Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Part of my Practice includes working out Traffic Tickets. In other Blog articles I have explained how I handle Tickets, and on my Website I also discuss the general philosophy I have regarding Tickets, and the Fees I charge to handle them (about $450 to $600 for Civil Infractions, and between $1200 to $2200 for those that are Misdemeanors, or Criminal Traffic Matters that carry a potential Jail Sentence).

I also point out that my Traffic Ticket Practice is limited to Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties. Given what I charge, there is no way it's worth my time to go farther, and it's also true that I don't think it's worth anyone spending much more than what I charge when they can find a local Lawyer in a distant County who can probably do the same thing that I can, and for what I charge locally.

When a person gets a Ticket, the first thing they should do is decide whether or not they're going to simply "eat it" or if they want to avoid, or at least lessen the points and other consequences of it. Given that I call not doing something about a Ticket "eating it," you can probably already tell that I think just paying it is a dumb idea. It's not just my professional experience that results in that conclusion.

As a Law Student, over 20-some years ago, I remember getting a Ticket and telling one of my classmates about it. At the time, I was just going to pay the Ticket and be done with it. My classmate told me that I would be crazy to just pay the Ticket. He had an older brother who was a Lawyer, and told me I should hire him and have him take care of it for me. At the time, I think I had a few points on my Record, so my big concern was that my insurance would go up.

I decided that I was willing to see what my friend's brother could do. I plunked down his fee (reduced because I was his brother's friend, and as a quasi-professional courtesy). My buddy's brother went to Court with me, and wound up getting the Ticket worked out where no points would go on my Record. I paid a fine, and that was it. I had saved not only the points on my Record, but the inevitable increase in insurance rates that would have followed.

Sometimes, when people call me, they either cannot come see me within the time remaining before they have to either pay the ticket of set up a Court Date, or they may not have the money until that time has passed. So what should a person do?

Without fail, and in every Ticket Case, a person who if facing a Citation would be well-served to call the Court and at least have the matter set for an "Informal Hearing." This will stop the clock from running, as the Court will inform the Person that they'll be mailed a Court date some time in the future. In the meantime, they can make arrangements to hire a Lawyer.

For those who have the money and ability to jump right on it, then there's no need to call the Court. Just hiring the Lawyer will allow the Lawyer to file Papers with the Court which will likewise "stop the clock" and cause the matter to be set for a future Court Date. For those, however, who might need a little time, calling the Court and requesting and "Informal Hearing" will result in additional time to hire the Lawyer.

When a Lawyer is hired, even if it's the very day before the "Informal Hearing," the Papers he or she files with the Court then causes the Citation to be re-scheduled for what's called a "Formal Hearing," which is where the Lawyer meets with the Prosecutor at a "Pre-Trial," just like that in a Misdemeanor Case.

Being a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer means that, beyond calls from those who want to hire me to handle their case the first time, I get any number of calls from people who have already tried (either on their own, or with a Lawyer other than me), and lost. Usually, the first thing they want to know is about filing an Appeal. I explain to such a caller that Appeals to Circuit Court are generally a waste of time and money. Winning an Appeal to Circuit Court after losing at the DAAD essentially involves proving that the Hearing Officer didn't follow the law. I could go on all day about what that means, but most often, it boils down to throwing good money after bad in a futile attempt to overturn the DAAD's ruling. If the caller has taken the time to read the volumes of stuff I have written about this subject, they know that, whatever else, I know this area of the Law pretty well.

The conversation usually moves on to my representing them when they're 1 year is up, and they can file again for a new Hearing. This is when I have even more bad news. I have to explain that all the mistakes were made in that first, unsuccessful Hearing, do not simply go away, but remain part of the Record of their case. In other words, whatever caused them to lose the first time must be addressed in the subsequent Hearing. And this has the potential to be a huge problem.

This isn't bragging, but I win over 90% of my License Appeals. In those rare instances where I'm not successful, it's usually no surprise to either me, or my Client. In fact, it better not be a surprise to the Client, because if the person hasn't been made aware of any weaknesses in their case, and hasn't made an informed decision to go ahead, anyway, then there has been a serious problem in the Attorney-Client communication. Crippling problems, such as having a not-good-enough Substance Abuse Evaluation, or not-good-enough Letters of Support, or the lack of a fundamental understanding of the principles of recovery, are the kinds of problems which can never be overcome at the Hearing, and, in those cases, I would never file for a Hearing until things were made right beforehand.

When someone loses, however, then calls me, I don't have the luxury of having prepared their case. Thus, if the Substance Abuse Evaluation that they, or their previous Lawyer submitted wasn't good enough for the Secretary of State, then whatever problems it had must be addressed in the next year's Hearing. This means that if a person's Prognosis for Continued Abstinence wasn't good enough in their first Hearing, it won't do to just come in next year with an improved Substance Abuse Evaluation. Now, the person is going to have to explain and show what changed in the last year to account for the improvement in their Prognosis.

Continue reading "Winning back your Michigan Driver's License - 2nd time is NOT the Charm" »

Filing for an Adminstrative Review may be the ultimate shortcut to losing a License Appeal in Michigan. As a Driver's License Restoration Attorney, my reasons for urging caution with this process might not be what you'd think. Sure, you might figure that there's no way some guy who gets paid to represent people in License Restorations would ever encourage them to try it themselves, because that's essentially taking money out of his pocket.

The truth is, I am and always have been a big believer in self-help. I have never made a living doing for others what they can effectively do for themselves. The principal reasons I am not a fan of the Administrative Review process have to do with the high number of unsuccessful Appeals, and the fact that whatever causes a person to lose is yet another obstacle that needs to be overcome in the next Appeal. In a recent Blog article, I discussed the general idea that after a loss, winning an Appeal becomes even more difficult. While not focusing so much on the Administrative Review process, I did point out in that any License Appeal, whatever is filed with the State, or is brought out at the Hearing (win or lose), becomes part of the Record of the case and follows the person through all subsequent proceedings.

This means that the reasons for a Denial in an Administrative Review don't go away when a person files his or her next Appeal. Let's look at an example: Say a person loses their Administrative Review because their Substance Abuse Evaluation wasn't adequately favorable, or was otherwise inconsistent in some regard (a problem which is far more common than you might think, especially for those Substance Abuse Evaluations done by Counselors who do not regularly do them for the Michigan Secretary of State Driver's Assessment and Appeal Division Hearings).

When a person files for their next Appeal, the first thing the DAAD is going to look at is the order denying that first Appeal, and see if whatever was cited as a reason for that denial has been properly addressed and corrected.

Thus, if within that previously-submitted Substance Abuse Evaluation a person's "Prognosis" for continued abstinence from alcohol was not good enough, the DAAD is going to want a very clear explanation at the next Appeal about why it has become better. In other words, just submitting a better Evaluation with a more favorable "Prognosis" the next time won't cut it. One or the other Evaluation is wrong, and one or the other is accurate; a person filing a second Appeal after a loss is going to have to clearly explain this apparent contradiction.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Gambling on an Administrative Review" »

This article will focus on License Revocations that occurred after January 1, 1992, but prior to October 1, 1999, when Michigan's Habitual Offender Drunk Driving Laws went into effect. This Blog article follows one about Licenses that were Revoked, prior to 1992, for multiple Drunk Driving convictions. As a Lawyer who concentrates a significant part of his Practice in License Restorations, my experience with Suspended and Revoked Licenses pretty much runs the gamut of possible circumstances and situations.

Prior to the Habitual Offender Laws of October 1, 1999, a person who was caught Driving on a Suspended or Revoked License was punished by having their License Revoked for an additional number of years similar to whatever their then-current suspension or revocation period was. In other words, if a person had been revoked for 5 years for 3 DUI's within 10 years, then a Driving While License Suspended/Revoked/Denied (DWLS/DWLR) conviction would automatically get another 5 years tacked onto that Revocation. And this kept adding up for every DWLS/DWLR case they got. The end result was that some people were Revoked for 20, 30, or even more years!

In 1999, the Habitual Offender Laws, which made pretty much everything connected with Drunk Driving even tougher, did, however, lighten up the penalties for what are known as "Mandatory Additionals." Instead of compounding Revocations until the end of time, that same person who was Revoked for 5 years (due to multiple DUI's within 10 years) and who got another DUI would simply be Revoked for 5 years from the date of his or her last conviction.

This was great news for anyone arrested after October 1, 1999, but kind of shut out in the cold anyone whose arrest occurred before then. In particular, it tended to treat more harshly (or at least it appeared to) those whose Revocations occurred from January 1, 1992, up to September 30, 1999. Those whose DUI's occurred before the 1992 laws went into effect were still eligible to file and Appeal in the Circuit Court in the County in which they lived, and to have a License Restored based simply upon their need for one. This was known as a "Hardship Appeal."

The "Hardship Appeal" was completely and totally eliminated by the 1992 laws. When the Repeat Offender Law became effective on October 1, 1999, one of the big changes was that anyone who got another DUI, even if it was their 5th, or 15th, or 20th, would still be eligible to file a License Appeal 5 years from their last one.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restoration Appeals - Revoked Until the Distant Future" »

As a License Restoration Lawyer, I help people understand the License Restoration process and answer lots of questions about it. It has been my hope that the numerous articles on the Blog in the Driver's License Restoration category can help explain the process and answer many of those questions.

One question that comes up quite frequently from people who've had their License revoked because of multiple DUI's is something like "Can't we just go to Court and get some kind of Restricted License?"

Generally speaking, the answer is "no," but there is an exception, although it applies to a small, and shrinking group of people. The reason I point it out is that in the last year alone, 2 of the License Restorations I handled fell into this category.

For anyone whose last DUI occurred in 1991, or earlier, then the possibility of going to Court and getting a License Restored does legally exist. If a person's last DUI occurred in 1992, or any time thereafter, then there is NO possibility of having a Revoked License Restored in Court.

Here's why: In 1992, new DUI laws went into effect that completely eliminated what were known as "Hardship Appeals" in License cases. A Hardship Appeal simply meant that a person whose License had been Revoked for multiple DUI's could go to Court, and demonstrate how not having a Driver's License was a hardship upon them, and ask the Court to grant some kind of License. That whole process was eliminated by the 1992 law, and from that point forward, any new License Revocation could not be undone except by a License Appeal to the Michigan Secretary of State's DAAD (Driver's Assessment and Appeal Division, which was then known as the DLAD, or Driver's License Appeal Division). Beyond where the Appeal was to be filed, the whole hardship thing went out the window. In other words, it couldn't matter less how difficult life became without a License. Hardship was no longer a basis, or even part of one, for a multiple DUI Revoked License Appeal. New rules governing License Appeals went int effect.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - Can I go to Circuit Court for a License?" »

In the previous article on this Blog, we examined the difference between Misdemeanor and Civil Infraction Traffic Offenses, and learned that Misdemeanor Traffic Offenses can NEVER be removed from a person's Criminal Record. In this article, we'll look at the consequences of that permanence, and see how it applies in the real world.

As a practicing Criminal Defense Lawyer, I spend a lot of time in the Metro-Detroit area Courts. A recent experience in a city outside the Suburban-Metro area (hereafter referred to as the "other place") serves as the inspiration for this installment. To be fair, I cannot say where this case was handled, other than to point out that it was not in Macomb, Oakland, or Wayne County. In fact, an experience like this tends to reinforce my general policy to limit my Practice to the Tri-County area, with certain, limited exceptions. And I got into this case as one of those exceptions.

My Client was charged with Driving While License Suspended, Revoked or Denied (DWLS/DWLR), 2nd Offense. His last DWLS/DWLR conviction occurred more than 10 years before this most recent charge. He has 4 total prior DWLS/DWLR convictions. His License was Revoked due to several DUI convictions, the last also occurring nearly 10 years before this arrest. To be clear, his last DUI did, in fact, occur after his last DWLS/DWLR case.

Somehow or other, my Client was able to get a License from another State right after his last DUI conviction (definitely an error on that State's part), and returned to Michigan for a visit a little over 5 years ago, when he held the then-valid, out of State License. He got pulled over in a local city, and because his Michigan License was revoked, was still cited for DWLS/DWLR. He returned to the other State without taking care of this Michigan matter, and all but forgot about it.

Until he got arrested for DWLS/DWLR in the "other place." When his LEIN record was run, it came up that he had an outstanding Bench Warrant for his failure to show up to Court for the local DWLS/DWLR case. The end result to all this was that he had to post a Bond for the Old, local case, as well as the new, "other place" case.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended or Revoked - a Return to Forever" »

We've all heard the term "Traffic Offense." Usually, it's used to denote a legal problem of relatively minor significance. Sometimes the term "Traffic Offense" is improperly used as a synonym for "Traffic Ticket." While all Traffic Tickets, are, by their very nature, Traffic Offenses, not all Traffic Offenses are merely simple Traffic Tickets.

Traffic Offenses can be divided into 2 categories: Civil Infractions and Misdemeanors. Civil Infractions are Offenses which DO NOT carry any possible Jail term. Most, but not all, Civil Infractions carry Points, which are applied to a Driver's Record, plus fines. Think Speeding Ticket.

Traffic Misdemeanors, on the other hand, DO carry a potential Jail Sentence. In addition, many, although not all, Misdemeanor Traffic Offenses carry Points, as well as fines and Court costs. Think DUI and Suspended License charges.

In my Criminal Practice, the general lack of clarity regarding a "Traffic Offense" comes up in many different ways. Let's look at a few examples.

When someone hires me because they've been charged with a crime, and I ask if they have any prior Criminal Convictions, I often get a response like "no, just some Traffic stuff." But as we've seen, some Traffic Offenses are Civil Infractions, and others are Misdemeanors. All Traffic Misdemeanors are, first and foremost, Misdemeanors, meaning they are Criminal Offenses. A person convicted of a DUI, or Driving While License Suspended charge does, in fact, have a "prior," or "priors." A person with 100 Speeding Tickets, but no prior Misdemeanor of Felony convictions, (Traffic or otherwise), despite being a lousy driver, does not have any "priors."

Here's where it gets tricky: Traffic Misdemeanors can NEVER be removed from a person's Criminal Record. While even a Delivery of Heroin Felony conviction can be set aside, by law, no Traffic Misdemeanor can ever "come off" a person's Record. Traffic Misdemeanor are worse than bad tattoos; at least a tattoo can be removed, even though the process is painful.

Continue reading "Misdemeanor Driving Offenses - On Your Record Forever" »

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" »

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" »

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..

A few years back, the State of Michigan enacted a new Law which created a new crime, called Operating While in the Presence of Drugs. Even prior to the enactment of the new Law, it was always illegal to Operate a Motor Vehicle Under the Influence of Drugs, and the charge associated with that offense was known as OUID. Now, Driving Under the Influence of Drugs is part of the overhauled OWI law, and included in that law is the new "Presence of Drugs" Offense, set forth in section (8).

The history of these laws is not nearly as important as their consequences. OWPD simply defines "presence" of drugs as "if the person has in his or her body any amount of a controlled substance..." This means that a person who submits to a urine test and, for example, tests positive for Marijuana, can be charged and convicted of the Offense simply because the substance was in their body (i.e., any amount in their body). I have seen this Offense charged in Macomb County.

Pretty much everyone knows that marijuana affects the user for up to several hours after consumption, and pretty much everyone will agree those effects are gone the next day, if not far sooner. Under this new law, a person who smoked a small amount of Marijuana almost 30 days before any urine test may well be "positive" for "any amount" of drugs within their body, and be subject to the same penalties as a Drunk Driver. Remember, the metabolites of Marijuana show up in urine for up to 30 days.

Of course, other Drugs have much shorter half-lives, making a positive urine test much more likely to indicate recent ingestion. Even so, it is very clear that to drive under the influence of drugs is a crime. This new law goes way beyond that. Think about it this way; under this law, if a person uses Marijuana even once, in their lifetime, they cannot drive without violating this law until they test themselves and make sure that any trace amount is out of their system, which, as we know, can take up to 30 days.

With the exception of a $500 Driver Responsibility Fee for 2 years (as opposed to $1000 for OWI), all the penalties for a 1st Offense violation of this law are the same as they are for a 1st Offense DUI:

$100 to $500 fine and one or more of the following:

Up to 93 days in jail.

Up to 360 hours of community service.

Driver's license suspension for 30 days, followed by
restrictions for 150 days.

Possible vehicle immobilization.

Six points on driving record.

$500 Driver Responsibility fee for two consecutive years.

The point to all this is just to note that many people may not even be aware that they are violating the Law when they drive their car, even those who would never think to endanger anyone by driving under the influence of anything. Fortunately, in my Practice, which involves handling all kinds of DUI and other Driving and Driver's License Cases, the charge of OWPD has only come up rarely. Given the apparently unfair effect of the law, let's hope it stays that way.