Articles Posted in DUI 2nd Offense

A rather large percentage of my DUI practice involves handling second time drinking and driving cases, meaning cases for people that have had a prior drunk driving a long time ago, as well as people facing an actual 2nd offense DUI charge. The reason for this is pretty simple: Those who have been through the process before recognize that my various explanations of the DUI process are pretty much spot-on, and have learned to separate what one wants to hear from what is true and accurate. There is, at least legally speaking, a vast difference between a 2nd offense DUI charge and merely going through the process for the 2nd time after a prior offense many years ago. A 2nd offense DUI charge is one, by law, that is brought within 7 years of a prior such case. Technically speaking, a DUI is a “second” if the arrest date for the current charge takes place within 7 years from the date of the conviction for the first. This does not mean, however, that everything is just peachy-good simply because a prior DUI falls outside of the 7-year window. Sure, a whole boatload of legal problems is avoided when your second DUI is not technically a “2nd offense,” but you still have to deal with the implications and reality of that prior offense, even if it cannot be used to enhance the penalties of the current charge.

ball-number-2-clip-art-free-vector-4vector.pngRecently, while attending a hearing in a driver’s license restoration case, a hearing officer redefined things for me and my client (who did win his full license back, by the way) after he characterized his 2 DUI’s as “mistakes.” She looked up, interrupted him, and said this: “Those weren’t mistakes. When you drove drunk the first time, you committed a crime. When you did it again, you became a habitual criminal.” That may sound harsh, but it gives a glimpse of how these cases are seen in the larger world. I’m sure one of the reasons I have such a robust DUI practice is that I am unique in pointing these things out, and speak rather candidly, if not at least diplomatically about these subjects. Avoiding real-world discussions and/or sugar coating things doesn’t help anyone. I have no tolerance for being patronized, and, in turn, have no inclination to do the same to anyone else. It is very easy for a lawyer to simply agree with the client (remember, the customer is always right) and not want to offend him or her, but the reality is that if you’re going to do anything good for a person facing a second DUI, it means you may have to get a little uncomfortable and tell it like it is. And it is this way: a person going to court for a DUI who has had a prior drinking and driving conviction is going to be seen by the Judge (and almost everyone else) as having, or as being at a substantially increased risk of having, a problematic relationship to alcohol.

I say this because most people who contact a lawyer for a second DUI, even if the charge itself is not a “2nd offense,” will want to explain that no matter how things look, they don’t have a drinking problem. If you sat in my chair, you could pretty much bank on hearing that in almost every such case, and usually as one of the very first things a person will say, at that. I understand this, but as easy as it would be for me to nod and agree, if I’m going to make things better for my client, then I need him or her to understand that you can say that until the end of time, but, in only a few exceptional circumstances, you’re not going to get the Judge to just go, “Oh, okay, well, I’m glad you cleared that up…” You don’t have to think about this too long or hard to realize that it doesn’t matter what you or I think. In the final analysis, it matters what the Judge thinks, and, when you think about that even a little, you begin to realize that nothing else matters nearly as much….
Continue reading

In my day-to-day role as a Michigan DUI lawyer, one of the most common questions I am asked is something like, “What’s going to happen to my driver’s license?” This is often followed by an explanation of how the person needs a license to drive to work, or a question about what can be done so he or she can have a license to at least get to work. In this article, I want to answer those questions; those answers are, in fact, clear and simple, but sometimes the consequences are hard to accept. The whole point of this article is to make crystal clear what will happen to your driver’s license in a drunk driving case. The rules governing what happens are fixed and inflexible, and as frustrating as that can be, it also simplifies things quite a bit.

600x400-Kevins2.jpgBefore I explain how a Michigan OWI charge affects a driver’s license, I need to be a bit undiplomatic and stop a certain line of questions right in its tracks. People will often ask things like, “How do they expect me to keep my job,” or “How am I supposed to get my kids to school.” To be clear, if not cold, under the law, that’s your problem. The rules are the rules, and if you can’t drive to work and that means you’ll lose your job, you need to understand that there is no “they,” and therefore no person, mechanism or system that cares about, understands or who can otherwise do anything about your situation. There is nobody who “expects” you to do anything. Instead, there is a set of rules that applies when you get a DUI, and it applies no matter who you are, how much money you have (or don’t) and whatever your personal situation. If you first accept this principle that these rules apply without exception, then it becomes much easier to understand what will happen to your license.

A common misconception, when someone facing a drinking and driving charge asks about his or her license, is the idea that the Judge, or the enigmatic and undefined “they,” so often the target of the never ending “what about” questions, has anything to do with what happens. Let me make this very clear: What happens to your license is a matter of written law, and no one, including the Governor of the State of Michigan or the President of the United States, can alter, change, lengthen, shorten or otherwise modify any part of it. There is 100% absolutely NO possibility of going to court to “get” any kind of relief or change any part of what the rules require to happen, and there isn’t even a procedure to do so anyway. In other words, trying to go to court to change what happens to your license is like trying to file a case in court to change the weather; it’s not an option. With that established, let’s move on to what does, in fact, happen to your license…
Continue reading

This will be an article about role of relapse in a Michigan DUI case. In the previous article, we focused on how relapse can be used as an asset in a driver’s license restoration case. I noted that in my role as a Detroit area (meaning Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County) DUI lawyer, alcohol, drinking (as in normal drinking), troublesome drinking and, in the case of my driver’s license restoration practice, recovery from drinking problems, are the focus of just about everything I do, every single day. Given that OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) cases are always about drinking, and given the court system’s natural bias toward finding and over-diagnosing drinking problem in those cases, it became obvious, that to really help my clients, I needed to advance my understanding of the whole clinical world of addiction and recovery. To do that, I went back to the university classroom and completed the coursework in a post-graduate program of addiction studies. This way, when I’m next to my client, I stand as the foremost authority in the courtroom on alcohol-related things like diagnosis, relapse and recovery. In a DUI case, a relapse usually brings both good news and bad news. The bad news, of course, is the DUI case itself.

craving_alcohol.jpgThe good news is that if we can properly communicate the entirety of the situation, we can assure the court that you don’t pose a worrisome risk of re-offending, and therefore don’t need to be pounded silly with all kinds of punishment. Granted, this sounds easier than it is (otherwise every lawyer would just say what I said and everything would be just fine), and that’s why I thought it worthwhile to invest years of my life and tens of thousands of dollars of my money into a formal program of addiction studies. Much of this is relevant to 2nd offense and 3rd offense DUI charges, and is not as broadly applicable to 1st offense drunk driving cases in general, but then again, broad generalities won’t help anyone who has relapsed only to wind up facing another drinking and driving charge.

As I pointed out in the prior, license reinstatement article, the term “relapse” is often used rather imprecisely. If a person has quit drinking and then engages in a single episode of drinking, that’s called a “lapse.” To continue drinking after that first episode (an episode can be anything from a single sip to a single drink to a whole, but single day of drinking) is to “re-lapse.” Thus, a relapse is a return to more than one episode of drinking. I’ve had DUI cases that have arisen the very first time my client picked up again, and I’ve had some that marked the tail end of a long, painful relapse, as well as just about everything in-between. If you are facing a DUI after having quit drinking, it may look bad at first glance, but we can – we must – and, if I’m your lawyer – we will use your prior period of abstinence to help your case. It goes without saying, though, that we’ll have to show how the lapse or relapse not only got you to stop drinking – again – but also how and why this time, it’s for good. So how do we do that?
Continue reading

As a Michigan DUI lawyer with a practice that concentrates exclusively in the Metro-Detroit area, I handle a lot of 2nd offense OWI (operating while intoxicated) cases. If you’re facing an OWI 2nd charge, the first concern you have is staying out of jail. Of course, this should also be the first concern of your lawyer, as well. Yet all the concern in the world won’t do you any good unless it translates into intelligently calculated and properly executed effort. It may seem trite, but hard work, in and of itself, can be a tremendous waste of time. You can go outside, gather up a pile of sticks and spend your time striking rocks together to create a spark that ultimately makes a flame, or, you can be smart about it and use a lighter or a match. In the context of a 2nd offense drinking and driving charge, it becomes important to understand that you must always take into account what’s at hand, and then use it, in the best way possible, to drive a better outcome.

Whiskey 1.2.jpgBefore going any further, let me clarify that the very first order of business in any DUI case is for me (and every lawyer) to gather the facts and investigate. This means obtaining the police report(s), breath and/or blood test results and any police car, dash-cam video. Every detail of the stop, the arrest, and the evidence must be examined carefully with the intention to find a way to beat the case, or at least find any problems with the evidence. It is only after that has been done that we turn to using what is “at hand,” and by that, I mean the facts of the case. I am fond of saying that combining a thorough knowledge of the facts and the law of a case to the careful application and management of perception, science and time produces the best outcome in a DUI case. Let’s make sense of this by looking at an example where we can focus on the management perception.

Imagine that you were talking to one co-worker about another co-worker named Stephanie who had recently been charged with a DUI, and you were told that she got so drunk she crashed into a parked car in some distant city, passed out behind the wheel and then was arrested. Imagine further that you were also told, in dramatic form that “Her breath test results came back way over twice the legal limit, like a .19 or something.” Your reaction would probably be negative; you might respond by saying something like, “No kidding, huh? That sucks. She must have a problem.” Now, what if the same story was told like this, instead? “Poor Stephanie; she is such a lightweight, and she wound up getting roped into going out with this group of people who are all big drinkers. They had her drink way too much, and the poor thing didn’t want to bother anyone to come get her. She was so out of it that she tried to drive home herself. She wound up getting lost, hit a parked car on some street on the other side of town, and then she just passed out. Someone called the cops, and they found her and took her to jail.” While neither story is good, your perception of Stephanie in the second description is probably not as negative as it was in the first. Managing perception is very important in a DUI case, and is only one small part of the equation…
Continue reading

Just about everyone has heard the old saying, “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.” As a DUI lawyer, it is imperative that my approach in every case is to find a way to “beat ’em.” For all we could say about it, the bottom line is that you will not find a way out of a DUI case in Michigan without looking for it. DUI charges do not dismiss themselves. Yet I have also discovered that, while listing my successes feels like bragging to me, the reading public apparently likes this sort of stuff, and uses it as at least one measure by which a lawyer is judged. This article will be about a case I recently handled; in this instance, I got the whole case dismissed. While every situation is different, this case is a very clear demonstration of the important principle that the best outcome in any case is achieved by combining a thorough knowledge of the facts and the law to the skillful management of time, perception and science.

Judgey.jpgThe case at issue was thrown out of court the week before this article was written. My client was charged with operating while intoxicated (OWI) 2nd offense in a local, Metro-Detroit area court. As I’ve noted before, I try to avoid identifying any particular court because I don’t think there is a single Judge out there who wants to ever be perceived or portrayed as being “easy” on drunk drivers. Fair and lawful as the dismissal at issue was, Judges sell themselves at election by promising to protect their constituencies and by being “tough” on criminals. You won’t see a Judge running for reelection talking about all the case DUI cases he or she has thrown out of court. In fact, you can take this to the bank: Judges don’t dismiss DUI cases because they want to, but rather only because they have to, and the reason they have to is because a lawyer like me has worked hard to find the way out. That’s what happened in the case at issue here.

As much as I believe it advisable to refrain from trumpeting identifying court information in the cases I describe, I also believe in not revealing too much detail about how I achieve certain results. Think about it; if the “secret sauce” in a winning case is the result of the careful management of time, perception and science, why would I want the Judge or the prosecutor to know all that. They might think that what I call that the careful “management” of time or perception is, at least in some cases, really a purposeful manipulation of those things. The cold reality is that you can get a court-appointed lawyer who is loved by the Judge and the prosecutor because he or she quickly pleads out every assigned case and moves the docket along at breakneck speed. This is great for the Judge and prosecutor, but if you’re the client, it’s much better if your lawyer makes things easier for you rather than them. The point I’m making is that being effective isn’t about being brash and obnoxious (some lawyers prefer to use the terms “tough” and “aggressive”) while stomping into court all full of antagonism and bluster. In a case where getting the most time is important, thundering into court like an angry bull may just speed up a showdown, and the benefit of stretching things out will be lost.

In the case that was dismissed last week, a blood test was taken, and the prosecution was counting on the results for its evidence. At first glance, the case looked pretty much open and shut. Yet a careful review of the evidence led to me finding legal grounds to challenge the blood test results, and, at the end of the day, the Judge wound up dismissing the whole case…
Continue reading

This article will be about the great results I produced in the 4 DUI cases I handled this past week in the Detroit area. On my website and within the numerous DUI articles on this blog, I examine and explain almost every aspect of Michigan DUI cases in careful detail. Here, we’re going to look at what all that analysis, knowledge and strategy actually produces. While I am certainly at the head of the class in terms of exploring how DUI cases work, I haven’t been so good at taking it to the next level and showing off the results. To be perfectly honest about it, while I am supremely confident in my own abilities and certainly proud of what I regularly accomplish, I am somewhat modest and really don’t like to do anything that seems like outright bragging.

Good Work 1.2.jpgRecently, both Ann, my senior assistant, and my web team have told me to do this. It has always seemed to me that the more cerebral reader could figure out from the kinds of articles I write that I produce exceptional results in Detroit-area DUI cases. I’m not nearly as shy about criticizing bargain, cut-rate legal services offered by some lawyers as I am to point to my own achievements. To me, it seems rather obvious that the top tier of DUI lawyers don’t tout their finest attribute as being the cheapest, or otherwise use the same worn-out labels for themselves like “aggressive,” “experienced” or “tough.” Yet I have to admit that I have been behind the curve in posting my real-world results because I hate coming off as boastful. Apparently, I need to do just that, so I’ll oblige. Since I handle so many DUI cases, we’ll look back at the 4 DUI cases I handled in court this past week.

I don’t know how to put this without sounding self-important, so I’ll just be direct: I don’t want to be too specific about the court or parties involved in the cases I’m about to review, because I don’t want to draw too much attention to the kinds of deals I can get, or the outcomes I produce, only to have there be some kind of “law and order” backlash. If I’m going to venture into this territory, then I might as well be upfront about the fact that I expect to produce the very best outcome humanly possible in every case I take. I expect to produce a result better than almost everyone else.

When it comes to protecting my clients from the implications of an alcohol problem that is, or is not present, I can safely say that I am without equal. I am actively and currently involved in the formal study of addiction and alcohol issues at the post-graduate (meaning one already possesses a graduate degree) level. There is no lawyer or Judge who knows more about the onset, development, diagnosis, treatment and recovery (including relapse) from an alcohol problem than I do. This makes me the expert in the courtroom about what does, and, more important in many cases, what does not constitute a drinking problem. Now, on to those cases…
Continue reading

As a Michigan DUI lawyer, I handle a lot of 2nd offense cases. I think that a good part of the reason why is that many people who’ve already had a 1st offense DUI read some of my articles and recognize the accuracy of how I explain the court process. In addition, because the whole issue of alcohol, and particularly your relationship to it, is the focal point in a 2nd offense DUI case, my expertise in addiction and alcohol issues is of immeasurable value. The bottom line is that anyone facing a 2nd DUI charge knows that things are serious, and that it’s important to get he best help you can.

While there is certainly a lot to a 2nd offense case, the hardest reality is that getting thrown in jail is a real possibility in this situation. That needs to be avoided at all costs, and it is unlikely that the level of expertise needed to produce the best results will come from the “low bidder.” For me, it is the convergence of a rather unique skill set that enables me to provide the best opportunity to stay out of jail and minimize all of the other consequences that are on the menu when you’re facing a 2nd offense. Someone who has been through the process before doesn’t have to take what I say on faith.

gettingArrested 1.2.jpgIn the bigger picture, it would just be more profitable for me to say what people want to hear in terms of making a 2nd offense DUI all better. However ignoring or refusing to look at and address the main issue a 2nd offense presents is not a strategy. To be completely honest about it, when you’ve been charged with a 2nd offense DUI, you are invariably seen as either having a drinking problem, or being extremely likely to have one. To put it another way, just about every Judge, at least in the Detroit area, will think that it’s highly unlikely that your drinking is not a problem. I cannot even fathom how a lawyer would not begin his or her representation, which is supposed to translate into “help” for the client, from this premise. To ignore this reality is not only disingenuous; it’s dangerous. Some think that simply ignoring this whole topic is good for business, in the sense that talking openly about it, as I do, might “scare” a prospective client away.

Think about it for a moment; do you really thing that there is any Judge who will look over from the bench and see a person with a 2nd offense DUI and just figure it’s bad luck? If we’re going to make things better for you, the first thing we need to do is take an honest look at your situation, and facing a 2nd offense DUI is a unique and troubling situation. At a minimum, you have to admit that a 2nd DUI represents some kind of ongoing problem when it comes to choices made, particularly choices about drinking, and driving. And from the new Judge’s point of view, whatever the other Judge in the first case did, it clearly wasn’t enough to put a stop to the behavior.

Accordingly, it would be ludicrous to think that the Judge in your 2nd offense case will be thinking that perhaps the 1 year of probation you got in your 1st offense case was just too much. The new Judge is going to be wondering what he or she has to do to make the point and get the drinking and driving to stop. About the last thing the new Judge is going to buy is another “it won’t happen again” promise. That pretty much amounts to nothing more than “been there, done that.” Instead, the new Judge will be waiting to hear what else you have to say, and show. And you better have something. That’s where I come in.
Continue reading

This article is going to be a rather direct examination of what most people facing a 2nd offense DUI in Michigan have as their most important concern: Staying out of jail. As a Detroit DUI lawyer who limits his Michigan DUI practice to the metropolitan Detroit, tri-county area, I have a wealth of experience in these local courts and know how to avoid a jail sentence where and whenever possible. This article will NOT deal with sobriety court: That option is only available in certain places and it’s a subject that has its own section on my website.

First and foremost, a DUI case is what I call “an accident of geography,” meaning no one plans on getting arrested for drunk driving in the first place, so where it happens is never a matter of design. In that regard, certain courts are just tougher than others. Of the three local, Detroit area counties, the courts in Oakland are much less “lenient” than those of either Macomb or Wayne. That’s just a fact. Even so, there are certain cities in Oakland County, like Royal Oak and Huntington Woods, that will seem much more “forgiving” than places like Bloomfield Hills or Rochester Hills. The same holds true amongst the various cities of Macomb and Wayne Counties, and, I imagine, for every county in Michigan with more than one District Judge. The essential difference is that if you had a choice, you’d always prefer to wind up in pretty much any court in Macomb or Wayne over as opposed to anywhere in Oakland County
Jail Hands.jpgLet’s start with a dose of reality: The undeniable truth in a 2nd offense DUI case is that you look like you’re a danger on the road. I defend DUI cases and keep my client’s out of jail all day long by recognizing the way things really work. If you’re going to have success at staying out of jail, you need a lawyer, like me, who darn well knows exactly what the Judge assigned to your case is thinking, and one thing you can count on is that there isn’t a Judge (or really anybody, for that matter) who doesn’t see a second time DUI offender as risky. This means that blundering into court and trying to explain that a second DUI charge is only a case of bad luck, and doesn’t really represent anything to worry about, is worse than rolling into court with no plan at all.

Here’s the rest of the bad news: The law essentially presumes that you have an alcohol problem in a Michigan 2nd offense DWI case. You are legally and technically classified as a “habitual offender.” As a result, the court is required to order you into counseling. There’s no way around it. In addition, the law requires that your driver’s license be revoked and that you cannot even start the process to ask for it back for at least a year, and only then after you attend and win a hearing before the Michigan Secretary of State’s Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). There, in order to win your license appeal, you must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that your alcohol problem is under control and that it is likely to remain under control. There’s a lot to all of this. If you’re facing a 2nd offense, you don’t need me to “rub it in,” but surely you know this is a much bigger deal than a simple first offense.

Here, it’s important to reiterate the focus of this article: Staying out of jail in a 2nd offense drunk driving case. We could make an endless examination of the nuances of 2nd offense cases, but here, we’re only concerned with not getting locked up. The good news is that if you succeed on that score, you will be free to attend to and deal with all these other things. While none of this is fun, avoiding incarceration in a 2nd offense DUI is the first order of business to which I attend as your lawyer.

For the most part, this is manageable. With a few exceptions, going to jail is not necessarily automatic. Even so, you have to have a plan that takes into account the 3 key variables present in every 2nd offense case. That’s where I come in…
Continue reading

In a recent article, I pointed out that the ultimate focus in any DUI case that doesn’t get dismissed for some defect in or lack of evidence is about the Driver’s relationship to alcohol. To anyone facing a 2nd or 3rd Offense DUI, this is obvious on several levels. This article will continue that discussion as it relates to anyone who has already had a DUI, and should prove equally informative to anyone who has never been through anything like this.

There is a good chance that if you have been Arrested for a 2nd or 3rd DUI, you are required to submit to some kind of alcohol (and often) drug testing as a condition of your Bond, or release. So much for the presumption of innocence, then…

Alcohol Rope 1.2.pngIn the real world, especially as it relates to DUI cases, the Court system struggles to even pay lip service to the presumption of innocence. Remember, the purpose of Bond, in the first place, is to make sure you show up in Court and don’t just run away. Bond, in that sense, is like a kind of “deposit.” How does any kind of alcohol testing help insure (or not) that a person will show up for Court? The fact is, this kind of testing has NOTHING to do with insuring a person shows up to Court, and has EVERYTHING to do with the undisputed, if unspoken, belief that a person charged with a DUI is guilty.

There is a reason for this belief, however. It’s not that Judges just pick this stuff out of the sky. In the course of their various careers, most Judges will handle thousands, if not tens of thousands, of DUI cases. By contrast, those same Judges will ever only wind up dismissing a mere handful of DUI cases, if they ever dismiss any, in all those years on the Bench. When a case is “knocked out,” it’s almost always because of some technical defect or shortcoming in the evidence. Very often, the problem lies with how the evidence was collected or tested, meaning there is some question as to the scientific, and therefore legal reliability of the evidence. Very seldom does anyone go to Trial in a DUI case and prove they were Sober.

The bottom line, at least to a Judge who sees thousands upon thousands of DUI cases, is that practically no one comes into Court charged with a DUI who hadn’t been drinking, and had a few too many. Once in a while I’ll get a DUI case where the Police failed to obtain breath or blood evidence, but that’s a lot different than arguing that someone with a .12 (one and a half times the legal limit) or even higher breath test wasn’t really over the limit.

If we’re going to be really blunt about it, then, that means that when Dan the Driver goes to Court after having been Arrested for DUI, and having blown a .12 (or higher), the Judge isn’t really thinking “Well, Dan is presumed innocent, so his breath test of .12 means nothing at this point. I wonder if the prosecutor will be able to prove Dan really was driving while intoxicated?” Instead, the Judge might figure that maybe, if Dan gets a really good Lawyer, and catches a lucky break, there might be some technical hiccup with the evidence and with a slick legal maneuver, Dan might be able to wiggle out of the charge.

In other words, Judges don’t really question that people charged with DUI have been drinking. Or driving. If you’re reading this, and you are required to test, there isn’t much more to say. If you have been through a DUI before, then you know what comes next…
Continue reading

As a full time Michigan Driver’s License Restoration and DUI Lawyer, I deal with the implications of a Second Offense Drunk Driving charge daily, and in different contexts, as well. As a Michigan DUI Lawyer, I am involved, nearly from the beginning of a 2nd Offense case, to guide my Client through the Court process. In that role, my job is to take a case and put it under the microscope and look for those flaws in the evidence that can be used to get the charge dismissed, or at least reduced. As a Driver’s License Restoration Lawyer, I help explain how that 2nd DUI was often the catalyst for my Client to recognize that they had a drinking problem.

Attitude is important. A DUI Lawyer must go in to a case expecting to find some problem with the evidence, or how it was gathered, and not just wait for the obvious to jump out of the file. I often point out that DUI cases don’t dismiss themselves. If you want to find a defect in the case, you have to look for it.

2nd 2.2.jpgThat said, by the time anyone is out of Jail and looking for a Lawyer, the facts of the case have been set in stone. What happened that resulted in the DUI Arrest happened; now, we’re looking backwards in time to see if the legality of what happened holds up under the law.

The same thing holds true a few years later, after a person becomes eligible and ready to file a Michigan Driver’s License Restoration Appeal. A person who has lost their License for multiple DUI’s has, in the meantime, either gotten Sober, or not. When someone calls my Office about a License Appeal, and I ask about their Sobriety, they either have it, or they don’t. These facts are also set in stone.

My differing roles as a Michigan DUI and Driver’s License Restoration Lawyer requires me to have certain differences of personality, as well. As a DUI Lawyer, I am the Lawyer, first and foremost. In a certain sense, I am a hired gun. My first mission, once hired in a DUI case, is to find some way to beat the case, or at least do serous damage control. When I can exploit a flaw in the evidence, or the way it was gathered, and manage to get the case “knocked out,” I do just that. I am hired, really, to make as much of a DUI go away as I can.

Yet there is a whole other side to this, and to me, as well. If a person picks up a 2nd DUI within 7 years, Michigan Law concludes that they are what’s called a “habitual offender,” and presumes that they have an alcohol problem. When that same person comes forward a year to two (or three of four, or even more) years later, to have their License Reinstated, the Michigan Secretary of State’s Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) will require that the person prove, by “clear and convincing evidence,” that their alcohol problem is “under control, and likely to remain under control.” This means that I also have to work under the legal presumption that a person with a 2nd (or subsequent) DUI has an alcohol problem.
Continue reading