it was no longer possible for a Judge hearing a DUI to make ANY decisions whatsoever about the Driver's License.

Moreover, the new law provided fixed, Mandatory Penalties for every kind of DUI (and Operating Under the Influence of Drugs) case. A 2nd Offense DUI within 7 years of the 1st results in a Mandatory 1 year License Revocation. A 3rd Offense within any 10 year period carries a Mandatory Revocation for at least 5 years. Interestingly, most people facing a 3rd DUI within 10 years are already painfully aware that their License will be yanked for a long time. They're more concerned about "when" rather than "if."

Let's look at an example: Prior to the Habitual Offender laws, if a person got a 2nd DUI within 7 years, but had the charge plea-bargained down to a 1st offense, the Judge could issue a Restricted License after 60 days of full suspension. After the Habitual Offender laws took effect, however, the Courts no longer had any power over a Driver's License. Beyond stripping the Courts of authority over a DUI Driver's License and rather than take into account what Plea Deals a person had made, the transfer of that power to the Secretary of State simply required it to count the total number of Alcohol-Related offenses a person had accumulated over a period of 7 or 10 years.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI 2nd Offense and Driver's Licenses - Can't I just go to Court to get some kind of Restricted License?" »

As a Criminal Defense Lawyer who Practices exclusively in the Metro-Detroit area, I handle loads of Driving on a Suspended License (DWLS) Cases. In my attempt to use this Blog to answer some of the more common questions I hear, let's address a question that is not often, but should always be asked by someone looking to hire a Lawyer to help them with one of these cases. That question is (or at least should be) "What should I do first?"

And the answer is pretty simple. For a good many people, perhaps even most of those charged with DWLS, the reason their License was suspended in the first place is either due to an unpaid, outstanding Traffic Ticket or Tickets, or their failure to pay an outstanding Driver Responsibility Fee to the Secretary of State. In either case, the first thing a person should do after being arrested for DWLS is to clear up the outstanding matter or matters. This means that if there is an unpaid ticket, or tickets, they should be paid. If there is an outstanding Driver Responsibility Fee, it should either be paid off, or arrangements made with the State for a payment plan, which can now spread the outstanding balance over a period of 24 months.

As a Lawyer for someone charged with a DWLS, the first thing I think about is trying to keep the DWLS completely off of their record. DWLS carries some consequences which, to be honest, are rather harsh. First, a person will receive a "Mandatory Additional Suspension," meaning their License will be suspended for an even longer period of time. Second, DWLS carries a mandatory Driver Responsibility Fee of $500 for two consecutive years. Also, and on top of a potential (but usually unlikely) Jail sentence, and additional fines and costs, a DWLS conviction carries 2 Points on a person's Driving Record.

When I represent someone who has been charged with DWLS, if I can show the Prosecutor that the person has paid their outstanding tickets, or scheduled them for Court dates, or paid their outstanding Driver Responsibility Fees or otherwise arranged a payment plan, I can usually get the Prosecutor to agree to reduce the DWLS charge to one that carries no "Mandatory Additional Suspension," no Driver Responsibility Fees, and no Points. Most often, this plea deal allows the DWLS to be dismissed and the person will instead Plead guilty to "No Ops," which means No Valid Operator's License on Person. Although "No Ops" is still technically a crime, I have never, in nearly 20 years of doing this, even heard of a person getting any jail time for it.

Bottom line: If someone calls me, the first thing I'm going to talk to them about is clearing up their outstanding matters. Even if a person cannot afford to do it all at once, a Defense Lawyer will know how to buy time so that the person can get enough accomplished to make a "No Ops" deal a reality. If you're facing a DWLS charge, the first thing you should do is fix whatever got your License suspended in the first place, or at least start fixing it, if it cannot all be done at once..