Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Part of what "inspires" me to write any given article on this blog is often that a particular subject has come up in my dealings with Clients and/or those who call my Office. Recently, the subject of a "sober lifestyle" has come up in several contexts, and, given its importance and relevance to a License Appeal, I thought we might put this issue on the table for a closer examination.

The whole concept of a "sober lifestyle" is more or less an inherent and necessary, if not overlooked, component of Recovery and Sobriety, much like electricity is a necessary element of watching TV. It's there, but we don't spend much time thinking about it.

However, the State, particularly the Hearing Officers of the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), do think about it. They look for it in any License Appeal that they decide.

In other License Restoration articles, I have examined the finer points of the issues involved in a License Appeal. Here, we can simply and summarily point out that the two main issues being evaluated by those Hearing Officers are whether the person filing the License Appeal can prove, by Clear and Convincing Evidence, that:

1. Their alcohol problem is under control, and, (more importantly), that
2. Their alcohol problem is LIKELY to remain under control.

As I noted above, the whole notion of a "sober lifestyle" is, more often than not, just an inherent part of a person's Sobriety. Once a person has maintained Sobriety for any length of time, the whole "sober lifestyle" thing becomes second nature, like brushing your teeth in the morning before you leave for the day. However, that "sober lifestyle" is also one of the strongest predictors of a person's likelihood to remain alcohol-free, or to use the State's terminology, that the person's alcohol problem "is likely to remain under control."

For the reader who has undergone the transformation from drinker to non-drinker, let's rewind a bit, to right before your last drink. On that score, the majority, although not all of those who get Sober, fix their last drink as the date of their last DUI Arrest. It really doesn't matter when it was; just think back to a few weeks before you "put the plug in the jug," to use a familiar phrase.

Continue reading "Why a "Sober Lifestyle" is Important in a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal" »

About half of my Driver's License Restoration Clients reside out-of-state. These people can be divided into 2 categories:

1. Those who left Michigan with a Revoked License due to multiple DUI's, and who have been unable to obtain a License outside of Michigan, and
2. Those who were able to obtain an out-of-state License but are then unable to renew it due to a subsequently discovered Michigan "hold" on their Driving Record.

When someone who has left Michigan, and thereafter obtained a License in a different state contacts me, they often express a sense of frustration, as if there has been some mistake. After all, they had a License in their new state, and they haven't had any Arrests or problems. How can this be? Is there some mistake? Isn't' there something that can quickly be done so that they can renew?

Usually, the source of their difficulty is what's called the National Driving Register. While the details and nuances of it's operation are rather involved, and go beyond the scope of this article, what matters is that it exists, and means a person who has obtained a License in another state, and who has had their driving privileges Revoked in Michigan, will, at some point, be unable to renew that License until they clear Michigan's "hold" on their driving Record. This is like a big, comprehensive national driving Record. To be clear, most people will simply be unable to obtain a License in another state because Michigan's Revocation (seen by that other state as a "hold") will show up right away. Yet in any number of cases, it does not, for some reason, and only catches up with the person later, when they go to renew their out-of-state License.

In terms of how it works, the inability to renew an out-of-state License requires the same "Clearance" that must be obtained before the usual, Revoked because-of-multiple-DUI's driver can obtain a License anywhere. Except for the fact that an out-of-state resident will seek the ability to obtain a License in a state other than Michigan, whereas a Michigan resident will seek Restoration of his or her Michigan Driver's License, the proof required to win such an Appeal is identical.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Holds - Unable to Renew a License From Another State" »

In part 6 of this series, we discussed what happens at the actual Drivers' License Appeal Hearing. In this seventh and final installment of our overview of the Driver's License Restoration Process, we'll wrap up with some final observations about what happens after the Hearing. We'll examine how an Appeal is either Granted or Denied, we'll talk about the mandatory ignition interlock system that Michigan residents must install in whatever car they'll be driving for at least a year, and what the term "Restricted" means as far as a License goes, how out-of-state Clients essentially win an "Full" License, and then we'll finish with some commonly asked questions about the License Appeal Process.

Let's rewind a bit. Let's go back to the Hearing Room for a moment. The Hearing has just ended. The Hearing Officer calls the case "off" the Record, announcing the time it ends, and then hits the "stop" button on the Recorder. At that point, goodbyes are said, and we leave the Hearing Room and head toward the waiting room of the DAAD Hearing Office.

After the Hearing has ended, I usually go over it with my Client, and do a sort of "post-game wrap up." Normally, this involves me explaining to the Client how and why I think we won.

That's it. The process, or at least our active part in it, is complete at that point. No decision is announced at the conclusion of the Hearing. Instead, we go home and wait.

I'm often asked about that. Standard protocol is for the Hearing Officer to tell the parties that he or she will take the Appeal under advisement, and, once a decision is reached, will thereafter forward a written copy of that decision to everyone. One of the main reasons the Hearing Officers do not announce a decision on the spot is for safety. Except for those that I handle, many, if not most Appeals, lose.

In my Practice, I win nearly 99% of mine the first time, and, as I have mentioned before, I offer a guarantee that I'll win any Appeal I accept the first time, and will go back, without further legal Fees, until I do win my Client's License back. Thankfully, I've never had to go back a 3rd time, and out of the hundreds and hundreds of cases I've handled, have only had to go back a second time on just a few occasions.

If the Hearing Officer were to announce to someone that they have just lost, it's not hard to imagine someone "going off" on them, blaming them for holding the person back with respect to their employment opportunities, or their ability to otherwise lead a normal life. BY the same token if the Hearing Officers began announcing winning decisions on the spot, while those people would be grateful, others might learn that NOT being told they've won means they lost, and that could result in the same kind of confrontation.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 7" »

In Part 5 of this series, we discussed preparing for a License Appeal Hearing. In this sixth part, we'll move on to examine the actual Hearing, but we'll tie in a few points about the "prep" session that, in the last section, I noted would be better explained here.

The big day is drawing near. For those who've been through the process before, it's no less intimidating, because their prior attempt didn't work out too well, and thus, they're going back to try again. To the person waiting to go in for a License Appeal Hearing, it seems like everything comes down to this. It feels like it's all on the line...

While it may feel that way, the truth is that the Hearing, while important, is NOT the entirety of a License Appeal. It doesn't actually "come down to this." Instead, I try and help my Clients understand that the License Appeal Hearing is just the final step, and one of several such steps, before a decision is made. In this 6th part, we will examine the actual License Hearing, and what a person can expect to encounter, and why, at least if I am their Lawyer, this is really nothing to be nervous about.

As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer who has handled hundreds upon hundreds of License Appeal Hearings, and who has appeared in Court, quite literally, almost daily for the last 2 decades, I have to remind myself that while this is really "just another day at the Office" for me, it is a big deal for my Client. The best analogy that comes to mind is getting a root canal. For me, facing such a procedure is a bit intimidating. Will the tooth survive, or will it break apart, necessitating oral surgery and an implant? All kinds of questions whirl about in my head as that kind of "big day" approaches for me.

Yet for my Dentist, this is, in every sense of the word, "just another day at the Office." He's not worried, because he has a pretty good handle on what will happen, or at least the range of realistic possible outcomes. He'll assure me that everything will be fine, and then he'll begin talking about things like movies, sports, or whatever you might discuss with a co-worker or friend with whom you're sharing lunch.

Take me out of the Patient chair, put me in the same situation with my Client, and I'll do the same thing. I know that we're okay, but not just because I say so. Remember all that stuff back in parts 4 and 5 of this series, where we talked about how the Substance Abuse Evaluation is the foundation of a License Appeal, and that we need to make sure that it's perfect, or darn close to it, and then we examined how much time I'll put into helping with the Letters of Support? Well, if we've done all that, then by the time we file for the Hearing, we're already in EXCELLENT SHAPE. The actual Hearing is very important,of course, but much of the path toward winning (or losing) a License Appeal will have been cleared by virtue of the good evidence submitted beforehand.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 6" »

In Part 4 of this series, we concluded our overview of the documents that must be submitted when a License Appeal is filed. In this fifth part, we'll examine what happens when a Hearing is requested, and how one should prepare for the big day.

Once the Substance Abuse Evaluation and the Letters of Support have been checked, and re-checked, and everything is in order, the whole packet is sent to the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) in Lansing. In my Office, this is done by fax.

Out-of-state people can request either what's called an "Administrative Review," meaning essentially an "Appeal by Mail," or they can (and should) request an actual live, as in "conducted by a Hearing Officer" Hearing. Like those who live in Michigan, the Hearing can (and again, should be) live, and in-person, or it can be done at any Secretary of State Branch Office that has a video terminal.

Those who live in-state MUST go through a live Hearing, but it can either be done by video, or it can be done in-person, by requesting that it be scheduled at one of the 3 DAAD Offices (Grand Rapids, Lansing and Livonia) where the Hearing Officers are physically stationed. In my Practice, I have EVERY case I handle set for a live, in-person Hearing at the Livonia Branch of the DAAD. There are 5 Hearing Officers there, and I am in front of each of them regularly.

This, to me, is very important, and likely accounts, at least in part, for the success I have in winning License Appeals, and allows me to guarantee that I will win any Appeal I accept the first time, or I will go back, without additional Fee, until I do. We'll get to that.

I have noted before that I DO NOT believe in, nor will I ever even consider doing a video Hearing. Beyond the fact that the video equipment used by the State is older than dirt (the "video terminal" is an old, tube-style TV set with a big, antiquated and clumsy "web cam" hooked up to it), the simple fact is that appearing in person has numerous benefits, some of which are just beyond description.

Before we review some of those benefits, let me point out again that, recently, the Secretary of State opened a video terminal about 4 minutes from my Office. The Livonia Branch of the DAAD is about an hour from my Office, yet it has never crossed my mind to save the time and just do the Hearing by video at the much closer and more convenient location. I am such a firm believer in conducting these Hearings in-person that saving an additional hour on the road to personally appear isn't even a consideration. I take these cases to win, and, as I have repeatedly observed, if you're going to do this right, there simply are no shortcuts.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 5" »

In Part 3 of this series, we examined the importance of the role of the Substance Abuse Evaluation. In this fourth part, we'll look at the other part of the required documentation that must be submitted with the Substance Abuse Evaluation when a License Appeal is filed, the Letters of Support.

The DAAD requires at least 3 Letters of Support, and asks for a maximum of 6. While submitting at least 3 Letters is the procedural minimum, a person can submit more than 6, although that's not necessary. We'll examine that shortly.

In a very real way, the Substance Abuse Evaluation is the most important evidence submitted because it primarily addresses the most important issue before the DAAD: That the person's alcohol problem is likely to remain under control.

The other main issue before the DAAD in a License Appeal is that the person's alcohol problem is under control, which basically means that they haven't consumed any alcohol since "X" date. The primary evidence in that regard are the required Letters of Support. This means that the most important purpose of the letters of support is to confirm that the person has not consumed any alcohol since "X" date.

This can sometimes present the first challenge. Not all Letter writers will have known the person when they were drinking. Say Don the Driver quit drinking after his 2005 DUI, and one of his Letters is from Co-Worker Carl, who he has known since he began working at ABC Corporation back in 2009. Carl cannot vouch for Don not drinking in 2006, 2007, or even 2008. All Carl can say is that since he met Don in 2009, Don has not consumed alcohol in his presence.

And that's fine, at least to a point.

If Don was my Client, I'd use Carl's Letter, but I'd also want a Letter, or Letters, from those who knew Don at the time he stopped drinking.

This is where experience matters. What if Don moved out of state in 2008? Sure, his family can vouch for his turnaround then, but they've only seen him a few times a year since his move. As much as Carl cannot attest to what Don did back in 2007 and 2008, the family really cannot vouch much for anything after that, except on those few occasions where they've actually seen Don.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 4" »

In Part 2 of this article, we examined the 2 types of License Appeals (Administrative Review or full Hearing) a person can file, depending on where they live, if they seek Restoration (or Clearance) after a Revocation for multiple DUI's.

In this third Part, we will begin examining the 2 pieces of information that must be filed when either type of Appeal is filed.

In order to begin any kind of Driver's License Restoration Appeal, a person must file at least 2 things with the Secretary of State in Lansing:

1. A Substance Abuse Evaluation, and
2. At least 3 Letters of Support.

In this installment, we'll look at the Substance Abuse Evaluation. In the Part 4, we'll examine the Letters of Support.

The Substance Abuse Evaluation is an actual state form that must be completed by a Substance Abuse Counselor. I have covered this topic in considerable detail on both my website, and in various articles on this blog. One could, quite literally, write a book on this subject alone. For our purposes, we can boil all the detail involved into a few, simple, or at least, simpler points.

The most important thing the Substance Abuse Evaluation provides is a Prognosis. This is the Evaluator's educated prediction about how likely the person is to remain alcohol and drug-free for the rest of his or her life. This is important because, as we noted earlier in this series, the biggest question before the DAAD is whether or nor the person's alcohol problem is likely to remain under control, which essentially means how likely (or not) a person is to remain alcohol-free for the rest of their life. If the Prognosis isn't good enough, then, legally speaking, the Appeal is already lost.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 3" »

In Part 1 of this article, we looked at the importance of a person's self-recognition of an alcohol problem within the context of a Drivers' License Restoration Appeal. We set out the real requirements of the governing Rule in a License Appeal, and we reviewed how those requirements must be met by "clear and convincing evidence."

In this second part, we will begin by examining the various Appeal options available to both Michigan residents, and former residents who now live out-of-state but have a Michigan "hold" on their Driving Record which prevents them from obtaining a Driver's License in another state. Then, we'll take a look at what it means to be a "Driver's License Restoration Lawyer," and I'll go over a few things I think are important to bear in mind as a person searches for the right Lawyer to handle their License Appeal.

If a person with a Revoked License is a Michigan Resident, the only way to "win back" their Michigan License is to go through the full Driver's License Restoration Appeal process. This means they will, at some point, have to appear for a Hearing, even if that hearing is done by video, via closed circuit TV (for the younger readers, this is something like Skype, but with a bad connection and an even worse webcam).

If a person now lives outside of Michigan, or is otherwise a resident of another state, they can either come back to Michigan for a full Hearing, or they can file what is essentially an Appeal by mail, called an Administrative Review, thereby avoiding the trip back to Michigan. Whichever method is used, the person, instead of seeking a License, will try to obtain a "Clearance" which will allow them to get a License in another state.

Not only do I strongly advise against Administrative Reviews (remember, out of 875 such requests received by the state in 2010, a total of 650 of them were DENIED, meaning that 75% of all such "Appeals by mail" were losers), I also firmly believe that the best way to win an Appeal is to appear for a live, and In-Person Hearing. I absolutely DO NOT believe in video Hearings, and will not do one. In fact, I have pointed out that recently, the Secretary of State has opened a video terminal about 3 to 4 minutes from my Office. I could easily choose to do any and/or all of my Hearings there. It would be a lot more convenient for me to drive 3 to 4 minutes down the road, rather than driving nearly an hour to Livonia, but I take these cases to win them, and guarantee that I will. As a result, I absolutely WILL NOT do anything other than a live, in-person Hearing at the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) Hearing Office in Livonia, where I know the 5 Hearing Officers well. No second-rate, choppy, impersonal video Hearing done using equipment that was out-of-date a long time ago can compare to the real thing.

Despite my feelings and the statistical facts about Administrative Appeals, I'm not really too concerned with persuading someone not to try that route, if they're so inclined. I have more than enough work to keep me busy, so I'd rather just deal with someone who thought they would try it on their own, and then lost, and now really wants to do it right, rather than waste a lot of time trying to explain all that in the first place.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 2" »

Within the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, I have covered every facet of the License Appeal process. Some articles cover the process from a much broader, overview perspective, while others, particularly many of those more recent, put a single component under the microscope for a detailed examination. This article will return to the "overview" perspective, so that a reader searching for general information about License Restoration can find a starting point. In that regard, this article will also include a look at how I, as a License Appeal Lawyer, analyze and handle License Restorations. In order to not miss anything important, this article will be broken into seven parts. There will be plenty of links to related articles and relevant sections of my website.

First, let's clarify who and what we're talking about. "License Restoration" is a process that follows a "License Revocation." It means a person has had their License Revoked for 2 or more DUI's, or, in some cases, a combination of DUI's and/or "Drug Driving" Offenses. Because so few cases actually involve a "Drug Driving" Offense, and because the principles involved in the Restoration process are the same anyway, from here on out we'll simply use the term "DUI" as we proceed.

There are 2 classes of Revocations:

1. A 1-year mandatory minimum Revocation for 2 DUI's within 7 years, and
2. A 5-year mandatory minimum Revocation for 3 or more DUI's within 10 years.

This means that after the "minimum" period of Revocation, a person is legally eligible to file for Restoration of their Driver's License. "Legally eligible" and really eligible are not the same thing. Let me explain.

One of the most important requirements in filing a License Appeal is that the person have at least 1 year of Abstinence in order to win back a License. In addition, the person will have to show that a certain period, typically at least 6 months (and that usually means, given that anyone with a 2nd DUI will almost always have at least a year's Probation, an additional 6 months) of "voluntary" abstinence The operative term here is "voluntary."

The body that ultimately decides License Appeals is the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division, or "DAAD." The DAAD rules require, in some cases, a minimum period of at least 6 months abstinence from alcohol, and, in others, a minimum of 1 year. "Voluntary" means just that; a person has maintained their abstinence on their own. This is where many people who stumble through this on their own, and many Lawyers who simply do not know better, make a critical mistake. ANY period of time that a person is on Probation or Parole is NOT considered voluntary. The DAAD holds that if a person is subject to potential legal or penal consequences for drinking, and even if they are not subject to testing, the effective period of such a restriction (meaning Probation or Parole) cannot be considered "voluntary." In other words, a "voluntary" period begins when Probation or Parole ends.

In practice, a person can forget about winning a License Appeal with only 6 months of abstinence; the 1-year period is the minimum that will fly in a real-life Appeal. Thus, I will not accept a case where a person does not have at least 1-year abstinence from alcohol, and at least 6 months of that (or, more likely, another 6 months after that), of VOLUNTARY abstinence, because I know that, with any less, they will NOT win.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Appeal Process in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road - Part 1" »

In Part 1 of this article, we began discussing how a person can win a Drivers' License Restoration case without going to AA. We began by acknowledging the important role AA played in the genesis of the whole notion of "Recovery," and how AA has provided much of the language we use to talk about Recovery and Sobriety.

In this second part, we will pick up by examining how a person can get "Sober" without AA, and how and why the State recognizes that AA is but one of many viable ways to Recover from an alcohol problem. In other words, we'll discuss how and why a person can win a License Appeal without going to AA.

In the first part of this article, I noted that more than half of my Clients are not actively involved in AA. Of that group, probably half, or maybe even a bit more, have at least been to AA a few times. Some went for years, some for months, and a few for at least a couple of meetings. They all have their reasons for leaving the program, from outright dislike to simply feeling strong enough in their own Sobriety to not feel the need for the kind of support offered by AA. It really doesn't matter why a person left. What matters is that, in the end, they made a conscious decision that they didn't need to go to any more meetings to stay Sober.

Whether a person attended 1000 AA meetings, or only attended 1, they undoubtedly heard the "first step." Many of those who attended AA for a while will often say that they simply "got it," and felt comfortable leaving the program. Those who only went to a few meetings often say they already "had it," and that the notion of not drinking again was something they had already accepted, meaning that AA really didn't offer them anything more than they already had.

Some people just hated AA. They found it to be too "religious," or "cult-like." Some people just don't do well in groups. Again, whatever the reason a person never attended or stopped going to AA, the key thing, at least for a License Appeal, is that they recognize that they cannot drink alcohol anymore. And even if they've never heard of AA's first step, their understanding of their situation parallels that of any AA attendee; I have an alcohol problem, and the only way to "fix" it is to completely stop drinking.

In a License Appeal, the State is looking not only for abstinence from alcohol, but a commitment to remain abstinent. This is where AA provides, or at least used to provide, an advantage. AA both implicitly and explicitly makes clear that the ONLY way to "control" an alcohol problem is to never drink again. There is no room for debate. And however much a person may like or dislike the AA program, on this score, it is 100% correct. The ONLY way to "control" an alcohol problem is to NOT drink. Period.

Continue reading "How to Win a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Without Being Involved in AA - Part 2" »

Can a person win back their Michigan Driver's License without going to AA? This article will address this question, and explain why the answer is not only "yes," but also how and why the majority of the License Appeals I file and win (and since about June of 2009, I have won 189 out of the last 191 cases I have accepted) are for people who are not currently attending AA.

Many of the people with whom I speak tell me that they've heard that "you can't win your License back without being in AA." To be clear: That's DEAD WRONG. I ought to know; I win such cases multiple times per week.

However, many years ago, that statement was much closer to the truth than it is now. If the reader had called my Office in back 1991 or 1992 and inquired about a License Appeal, the very first question I would have had is whether or not they were currently attending AA. If they were not, I would have simply instructed them to start going, and call me back after they had at least a year of attendance under their belt.

The pendulum has swung the other way, and I think this represents a better understanding on the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division's (DAAD) part that AA is a great program, and, in fact the ONLY program, for some, but NOT all people. To be clear about this: The MAJORITY of people for whom I win a License Appeal are NOT currently involved in AA.

This is not a knock against AA. As I noted, AA is a great program for lots of people. In fact, it is the only path to true Sobriety for SOME of them. But, in my opinion, one of its biggest shortcomings is that AA kind of "preaches" that it is, without exception, the ONLY legitimate path to true Sobriety.

Years ago, when I had a Substance Abuse Counselor as a Legal Assistant (she later left and became an Ordained Minister, and then moved on to become a College Professor), she helped me understand the whole notion of "Recovery" and "Sobriety" from a more holistic, panoramic perspective. She explained that there were various "schools of thought" about Recovery. Which one worked best for any particular person was a matter of choice, and fit, and that a "one size fits all" approach is just plain wrong-headed.

Continue reading "How to Win a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Without Being Involved in AA - Part 1" »

In Part 2 of this article, we continued our examination of how and why some License Appeals lose due to what the DAAD calls a "questionable/insufficient Substance Abuse Evaluation." We began examining the Substance Abuse Evaluation form section by section, noting some of the common sources of errors in its completion that result in the State Denying a License Appeal.

In this 3rd and final Part, we will complete our section by section analysis of the Substance Abuse Evaluation form, then wrap up by looking at how to avoid losing a License Appeal for submitting a flawed Evaluation that the State considers "questionable/insufficient."

The Drug Screen (meaning Urine Test) section that follows is pretty clear. Despite the very clear request for a 10-panel drug test with at least 2 integrity variables, I have seen Evaluations that try and explain that the lab used by that particular Evaluator ONLY does 7-panel screens. That won't work. That's like going to a soda pop vending machine where the price of a Coke is $1.25 and only putting 4 quarters in. It doesn't fly.

Beyond making sure that a person actually took a 10-panel test, the Lawyer's job is to make sure that both integrity variables (usually "specific gravity" and the person's "creatinine level") are good. In addition, if the person is on any medication that shows up in the drug screen, explaining that is a must. This can include a letter from the person's physician outlining their condition, the need for the medication, and, if a mind or mood-altering medication MUST be prescribed, why that's the case, an acknowledgement that the Doctor knows the person is in Recovery, and that he or she is monitoring both the dosage and has determined that the person does not appear to be abusing the medication, or getting more of it from an additional source or sources.

A good Evaluator will address this right out of the gate. A good License Appeal Lawyer will make sure every "i" is dotted and every "t" crossed in such a situation. Unfortunately, some of the Clients I see who have already lost on their first try become angry that either their previous Evaluator and/or Lawyer "didn't say anything about that to me!"

Next up is a person's Lifetime Abstinence History. Many readers who filed a prior Appeal and lost may have submitted the older version of this form (still valid, by the way, and more on that later) in which this section was called "Lifetime Relapse History." Despite the change in name, this section is still asking for the same exact information. Explaining what that means simply requires more space than I can afford without turning this article into a "textbook." Not to rely too much on an old crutch, but this section is rather important and knowing how to respond to it is part and parcel of why my first meeting with a new Client takes 3 hours. I cannot just "summarize" this, anymore than a Dentist can "summarize" how to do a root canal.

Continue reading "Losing a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Because of a "Questionable/Insufficient" Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 3" »

In Part 1 of this article, we began examining the role of the Substance Abuse Evaluation in a License Appeal. I defined that role as "foundational." From there, we examined why so many Evaluators feel qualified to "do" a Driver's License Appeal Substance Abuse Evaluation, and what it means for the final product to be a disappointment and waste of money if the State declares to be "questionable/insufficient."

In this 2nd Part, we will continue by examining how the very term "Substance Abuse Evaluation" can be part of the problem in finding an Evaluator who knows what the Secretary of State is looking for within that form, and then we will begin doing a section-by-section analysis of the form itself.

Part of my success in License Appeals is no doubt due the fact that once I found a Clinic that did a consistently good job completing Substance Abuse Evaluations, I began communicating with them. I have actually gone in and met with their Counselors and explained what the State is looking for, and answered their questions about doing a proper job on the Substance Abuse Evaluation form. As a result, they have a detailed knowledge of what is important to the DAAD, as well as what is not. Ironically, this Clinic charges less ($199) than almost any other Clinic I have heard about, while managing to do a better job.

We can take from this that the term "Substance Abuse Evaluation" within the context of a License Appeal has a very specific, and different meaning than it does in other contexts.

Recently, I met a Client who has been seeing a Substance Abuse Counselor for a number of years. This Client expressed a preference to have the Evaluation completed by that Counselor, despite my stated reservations, based upon my experience with so many individuals who assure their Clients/Patients that "I can do that." The Evaluation came back last week, and it needs to be fixed. While not an outright disaster, it is clear to me that whoever did it does not have a clear picture of what the DAAD is looking for. As it stands, it is not good enough.

One of the requirements, clearly stated (although in very small print) on the Evaluation itself is that the actual Substance Abuse diagnostic test, along with the actual answer sheet the Client filled out be attached. In the case I just mentioned, it wasn't. This is a common, but potentially fatal error. On top of that, the State form has various "dialogue boxes" where the Evaluator's reasoning must be stated for reaching any particular conclusion, be it a Diagnosis or a Prognosis, or whatever else is being asked. This Evaluation came with an attachment sheet containing further explanations in a number of those areas. While that may, at first, appear helpful, in reality, it is not. Instead, it means the person doing the Evaluation does not quite understand exactly what is being asked, and cannot confine their responses to the space provided. There is simply no need, in ANY case, to "go outside the lines" of the State's form.

Continue reading "Losing a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Because of a "Questionable/Insufficient" Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 2" »

In previous articles within the Driver's License Restoration Section of this blog, I have written about why so many "do-it-yourself" License Appeals lose, as well as those handled by Lawyers who claim to "do" License restoration cases, albeit not as a specific concentration of their Practice. In most of those articles, as in this one, I have begun by pointing out that "Rule 13," which governs Michigan Drivers' License Appeals (and applies equally to Appeals seeking either Restoration of a Michigan Drivers' License, or a Clearance of a Michigan "hold" on a person's Driving Record) mandates that the Hearing Officer deciding the case "shall not order that a license be issued to the petitioner unless the petitioner..." proves their case "by clear and convincing evidence."

This language from Rule 13 sets the stage for EVERY License Appeal to either win, or lose. However, saying that is a lot like saying that in any sporting contest, the person or team with the most points wins. Such an oversimplification tends to ignore the importance of things like preventing the other side from scoring, and not being disqualified for fouls or illegal moves. In other words, there is a lot more to it than that.

In this article, we will look at a specific, very common reason so many License Appeals are Denied; that the Substance Abuse Evaluation filed with the Appeal was "questionable/insufficient." Rather than focus on the general application of the standard of proof required under Rule 13, or the various legal issues specified within the Rule, we'll examine this real-world reason people are often turned down. This will be a serious and long article, and because of the amount of detail and information contained in it, will be broken in to 3 sub-parts.

At this point, anyone who has read this far is either a detail-kind of person, like me, and hungry for knowledge, or has already previously tried a License Appeal and lost. And if the reader is in the latter category, there is a good chance that, within the Order of Denial from that previous attempt, it is noted that the Substance Abuse Evaluation submitted as part of that Appeal was "questionable/insufficient."

What does that mean? And how does it relate to Rule 13?

We'll answer those questions in turn.

As I have pointed out on both my website, and in the various articles about this subject within this blog, the Substance Abuse Evaluation is the very foundation of a License Appeal. This is why, in my Office, my FIRST meeting with a Client is scheduled for about 3 hours, and is focused almost entirely on preparing the Client to undergo the Evaluation.

It is important to note the timing of this: I need to meet with the Client for 3 hours BEFORE they go and have their Evaluation completed. Meeting after the fact is like buying an instant lottery ticket; whatever is in there is already in there, meaning it's either a winner or a loser, and no amount of talking about it is going to change what has already been printed.

Continue reading "Losing a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Because of a "Questionable/Insufficient" Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 1" »

In Part 1 of this article, we began examining the process by which someone who has moved out of Michigan, but has a Michigan "hold" on their Driving Record goes about obtaining a "Clearance," which releases that hold. We observed that in the year 2010, the Secretary of State received 875 Administrative Appeals, and DENIED 650 of them, meaning that 3 out of 4 such Appeals Lost. By contrast, I pointed out that in that same year, I conducted over 70 live License Hearings, and won each and every one, meaning that 100% of my Clients got back on the road.

In this second part, we will examine my Office protocol for accepting and handling out-of-state Driver's License Appeals. We left off at the end of the first part of this article by noting that in an Administrative Appeals, (and 3 out of 4 cases being Denied proves this), it is quite likely that the Hearing Officer reviewing the case will have a question, or questions, but with no way to ask them, will be left with no choice but to Deny it. We noted that the State, will say, in essence, "See you next year..."

The benefit to me, as a License Restoration Lawyer, is that once someone tries an Administrative Appeal and loses, they are almost always "all ears" when the chance for next year's Appeal rolls around. About the only question they have of me is how soon they can come in and start the process.

And it is a process. It is a labor-intensive, important process for which there are no shortcuts. My first meeting with a new Client is scheduled for 3 hours, and is pretty much solely dedicated to preparing them to undergo the mandatory Substance Abuse Evaluation. And that's just the first step.

Having handled hundreds of cases for people who live out of state, and for hundreds who still live here, in Michigan, but rather far away from my Office, I have developed a pretty efficient system for having them come in the day of their Substance Abuse Evaluation, meeting with them for about 3 hours, then sending them around the block to have the Evaluation completed.

Normally, I like my Clients to have their Substance Abuse Evaluation completed at a local Clinic a few blocks from my Office. I prefer this Clinic because they do a top-notch job of completing the Evaluation. By "top-notch job," I DO NOT mean that they simply take someone's money and crank out a favorable report. The State can smell that kind of quackery a mile away. The Clinic I like does not rent or sell its integrity, and instead conducts a thorough Evaluation which results in a Clinically accurate diagnosis and prognosis of and for a person's alcohol problem and Recovery. This means that a person must, in fact, be both Sober, and committed to remaining Sober, in order to pass muster. Fakers and scammers need not apply.

Normally, a person will have their Evaluation scheduled about 4 hours after our meeting time, so that we can spend 3 hours together preparing for that first step, then they can go and spend another hour getting it done. After that, they can go home, wherever that may be. We can do the rest of our work via phone and fax and email.

Continue reading "How to Clear up a Michigan Hold on Your Driver's License and Get a License in Another State - Part 2" »

As a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I file (and win) over 100 License Appeals each year. More than half of those Appeals are for people who now live outside of Michigan, but are still unable to get a License in another state because of a Michigan "hold" on their driving Record. Most of these cases involve a person having multiple DUI convictions. It is not necessary that all, or even any of those DUI's took place in Michigan. What matters (as anyone reading this has no doubt already discovered) is that the person had a Michigan Driver's License that was Revoked for 2 or more DUI's within 7 years, or 3 or more within 10 years, wherever they may have occurred.

While I have written rather extensively on this topic within the Driver's License Restoration section of my blog, it seems that unless I regularly keep writing about this particularly important topic, finding those articles about "out-of-state" Michigan Drivers' License Restoration issues requires some digging. As always, I will try to do more than just re-state what I've already said in previous articles. Accordingly, this will be a long, 2-part article that will not only explore the options for out-of-state residents who are being held back by a Michigan "hold" on their Driving Record, but will also examine how I handle these cases and get my out-of-state Clients back on the road.

When a person has left Michigan without having had their Driver's License Restored, meaning they have left with their License still Revoked, they often don't understand that this Revocation will prevent them from obtaining a License in another state. Sometimes, because they intend to live outside of Michigan and have no intention of ever returning (except, perhaps, for a visit), they have ideas of beginning afresh in a new place.

As they soon discover, however, the Michigan "hold" on their Driver's License follows them everywhere.

In fact, most people who find me do so as a consequence of learning that they must "clear" the hold on their Michigan Driving Record. Very few people research this issue before they go to the DMV of their new state. Instead, they come home from that DMV and start trying to figure out how to clear up this mess.

In that regard, it does not matter if a person now lives out of State, lives around the block from my Office in Mt. Clemens, or lives in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, because in each and every one of those cases, there are 2, and only 2, procedures available to clear up a Michigan Driver's License Revocation. We'll get to those shortly. What's different for those who live out of state is the relief sought by whichever procedure a person uses to try and move forward. Let me explain:

A person who lives in Michigan, and wants their License Restored will file for a "Restoration" of their Michigan Driver's License. In other words, they want their Michigan License back. A person who no longer lives in Michigan, and who wants a License in another state, will seek what is called a "Clearance" of their Michigan Driving Record, which means a release of Michigan's hold, or, to put it another way, a "voiding out" of the previous Revocation that prevents them from obtaining a License in their new state.

Continue reading "How to Clear up a Michigan Hold on Your Driver's License and Get a License in Another State - Part 1" »

In part 1 of this article, we began looking at how an important part of any License Appeal is the specific Hearing Officer to whom the case has been assigned. We talked about 3 of the 5 Hearing Officers before whom I appear in the Metro-Detroit Branch of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) in Livonia. In the interests of diplomacy, I have refrained from using their actual names, but have instead referred to them by the nickname that I think encapsulates their most prominent characteristic(s).

We'll pick up by looking at the 2 Hearing Officers generally considered the "toughest" of the group. I use the term "toughest" rather liberally here. In my experience, while these Hearing Officers are no doubt firm, they are also unquestionably fair in application of the Law to any case before them. Sometimes, especially if a person does not understand the subtleties of the law, and especially if they really and truly have been Sober for a while, they feel slighted for being Denied, without fully understanding that any such Denial isn't a decision that they're not Sober, but rather a decision that they have failed to prove that their alcohol problem is under control, and that their alcohol problem is likely to remain under control, by the required "clear and convincing evidence" standard.

With that, let's turn out attention to the two remaining Hearing Officers:

4. The Doctor. Perhaps the "hardest" (okay, "toughest") of all Hearing Officers, this individual tends to approach the entire process more from that side of the governing Rule (Rule13) which directs that "The Hearing Officer shall NOT order that a License be issued, unless the Petitioner, by clear and convincing evidence, proves the following..." (emphasis added). In other words, this Hearing Officer has the highest standard for what he considers to be "clear and convincing evidence." He has the nose of a tracking dog for any use of drugs, meaning past drug use, or current prescription drug use, as well as cases involving any kind of anxiety, depression, or other mental health or mood issues. If any of those issues are present, or were ever present, then preparing for a Hearing before him will typically involve getting a letter from one's treatment provider addressing his specific concerns, including that the prescribing physician or treatment provider knows about the person's alcohol and or drug problem(s). Likewise, he tends to make a microscopic examination of any issues involving anxiety or mood disorders, or any kind of bi-polar issues. Whatever else, he is not content to accept the Substance Abuse Evaluator's conclusion that such an issue "isn't a problem."

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration Appeals in Michigan - Know Your Hearing Officer - Part 2" »

In a recent article, I wrote about the importance of being "prepped" for a Driver's License Restoration Appeal Hearing. The focus of that article was on the general process of preparation for License Hearing. Here, we'll narrow that focus to a specific question that I am often asked by my Clients once the Notice of Hearing is sent from Lansing, and the name of the Hearing Officer who will be deciding the Appeal is disclosed: "What do you know about this Hearing Officer?"

In every such case, the answer is " a lot."

As usual for me, this will be a long article, and will, like so many others I have written, be broken into 2 parts.

As I have noted on my website and in some of the articles in the Drivers' License Restoration section of this blog, I have every case I handle set for a live Hearing at the Livonia branch of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). There are only 3 such DAAD Hearing Offices in Michigan: Lansing, Grand Rapids and Livonia.

Before we get into the meat and potatoes of the question that is the subject of this article, I should also reiterate that I only do "live Hearings." In other words, I NEVER do any kind of "video Hearing." This is noteworthy because very recently, the DAAD began allowing Hearings to be conducted at the Clinton Township Branch of the Secretary of State Office on Metropolitan Parkway (16 Mile) and Gratiot. This Branch Office is only about 4 or 5 minutes from my Office in Mt. Clemens, while getting to the Livonia Office takes about an hour, or even a bit more, from my front door. Despite that, it has never so much as crossed my mind to do anything other than show up, in person, for a live Hearing in Livonia. I not only believe in live Hearings, I ONLY believe in live Hearings.

This means that, over the course of my career, I have had every case I have ever handled set of a live Hearing in the Metro-Detroit DAAD Hearing Office. Formerly located in Southfield, this Office moved to Livonia a few years ago.

Having appeared before this same group of Hearing Officers again and again, I have certainly come to know the idiosyncrasies and particularities and quirks of each, and quite well, at that. This is a HUGE benefit as I prepare the Client to testify before any one of them.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration Appeals in Michigan - Know Your Hearing Officer - Part 1" »

This article will detail a change, or, more particularly, a clarification (and kind of extension) of my Guarantee to win any Driver's License Restoration Appeal that I accept. In a previous article, I announced that I Guarantee I will win any License Appeal I accept, "or the next one is free." For someone who prides himself on the precision of the language he uses, and given that this blog has more highly detailed, informational articles about Driver's License Restoration that can be found on every other website out there combined, I have to admit that I missed the mark and did not properly explain my Guarantee very well. I assumed (and remember, one should NEVER assume) that everyone would understand that to mean that I simply guaranteed, in exchange for my Fee, that I would get the Client back on the road. At least, that's what I meant...

To clarify, then:

I GUARANTEE THAT I WILL WIN ANY DRIVER'S LICENSE APPEAL I ACCEPT THE FIRST TIME. IF NOT, I WILL HANDLE ANY SUBSEQUENT SECRETARY OF STATE LICENSE APPEAL WITHOUT ADDITIONAL FEES UNTIL THE CLIENT DOES WIN.

In other words, you pay me once, and if that Appeal is Denied (as of this writing, by the way, I have won 184 out of the last 186 Appeals I have filed since I began keeping track back in June of 2009, giving me a first time " win rate" of 98.92%, meaning that I don't have very much experience NOT winning the first time), I will go back to the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) until we win.

This really involves no risk for me, but does provide assurance to the Client that I'm not about to just accept a Fee and not be able to deliver what they're hiring me for.

Of course, there are limitations. If, for example, the Client has some kind of "meltdown" at the Hearing, and starts testifying about a drug use pattern that they previously failed to disclose, or if they admit to having taken a few hits off of a joint a few months ago, then the Guarantee does not apply.

To put this in perspective, I promise that if a person comes to me and has, indeed, been Sober for what I determine to be long enough, and is committed to remaining Sober, and I take their case, then they can count on me to get their License back. If there is something defective within the evidence submitted as part of their Appeal, then I think its only fair that I would go back next time to rectify something that, by all accounts, I must have missed.

But I don't miss things. This is my job, and my passion.

Continue reading "Guaranteed Win in a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal" »

In the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, my various articles examine every aspect and facet of the License Appeal process in sometimes microscopic and painful detail. There is, of course, a method to my madness. I know that it is precisely that attention to detail that has resulted in my winning 184 out of the last 186 License Appeals I have filed (giving me a win rate of 98.92%), since I began really keeping track back in about June of 2009. It is also this attention to detail that makes me so sure I'll win any License Appeal I take the first time that I offer a Guarantee that if I do not, I will handle any subsequent License Hearing without additional Fees until I get the Client back on the road.

In a few of my articles, I have talked about Sobriety. Sobriety is, in fact, a first requirement in a License Appeal. Yet sometimes, I think beyond being the first requirement, it is also the first thing forgotten, or lost sight of, in a Driver's License Restoration case. This article will not just reexamine what I have already dissected in my other articles about "Sobriety," but will look at what the State needs to hear about on the subject from anyone hoping to win back their License. This will be a longer article.

In another recent article, I pointed out that Rule 13 of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) governs a Driver's License Restoration Appeal. We went on to boil Rule 13 down to 2 parts:

1. That the person's alcohol problem is under control, and
2. That the person's alcohol problem is likely to remain under control.

Upon further examination, we will see that while being "Sober" necessarily means one is abstinent, being "abstinent" does not, necessarily, mean being "Sober." This might make more sense if we look at an example.

Say Snake the Biker got off Probation for his second DUI about a year ago. If we were to ask him about not drinking, and how that's working out for him, Snake might say something like this:

"I hate it. Dude, I'm a Biker. What kind of Biker can't drink beer?" This sucks. But, I know that if I pick up another DUI, I'll be sent off to Jail or Prison for at least a year, I'll lose my motorcycle repair shop, I won't be in the Club anymore, and I'll lose my house, too. So I just sit here, drinking Coke, and hating this mess."

Snake may be abstinent, but he's far from Sober.

Continue reading "Winning a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Means Being Sober First" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our examination of Rule 13, the rule governing License Appeals. We began with the premise that the first 3 issues of Rule 13 actually all fold into the first issue. We then examined how the second issue in fact does just that, and how and why, after proving the first issue, number 2 can be considered already proven, or moot.

In this second part, we'll pick up by showing how the third issue, like the second, actually "folds" into the first, and how, just as with that second issue, once a person has proven the first, the third can be considered to have been proven, as well.

To put it another way, there really aren't 3 issues here, there is only 1, kind of stated in 3 different ways. This transforms this seemingly complex Rule into something rather easy to understand

Remember, what we're talking about in terms of the first issue has been boiled down to essentially mean that a person must show that they're alcohol problem "is likely to remain under control," which we then interpreted as meaning that the person is a safe bet to never drink again.

The third issue reads as follows:

(iii) That the risk of the petitioner repeating the act of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by, or under the influence of, alcohol or controlled substances or a combination of alcohol and a controlled substance or repeating any other offense listed in section 303(1)(d), (e), or (f) or (2)(c), (d), (e), or (f) of the act is a low or minimal risk.

We can simplify this and take it to mean the person is a low to minimal risk to drink and drive again.

We must therefore ask, how is it even possible that person's alcohol problem has been proven to be "likely to remain under control," but the person could not likewise be said to be a low to minimal risk to drink and drive again, which is really what issue number 3 (iii) is all about?

And the answer: It is not.

Accordingly, by proving that their alcohol problem is "likely to remain under control," a person will have likewise and simultaneously proven that they are a low to minimal risk to drink and drive again. Issue number 3 (iii), then folds into the first, just like issue number 2 (ii) folds into the first. In effect, is also redundant.

Continue reading "Simplifying a Michigan License Appeal and Understanding DAAD Rule 13 - Part 2" »

As part of my Driver's License Restoration Practice, I have tried, within the License Restoration section of this blog, to explain every aspect and facet of the License Appeal process. Many of those articles examine the varying degrees of complexity involved in a License Appeal, and try to boil these issues down to their more manageable, understandable elements.

Sometimes, what seems simple is not. This article, however, will take the opposite approach, and will focus in on a pair of issues that at first glance seem complex and difficult, yet in reality are rather quite simple. In other words, I hope to show how what may at first seem like some monstrously confusing and difficult passages of legal mumbo-jumbo can actually be reduced to a very simple, easy to understand concept.

To be clear, the two issues with which we are concerned are numbers 2 (ii) and 3 (iii) under Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) Rule 13, the rule that governs License Appeals. For reference, here is the relevant part of Rule 13, in all of its "legalese" glory:

(1) With respect to an appeal hearing that involves a review of a determination of the department which results in a denial or revocation under section 303(1)(d), (e), or (f) or (2)(c), (d), (e), or (f) of the act, all of the following provisions apply:

(a) The hearing officer shall not order that a license be issued to the petitioner unless the petitioner proves, by clear and convincing evidence, all of the following:

(i) That the Petitioner's alcohol or substance abuse problems, if any, are under control, and likely to remain under control.

(ii) That the risk of the Petitioner repeating his or her past abusive behavior is a low to minimal risk.

(iii) That the risk of the petitioner repeating the act of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by, or under the influence of, alcohol or controlled substances or a combination of alcohol and a controlled substance or repeating any other offense listed in section 303(1)(d), (e), or (f) or (2)(c), (d), (e), or (f) of the act is a low or minimal risk.

Continue reading "Simplifying a Michigan License Appeal and Understanding DAAD Rule 13 - Part 1" »

Within my Driver's License Restoration Practice, about ½ of my Clients have either moved out of state, or live pretty far from the southeast Detroit-area where my Office is located. Wherever they now live, many of my Clients have moved away from where they lived at the time of their last DUI. Sometimes they move for work, other times for different reasons, but the point is that they no longer live in what could be considered their "old stomping ground."

This is important, because very often, the move to somewhere different helps support what's known as a "Sober lifestyle." As I have noted in other articles in the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, Sobriety is a first requirement in order to win a License Appeal. The whole process of getting and staying Sober is really at the heart of a Driver's License Appeal.

Yet it is also well known that there is no such thing as a "geographic cure" for an alcohol or substance abuse problem.

In this article, we'll examine how, in a License Appeal, a move to somewhere new, while not any kind of "cure," in and of itself, can be helpful and persuasive evidence of a person's establishing and maintaining a Sober lifestyle.

Anyone who has been through any kind of IOP (Intensive Outpatient Program) Counseling, or who has attended AA for any length of time has heard the general proposition that there is no such thing as "geographic cure" for an alcohol problem. This really means that a person cannot just move away from where they drink, or from their drinking friends, and do nothing more than expect to get better. The urge to drink will soon be too strong to resist, and without any other kind of plan, that person will, sooner or later, wind up back in the saddle, only somewhere different.

And while this generalization may be true, it tends to be at odds with the way the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Appeal and Assessment Division (DAAD) sees a person's Recovery behavior. The State does, in a very real way, look at all of the changes a person has made as part of their commitment to not drink again, and moving away from bad influences, or, as the AA people say, from "wet faces and wet places," can be a helpful part of that.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Appeals and the Geographic Cure for an Alcohol Problem" »

While it might be easy to understand my job as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer as making sure a License Appeal can and does go forward, there is another aspect to my job that's far less glamorous than that. Sometimes, I have to be the "heavy" who "pulls the plug."

This means that in some cases, I have to tell the Client that we have to start all over again, or re-do this or that part of our case, before we file the actual Appeal. And while no one wants to hear that, my Clients do understand that's what they're paying me for; to make sure that a case doesn't go forward with a fatal defect, or some flaw that can turn into that.

One situation that has reared its head, not surprisingly, occurs when I'm hired after a person has previously tried on their own to win their License back, and lost. Usually, the Client will come in with only that previous Order of Denial from the Secretary of State. In and of itself, that Order will tell me exactly what went wrong, and what needs to be fixed in order to win. But in some cases, there is more. Let me explain:

While I don't handle any part of Administrative Appeals, as I feel strongly that there absolutely must be a live, in-person (NOT VIDEO) Hearing, any number of my Clients are people who have tried that route before. The fact that they're now my Clients means they found out the hard way that such Administrative Appeals are generally losing propositions.

Anyway, as part of the paperwork they will have submitted with that prior Administrative Appeal, they will have completed an Affidavit. An Affidavit is a sworn document. It carries the weight of sworn testimony, and is generally sworn to under penalty of perjury. It really is testimony, except it's in writing.

Within that Affidavit, the person will have indicated the last time they consumed any alcohol whatsoever. In the world of Recovery, this is called a "Sobriety Date." People in AA sometimes call it their "Birthday." It is, by all accounts, an important date, kind of like a wedding anniversary.

Continue reading "Another Simple, Clear Danger in a "Do-it-Yourself" (Administrative) Michigan Driver's License Appeal" »

A significant percentage of my Driver's License Restoration Practice involves representing Clients who have either moved out of the State of Michigan, or those who live rather far away from both my Office and the Livonia branch of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), where I have all my Appeal Hearings conducted. A recent experience I had made clear just how critical and important the "prep session" that I have with all of my Clients, a day or two before their actual License Hearing, really is.

Ann, my Senior Assistant, had correctly told me that this particular Client, who lives on the west coast, would be flying in to Michigan the day before his Hearing. As she confirmed his attendance at the Hearing, she also, as a matter of course, verified his contact phone number so that I could call him to do our "prep session." This "prep session" takes place a day or two before the Client's actual hearing, and lasts anywhere from an hour to an hour and a half. I often do it over the phone, in the evening, when there are no outside distractions or anything else than can interrupt me.

For whatever reason, I had misheard Ann, and thought my Client was coming in a day or two before his Hearing.

Having assumed my Client was already in town, I tried to call him in the early afternoon the day before his Hearing, as I was going to have an hour's drive back to the Office from Court, and had already arranged with the Office to not interrupt me.

I called my Client, and got his voicemail. No big deal, I thought. I left him a message and indicated I'd call again.

On the drive home, I called again, and got the same voicemail. Again, I left a message, thinking that maybe he was busy catching up with family and friends.

After dinner, I called again. Got voicemail again. By this time, I was becoming a bit concerned.

A little while later, I placed another call, and, you guessed it, got his voicemail.

An hour after that, I placed another call, and upon getting his voicemail, I could not hide the concern in my voice. I told him I was worried that he left his phone back at home, and that we wouldn't be able to go over everything before the next day's Hearing. I envisioned his cell phone, sitting on his dresser, buzzing away....

Continue reading "The Importance of Being "Prepped" for A Michigan Driver's License Restoration Hearing" »

In my role as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I read the decisions of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) almost daily. Fortunately, when reading those Orders for the License Appeals that I handle, I'm always reading a winning decision. Having won 181 of the last 183 cases I've handled, I can honestly say that I have almost no experience reading a Denial in any of my cases. However, many of my Clients are people who have already tried on their own to win back a License, or used some Lawyer who claims to "do" License Appeals, and lost. When they come in, part of the paperwork they bring is any previous Denial Order.

In this article, we'll look at why a previous Order of Denial is so important in the larger job of preparing for a subsequent License Appeal that will win.

From the outside, someone might just think that you file a License Appeal, and either win or lose. Like everything else about the whole License Restoration process, it's far more complicated than that.

To fully understand what's involved, we need to take a few steps back from the final result of the process, and look at what goes into it. In my various other articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have covered pretty much every aspect of the License Appeal process in detail. The focus of our examination here both governs and precedes even the very first step in that process. Let me explain:

In order to win a License Appeal, a person must prove certain things. Those "things" are outlined in the DAAD's Rule 13, which begins as follows:

The Hearing Officer shall not order that a License be issued to the Petitioner unless the Petitioner proves, by Clear and Convincing Evidence, all of the following...

The point of this whole detour is to point out how the Rule is written in the negative, and that the DAAD is required to NOT issue a License unless the person proves the relevant things by "Clear and Convincing Evidence."

"Clear and Convincing Evidence" is a kind of hybrid standard of proof that falls short of what's necessary to convict someone of a crime under the "Proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt" benchmark, but well beyond what it takes to win a Small Claims matter, where the standard of proof is a "Preponderance of the Evidence." One way to think of it is that "Preponderance of the Evidence" requires that the scales of justice be tipped just over the 50% mark, like 50.01%. "Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt might be likened to tipping the scales past the 90% mark, while "Clear and Convincing Evidence" would amount to tipping the scales past the 80% mark.

Continue reading "Michigan Drivers' License Restoration - How a Denial can Become a Win" »

Almost every article in the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog examines and explains some part of the License Appeal process, or takes an overview-type look at it. This article will be different. I want to explain why I like this field so much, why I have such passion about it, and how I can come back, week after week, with enough enthusiasm to write yet another License Restoration article.

The first thing I can point out is that there is much happiness in success. I have won 181 of the last 183 License Appeals I have handled in the last nearly two and a half years. In 2010, I won 100% of the cases I filed, and since about June of 2009, having won 181 of the last 183 cases I accepted, my overall win rate is 98.9%. I'm so sure that I'll be successful in any Appeal I take that I guarantee I'll win the first time, or the next is free.

But winning isn't everything.

I certainly would have no such job satisfaction if I was defending murderers and rapists and helping them go free. Nor would I derive any pleasure in representing some big company that steamrolled all over the rights of some average person, and managed to help it escape liability for its actions.

As I said, winning isn't everything.

License Restoration Clients, or at least the people who become my Clients, are people on the upswing in their lives. They're people who have not only had a deep insight into themselves, but who have had the fortitude and drive to make a significant lifestyle change. They are people who now live alcohol-free. And without exception, their lives are better now that they were at the time of their last DUI.

On any number of occasions, I have represented someone on their 2nd or 3rd (or 4th or 7th) DUI, and observed them in denial, blaming the whole situation on some outside, external factor or factors in their life. They don't take responsibility for their own actions, and seem, at least at that point, unready and unwilling to make the changes necessary to prevent it form happening again.

Imagine how nice it is to meet them a few years later, after they've gotten Sober, and hear them talk about the person they used to be in the past tense. It is night and day to stand next to someone facing a Felony DUI who thinks the whole system is out to get them, and then to stand next to that person down the road, when they have the insight to see that it was them that was the problem, and not anyone or anything else.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Lawyer - The Best Job in the World" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the overall process of Driver's License Restoration, beginning with determining if a person is both "legally" and "really" eligible. We then examined what can rather accurately be described as very foundation of a License Appeal, the Substance Abuse Evaluation.

We'll pick up with the other component that must be completed and submitted along with the Request for Hearing and the Substance Abuse Evaluation, the Letters of Support.

If the Evaluation is the foundation of a License Appeal, then the Letters of Support are its walls. In my Office, I provide sample copies of Letters to my Clients so that they can get an idea of what the Letters are supposed to say, and, as important, what they shouldn't get into. Quite frankly, this isn't nearly as much work as it sounds, because I pretty much tell the Client to get something, anything, down on paper, and send it to me so that I can edit it. Normally, instead of bothering 3 to 6 people to actually write a first draft of a letter, only to have me red-pen all kinds of changes to it so that they can thereafter re-do it, I have the Client write the first draft so that once it has been edited properly, it can be presented to the person who will be signing it and they simply type it up, sign it, and give it back.

After the Letters have been finalized and the Evaluation double-checked and cleared, everything is filed in Lansing. It takes about 4 weeks to get Notice of the Hearing date. The actual Hearing itself occurs abut 2 weeks after that, meaning that it takes about 6 weeks from the date the paperwork is filed until the day someone is sitting in a Hearing Room. I have all of my cases set for a live Hearing in the Livonia Office of the DAAD. Even for those Clients who live out of state, or live in Michigan but far away for the Metro-Detroit area, I have all of my cases heard in the Livonia Office. For what it's worth, there are 3 places where the Hearings are conducted: Livonia, Lansing and Grand Rapids. Throughout the state there are plenty of Secretary of State Branch Offices that will host a "video Hearing" where a Hearing Officer in one of these 3 locations will conduct the proceeding via closed-circuit TV, but I firmly believe in doing a live, in-person Hearing, and then only in front of those Hearing Officers with whom I have years and years of experience.

Because my Office is located in Mt. Clemens, I have the ability to have some of my Hearings done by video just down the road at the Secretary of State Branch Office on Metro Parkway (16 Mile Rd.) and Gratiot. This is only about 4 minutes from my Office, yet I would never even consider it, choosing instead to drive for about an hour to Livonia to have the case heard in person. I certainly don't do this because I like driving so much; I do it because I know it's better, and the results bear that out.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Process in Michigan - Part 2" »

The process of winning back a Michigan Driver's License after a Revocation for multiple DUI's is a succession of steps. Each step is not only important in its own right, but a deficiency at any point in this process stops a person from going forward, and leaves them stranded right where they had the problem. In the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, I have covered just about every aspect of every step in the License Restoration process. In this article we'll take a step back and re-examine the process more as a whole, rather than by individual parts.

At its simplest, the process starts by filing the Appeal, and ends with a decision by the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). If you think about some of the board games you might have played as a youngster, whatever the rules, the goal was to move from the starting space to the ending space. Getting there, however, was fraught with all kinds of challenges, including missed turns, or a spin or a roll that sent you backward, rather than forward. The License Appeal process can generally be thought of the same way.

In order to even get in the game, a person must be eligible to file a License Appeal. This means one of two things: If a person lost their License for 2 DUI's within 7 years, then they will have to wait a full year before their eligible to Appeal. In practice, this means more like 2 years. If a person was Revoked for 3 DUI's within 10 years, then they have to wait at least 5 years before they can file an Appeal.

While this sounds clear and simple enough, there are loads of things that can mess up the works. As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer who now handles close to 100 License Appeals per year, I have seen just about every situation one could imagine, from the normal to the ultra bizarre. In the usual case, a person will tough out the period of mandatory Revocation and then be eligible to file the Appeal. However, things can go wrong and push that eligibility date farther into the future. These "things" can range from the Court not promptly or properly reporting the last conviction to the Secretary of State to a person's getting caught driving while the License is Revoked. Whatever the background, a person must wait until their eligibility date in order to file a License Appeal.

Being legally eligible doesn't make a person "really" eligible, however. In order to be "really" eligible to start the Driver's License Restoration process, a person must also have made the commitment to get and stay Sober. Sobriety is a must. In other articles I have talked about Sobriety as a perquisite to a License Appeal. And while a person must truly be Sober, and committed to remain Sober in order to really be eligible to win back their License, the definition of Sobriety is much broader than some believe.

Continue reading "The Driver's License Restoration Process in Michigan - Part 1" »

Within my Practice as a DUI and Criminal Lawyer, I am often asked by someone facing a DUI how long it will stay on their Record, or if the can come back later and have it Expunged.

The bad news is that a DUI will stay on a person's Record forever, and it can NEVER "come off."

A DUI, technically called an OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) is both a Criminal and Traffic Offense. A conviction for a DUI goes on both a person's Driving Record, and their Criminal Record.

Beyond that, a DUI falls under a whole different set of Laws related to a Court's obligation to report certain, specified Offenses to the Secretary of State. Part of those Laws is a provision that Criminal Traffic Offenses CANNOT be Expunged, ever. And this applies equally to any Criminal Traffic Offense, not just DUI's.

Moreover, the Law forbids the Court from taking a DUI "under advisement," or otherwise "deferring" it. This is often the answer I have to give someone who asks about the possibility of having the charge somehow deferred for a given period of time, and if they do everything they're supposed to do, having the whole thing dismissed, or reduced to a non-alcohol-related Offense.

In short, it cannot be done, except in those cases where there is a critical and substantial defect in the evidence. And those situations are few and far between.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - How Long Will it Stay on my Record? " »

Of all the articles I have written about Driver's License Restoration, I have yet to really describe what happens at the actual License Appeal Hearing. This article will examine what goes on behind the closed doors of the Hearing Room.

First off, it should be pointed out that the main reason this subject is finally coming up in the 78th Restoration article I have written is because almost all of what is so important about these Appeals happens before the Hearing itself. It may sound clichéd, but these cases are won in the preparation. And while preparation alone can't win a License Appeal, a case cannot be salvaged if absolutely all of the evidence submitted is not up to the mark. In other words, nothing that happens at the Hearing can fix a fatal flaw in the evidence previously submitted, meaning the Substance Abuse Evaluation and the Letters of Support.

The Hearing is more of an opportunity to confirm that the person portrayed in the evidence submitted is as good in real life as they seem on paper. As I tell my Clients beforehand, our preparation has been flawless, so if you can simply go in, and be that person, you'll win.

Yet for all of the preparation one can put into a License Appeal, the idea that "this is it" really hits home once the door of the Hearing Room has been closed.

I have all my cases Heard in the Livonia Office of the DAAD. This office is the default location for all Metro-Detroit residents, but as an Attorney, I can request that any Hearing, no matter where the Client is from, be scheduled there.

Hearings are set for every hour, from 9 to 11 am, and 1 to 4 pm. The Notice sent by mail will indicate the Hearing time, followed by the word "sharp." This means that a Hearing set for 10 am will be Noticed up at "10 am Sharp." There are no Hearings scheduled on the half-hour.

The Hearings do not last for more than the allotted hour, and often last far less than that. I often try to put my Clients at ease, as we prepare for their upcoming Hearing, by telling them that our time preparing will far exceed the time we actually spend in the Hearing.

At the DAAD Hearing Office, there is a window at which the Client and the Lawyer check in. If one arrives before the other, each will check in separately.

Continue reading "What Happens in a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal Hearing?" »

Within the body of my Driver's License Restoration articles, I have covered the most important and relevant legal issues and how they're managed as part of a License Appeal. One issue particular issue within my License Restoration Practice, called the "Seldom Occurring Issue" on my website, has been coming up so much more often recently that it suddenly doesn't seem so "seldom" anymore. This issue is a Revoked DUI Driver's ability to win a License Appeal when they've been caught driving after having had their License Revoked for multiple DUI's.

In this article, we'll examine what happens when a person is otherwise eligible to file a License Appeal, but has gotten one or more Driving While License Suspended or Revoked charges since the time of their Revocation for their last DUI.

The actual legal issue, as presented in DAAD Rule 13 (The Rule which governs License Appeals), reads as follows:

"That the petitioner has the ability and motivation to drive safely, and within the law."

Almost everyone, at first glance, tends to skip over the word "ability." In truth, the only "inability" to drive that I encounter is a person's lack of a Driver's License. That said, the State does make inquiry if the person has any mental health or medical conditions which would affect their physical or mental ability to drive. A person who is subject to seizures, for example, will be required to get what essentially amounts to a medical clearance before they'll be let back on the road.

However, that's not all there is to an inquiry about "ability." From the State's point of view, if a person has had their License Revoked, meaning they cannot drive at all, under any conditions, and they wind up getting caught driving anyway, then that person has a questionable ability, at best, to drive within the law. This is because, despite all the evidence they present about their Sobriety, they still have a demonstrated tendency to not follow rules.

In the real world in which I Practice, most people in this situation were driving to or from work, or to pick the kids up from school, or something like that. Obviously, if they were cited for another DUI, then the driving itself wouldn't be at issue. And those who do drive, despite a Revocation, do so with a heavy heart, and an eye on the rear-view mirror, because they know that if they get pulled over, it will NOT be good.

And of course, some people do get pulled over.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - A Very Important Question in Some Appeals" »

Within my Driver's License Restoration Practice, a significant percentage of all the Driver's License Restoration cases I handle are for Clients who live outside of the Detroit area. I have Clients from all corners of Michigan, and from all corners of the continental U.S., as well. No matter where they live now, all these Clients have one thing in common: They formerly held a Michigan Driver's License which was Revoked because of multiple DUI's. For those that no longer live in Michigan, the implications of a Michigan Revocation can be frustrating, to say the least.

There are lots of reasons people leave Michigan, but it's safe to say that in all cases, it wasn't because things here were going too good. In some cases, people move to some place where transportation isn't a problem. In others, the prospect of good paying work entices them to leave, figuring that being somewhere warmer and making money, even without having a License, beats being cold, unemployed, and still having no License.

At some point, however, a person who formerly held, and then lost, a Michigan Driver's License tries to get one in their new State. And no matter how much time has passed, they find that Michigan has a "hold" on their License, and that they cannot do anything until they clear that "hold."

So they start researching. And they soon learn that in order to get that "hold" released, they need what's called a "Clearance" from Michigan.

A "Clearance" is basically the same thing as getting one's Michigan License Restored, without getting an actual Michigan License. It is as simple as this: If a person still lives in Michigan, then the only action the State can take is to Restore their License. If a person has moved out of state, then Michigan can only release its "hold" by granting a Clearance. No state can give a License to a non-resident. Think about it for a moment; if you were traveling to Texas, as a resident of any other state, and when to their DMV and said "Hi. I'd like to get a Texas Driver's License." What do you think they'd say? It's not like this is "collect all 50, and win a prize...."

Perhaps the critical difference between those who still have a Michigan residency and those who do not is that any resident can and will ONLY win back a Restricted License. A Michigan resident CANNOT win a full, unrestricted License. By law, a Michigan resident will have to serve at least 1 year on a Restricted License with an ignition interlock system in whatever car they drive, None of this, however, applies to people who have moved out-of-state.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License "Holds" for Former Residents with Multiple DUI's" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the legal issues in a Driver's License Restoration Appeal, and saw how many of the issues specified in the Rule governing the Appeals actually folded into 2 (and sometimes 3) simpler issues. From there, we narrowed the scope of our review down to that one issue that is really at the core of any License Appeal, that the person's alcohol problem "is likely to remain under control."

Here, we'll put this issue under the microscope and try to show how a person proves that their alcohol problem "is likely to remain under control."

At the Hearing which was the subject of another article from last week, the Hearing Officer pointed out that proving abstinence is relatively easy, and there are tests, such as urine tests, and even hair follicle tests, which can substantiate claims of abstinence. He then pointed out that there is no such test to prove a person won't drink again, and that "proving" this is, at its core, more subjective than anything else.

This really cuts to the heart of a License Appeal.

How does a person prove that they won't drink again? The DAAD, after all, knows that even some of those who they have examined very closely and to whom they have granted Licenses go out and drink again. Those that come to their attention either test positive for alcohol on the mandatory ignition interlock, or pick up another DUI.

It would probably be easy for the DAAD to require 10 years of Sobriety backed up with 10 years of AA attendance. That would certainly weed out most of their trouble. The problem with that is that the law allows a person to file an Appeal 1 year after their 2nd DUI within 7 years, or 5 years after their 3rd within 10 years. On top of that, the DAAD Rules only require 1 year of abstinence, at most.

So what does it take for a person who has DUI's spanning 3 or 5 or 7 years to prove that, after 1 year of abstinence, they really are a safe bet to NOT drink again?

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - The Most Important Part of the Appeal - Part 2" »

In a Driver's License Restoration article I put up last week, I wrote about representing a Client who had previously won back his License, only to lose it again for another DUI. As I thought back on the Hearing itself, several observations made by the Hearing Officer presented themselves as the inspiration for this article.

Within the body of my License Restoration articles, I have covered this subject from every angle possible. This article will be a new twist on a familiar aspect of winning a License Appeal. Here, we'll focus on the core issue in any License Appeal, that the person's alcohol problem is "likely to remain under control." This will be an in-depth and long article, and, accordingly, will be broken into 2 parts.

To set things up, let's take a look at what needs to be proven to win a License case. The law governing License Appeals are Administrative Rules, and the one setting forth the legal issues and standard of proof in any License Appeal case is set out in what is known as "Rule 13," reprinted below in relevant part:

(a) The hearing officer shall not order that a license be issued to the petitioner unless the petitioner proves, by clear and convincing evidence, all of the following:

(i) That the petitioner's alcohol or substance abuse problems, if any, are under control and likely to remain under control.
(ii) That the risk of the petitioner repeating his or her past abusive behavior is a low or minimal risk.
(iii) That the risk of the petitioner repeating the act of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by, or under the influence of, alcohol or controlled substances or a combination of alcohol and a controlled substance or repeating any other offense listed in section 303(1)(d), (e), or (f) or (2)(c), (d), (e), or (f) of the act is a low or minimal risk.
(iv) That the petitioner has the ability and motivation to drive safely and within the law.
(v) Other showings that are relevant to the issues identified in paragraphs (i) to (iv) of this subdivision.

Now, before anyone rolls their eyes or runs off in panic, all of this can be boiled down to 2 or 3 rather simple things.

First, it is important to note that the Rule directs the Hearing Officer to NOT issue a License unless the Petitioner proves their case by "Clear and Convincing Evidence." This means that, unlike just about every other law out there, this one is written in the negative. For all the discussion we could have about this, it more or less boils down to the Hearing Officer being directed to find a reason or reasons to NOT grant a License, and not the other way around.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - The Most Important Part of the Appeal - Part 1" »

[Author's note - On July 13, 2011, we received notice that the DAAD Approved a License for the Client mentioned in this article, meaning we won his Appeal.]

In my Practice as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I have seen just about every kind of case there is. In the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, I have tried to cover all aspects of this subject. One kind of case that comes up from time to time, and which I handled last week, involves a situation where someone has previously won their License back, only to lose it again because they thereafter picked up another DUI. Admittedly, this doesn't happen too often, but it does occur frequently enough for me to have to watch out for it.

While every case is truly unique, it is paramount for me, as a License Restoration Lawyer, to look deeply at the facts surrounding a License Client's "slip" (aka Relapse) that resulted in this predicament. In that regard, there are certain similarities in all of these cases that can prove enlightening.

In several other articles, I have pointed out that I am only interested in representing someone in a License Appeal who is really and truly Sober. I think there is something that simply "rings true" about someone who has made the decision to permanently give up drinking, remain alcohol-free and live Sober. This is equally true whether or not the person is involved in AA, never went to AA, or just no longer attends AA.

The problem, of course, is that the State will basically say "you convinced us once before that you were sober, that you 'got it,' and that you were committed to remaining sober. We misjudged, gave you a License, and you not only drank again, but you drank and drove. So how can we begin to believe that this time, you really 'get it,' and won't do the same thing all over again?"

This is a tough question. At first blush, it seems that about the only thing a person can do is to emphatically profess the sincerity of their commitment to remain sober.

In a way, that's true, but there is more to it than that.

In a License Appeal I handled last week, my Client, when asked that general question by the Hearing Officer, began to explain that at the time of his prior Hearing, he certainly had made all of the "external" changes anyone might as they try to quit drinking. Those changes included things like going to meetings, keeping alcohol out of his home, and hanging around with non-drinkers (at least initially).

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Winning Back Your License a 2nd Time" »

The Driver's License Restoration process is just that: a process. I have covered pretty much every step of that process within the various articles of the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog. Equally important as each, or any, of the steps in a License Appeal is how the case is proven. By "how," I mean the legal "standard of proof" that must be met in order to win.

Think about this for a moment: When you hear the phrase "win a License Appeal," what comes to mind? Winning, of course, but what else? Doing enough to win, right? Proving whatever it is that needs to be proven. But exactly what does that mean?

In a Driver's License Restoration Appeal, the standard of proof that must be met for a person to actually win is called "clear and convincing evidence." While this sounds complicated, it is really rather straightforward, and can be best understood by seeing how it falls between the standard of proof required to win a lawsuit and that required to convict someone of a crime.

Now, imagine those famous scales of Justice. Pretty much everyone understands that if one person is suing another, in order to win the lawsuit, the person doing the suing must "tip the scales." This legal standard of proof is called "preponderance of the evidence," and is often described as "50.01% to 49.99%"

Likewise, we generally understand that, in a Criminal case, the Prosecutor has to prove a person's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." That means the scales tilt as far down on one side as they'll go, sending the opposite site as high up as it will go. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is a much higher standard of proof than "preponderance of the evidence."

Where does "clear and convincing evidence" fit in? It almost sounds like it would fit nicely about halfway between "preponderance of the evidence" and "beyond a reasonable doubt," doesn't it? And while that's not exactly accurate, it isn't far off the mark, either.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - How the Case is Actually Proven" »

My Practice as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer brings in many calls from people who want to get back on the road. In the last 2 years or so, I have won 168 out of the 170 License Appeals I have filed, giving me a win rate of 98.4%. I guarantee that I will win any Appeal I accept the first time, or the next is free.

One question that has come up quite a bit lately, from a number of callers, is whether or not I will accept their case. They want to know if I think they meet the "standards" I have set to take an Appeal. This is interesting, and a bit ironic, because, as it turns out, almost none of the people who ask this question have anything to worry about.

Recently, I have gone to some lengths to point out, in my various blog articles about Driver's License Restoration, that I am only interested in representing people who are really and truly Sober.

I have likewise made clear that anyone who tells me that they can or will say whatever I want them to, but still believes they can have a glass of wine with dinner, or a beer every once in awhile, no matter what anyone says, can forget about having me handle their case. I'm not interested. I want to win Licenses back for people who have really made the commitment to not drink again.

What's ironic is that those who have made that commitment seem to be those who tend to ready many, if not all of my License Restoration articles. As a result, they know I have that "Sobriety" threshold for accepting new cases. These people, as it turns out, are almost always the ones who have made that commitment to ongoing sobriety. It seems that those who have the most concern about whether I'll take their case or not have the least to be concerned about.

Other people perhaps scan the titles of my more than 70 License Restoration articles, read a little bit here and there, and conclude, from the sheer number of my writings on this topic, that I know my stuff (and I do), and therefore, I am the guy they should hire. By not reading enough of what I have written, however, they have missed something important.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restoration - Are You Ready to Win?" »

In my Practice as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I am contacted by loads of people who want to legally get back on the road again. Honestly, if I could simply represent everyone who wants to come in and hire me, I'd need to clone myself twice: I'd need two of me to handle the cases, and a third to just handle the business side of things. The basis of my success in this field, however, has to do with making sure I only accept representation on behalf of those who are not only eligible, but also ready to undergo the scrutiny involved in a License Appeal.

That "scrutiny" involves many things, but first, and foremost, it assesses whether or not the person trying either to get their Michigan Driver's License Restored, or obtain a "Clearance" so that they can get an out-of-state License, is really and truly "sober."

At its simplest, my first inquiry of a prospective Client is about their sobriety. Of course, it is necessary that they have not had a drink for at least a year, at the minimum, but I'm equally interested in finding out if their definition of "sobriety" means remaining abstinent. In other words, I need to know that a prospective Client has not only been alcohol-free for the last year or more, but also plans on remaining alcohol-free permanently.

When I am contacted by someone who hints that they're willing to say whatever I want them to say, or otherwise indicates they've had anything to drink in the last year, I know several things right away:

I know that the person is not ready, by a long shot, to begin the License Appeal process.

I also know that they have not read enough of the articles in the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, wherein I make very clear that I'm only interested in taking up the case for those who have honestly made a commitment to remain sober.

Finally, I know that the person, whatever else, has not "hit bottom," or had enough, or whatever term one uses to describe that point where a person has simply gotten sick and tired of being sick and tired, and knows they have to eliminate alcohol from their lives.

Continue reading "Sobriety as a First Requirement in a Driver's License Appeal" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our examination of the ignition interlock requirement for those who win a Michigan Drivers' License Restoration Appeal. In this second part, we'll examine the 1-year requirement for the ignition interlock device, and what happens if a person has a positive, or multiple positive alcohol tests while under the "supervision" of the device.

Beyond the requirement that a person install an ignition interlock unit in whatever vehicle they drive, they must keep that unit in the vehicle for a minimum of 1 year. At the end of that year, they may file for another Hearing before the Secretary of State's DAAD, and seek permission to have the unit removed. This is a departure from before when, after a year had passed, a person could simply remove the unit.

Technically speaking, a person could file for a Hearing to just remove the ignition interlock, but at the time a person becomes eligible to file an Appeal to remove the unit, they also become eligible to Appeal for full Restoration of driving privileges. It goes without saying, then, that everyone files for full Restoration AND to have the interlock unit removed.

This second Appeal is no different than the first, and requires an updated Substance Abuse Evaluation, new Letters of Support, and a whole, full-blown Hearing.

If, however, a person has what's called a "major violation" while on the interlock, (meaning a rolling violation where the driver does not, within 5 minutes, provide a sample with a BAC of under .04, or the driver has 3 or more minor violations within a "monitoring period) then the interlock company sends notice to the DAAD and the person is bought in for a "show cause" Hearing, at which time the Secretary of State positions itself to Revoke their License all over again, unless the person can "show cause" why that should not happen. As noted before, the DAAD isn't very sympathetic to explanations about positive breath test results.

As I have noted in various other articles I have written, after over 20 years of doing this, I've pretty much seen it all. A few years back I had a case where my Client, who was on a Restricted License with an interlock device, got into an argument with his girlfriend. It must have been a real humdinger, because she went to a nearby party store, bought a beer, chugged it down, and then sat in his car and tried to start it with fresh alcohol on her breath. The machine, of course, went crazy.

Continue reading "License Restoration in Michigan - the Ignition Interlock Requirement - Part 2" »

In this blog, it has been my goal to cover every aspect of Driver's License Restoration. I have approached this by writing 2 kinds of articles: The more general, or "overview" type, and those that cover a particular aspect of the License Restoration process in great detail. This article will likely fall into that first category, being more general in nature.

Most of the time I spend with License Restoration Clients involves preparing them for the Substance Abuse Evaluation, which takes about 3 hours in my Office at the time of our first meeting, and then preparing them for the actual Hearing. In truth, very little of my time is spent on what happens after we win our License Appeal and the person gets back on the road.

I don't really consider this any kind of oversight. My job is to win License Appeals, and I guarantee any Client that I will do just that, or their next round is FREE. Once a License Appeal has been won, the Secretary of State, for all of its shortcomings, is pretty good at explaining the steps involved in getting behind the wheel again.

There have, however, been a few changes in recent years regarding what can and must be done once a person has won a Driver's License Restoration case, and many of these involve the rules regarding the ignition interlock device that must be installed by any Michigan resident who wins a Driver's License Restoration Appeal.

Chief amongst those changes has been the rule, or rules, concerning the ignition interlock.

Most everyone knows that if they win their Appeal, they'll be required to install something in their car. Beyond that however, most people are unsure of what, for how long, and under what condition they must use it.

The ignition interlock unit is a kind of breath-tester that requires the person to give a breath sample before the car will even start. Beyond that, the machine goes "off" from time to time and requires the driver to continue to give breath samples as the vehicle is being operated.

A condition of any License Ordered as a result of a License Appeal is that the person ONLY drives a vehicle equipped with the device. To be clear, NONE of this applies to out-of-state cases where a person is seeking a "Clearance." Instead, it only, but always, applies to any case where a Michigan resident is seeking some kind of Restoration of his or her Michigan driving privileges.

Continue reading "License Restoration in Michigan - the Ignition Interlock Requirement - Part 1" »

For all the analysis of DUI cases one can find, I have yet to see anything that tries to look at such a case from the point of view of the person facing the charge. Even within the body of articles in the Drunk Driving section of this blog, I have tried to look at these cases from the point of view of the Judge, the Probation Officer, and even the Police Officer, or at least how the person charged with a DUI should "see" those parties. This article will attempt to do a 180-degree turn and try and get in the head of the person facing the DUI as they grapple with the emotional and psychological considerations of being dragged through the Criminal Justice System.

After more than 20 years of handling DUI cases, I have personally met with and handled the cases for thousands of people dealing with this charge. I have, I think, seen it all, from those who seem rather unfazed by the whole thing to those who break down and cry at almost every turn. It's a safe bet that anyone who has read this far is NOT the kind of person "unfazed" by a DUI, and our focus, therefore, will be on those who feel some kind of emotional burden along with the various practical considerations that come along with a DUI.

Everyone knows that a DUI is a Criminal matter. Only those who have been Arrested for a DUI, however, have any first-hand knowledge of what its like to suddenly feel like a Criminal.

From the first moment of Police contact, a DUI driver experiences a sense of loss of control. At first, many people may think they can still "get out" of the Traffic Stop, but they soon begin to realize that is not likely to happen. Once they are told to step out of the car, a person starts to feel less and less in control of their own destiny. By the time they're in the back of the Police car, they realize that they have essentially no control over what is going to be happening, at least for a while.

Perhaps the first "punch in the gut" comes when a person is placed in handcuffs. At that point, as they often relate to me, they feel "degraded" and embarrassed. Being placed back into the Police car in cuffs often starts a panic response on the inside, even if they maintain a straight face on the outside. Their mind is whirling as they get driven to the Police Station.

Once they start being processed at the Police Station, most people feel a strong mixture of apprehension, or outright fear, and complete embarrassment. Maybe in their day-to-day life they are someone important. Maybe they tell other people what to do, or how to do things, or have a lot or responsibility. Why hasn't someone seen that they are, at their core, a good person?

Continue reading "DUI Charges in Michigan - Dealing with the Emotional Considerations" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our examination of the Diagnosis section of the Substance Abuse Evaluation that is a required part of the Driver's License Appeal process. In this second part, we'll continue that examination by first narrowing our focus a bit and zooming in on what are often called "self-validating" or "test-taking attitude" scores, and then looking at the more general role of the Diagnosis section of the Substance Abuse Evaluation in a License Appeal.

As I noted in the part 1 and part 2 of the previous article regarding Testing Instruments, the most commonly used test for License Appeal Substance Abuse Evaluations is the SASSI-3 (or simply SASSI) Test. Unlike the MAST Test, the SASSI calls for no discretion in the scoring of the Test. However, as we noted in our discussion of the SASSI in that previous set of articles, the SASSI has a number of "self-validating" questions that ultimately result in a "Defensiveness" score. Depending on that score, the overall test results are determined to be more, or less, reliable. The higher the Defensiveness score, the less reliable the SASSI Test results. Of course, the lower that score, the more reliable any such results are determined to be.

If this was as easy as consistently dealing with low Defensiveness scores, then there would be no need for this discussion. However, a sizable chunk of people wind up with Defensiveness scores that, while not high enough to completely invalidate the Test scores, do call them into question. This leaves the test results in need of "interpretation." This means that the Evaluator has to arrive at a Diagnosis based upon not only the Test scores, but his or her experience, disposition and training as a Substance Abuse Counselor. It means, in short, that the Diagnosis is not completely determined by objective standards, but also contains an inescapable element of analytical subjectivity.

Beyond being able to analyze any such Diagnosis independently, it is even more important to know how the DAAD will "see" it. No matter how favorable any such Diagnosis might first appear, if it can, or will be doubted by the DAAD Hearing Officers, or otherwise not automatically accepted by them as inherently reliable, then the result will be a Denial of a License Appeal.

Remember, DAAD Rule 13, which governs License Appeals, mandates that the Hearing Officer "shall not" issue any driving privileges unless the person Appealing proves his or her case by "clear and convincing evidence." This means that if the Hearing Officer has any unresolved question or questions about the evidence presented in support of the Appeal, the person will lose. Therefore, a questionable diagnosis will in turn lead to the Hearing Officer declaring the Substance Abuse Evaluation to be "questionable" or "insufficient," and the whole Appeal goes down the drain.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - The Diagnosis in a Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 2" »

In the previous 2-part article, we began a rather detailed examination of the "Testing Instruments" section of the Substance Abuse Evaluation that must be completed and filed as part of any Driver's License Appeal. In that article, we noted that, quite logically, the result of that Alcohol Evaluation Test is a "Diagnosis." This article will bring that whole "Diagnosis" section under the lens for another in-depth analysis. Part 1 and part 2 of the preceding article should be read as a pre-requisite to this one. In this article, we'll analyze the Diagnosis that results from whatever Test is given, and analyzed in the prior set of articles.

These "fine-tooth comb" type of articles are for people, like me, who are interested in details. Within the body of the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, I have all kinds of articles that range from a summary overview of License Appeals, to a more specific analysis of the process, all the way to articles like these, which provide a nearly microscopic analysis of just one component of that process. As I noted before, I find that many of my Clients are interested in the fine points and minutia, and that's a good thing. Beyond the mere desire and willingness to learn, this helps provide me with a Client base that is considerably more well-read and intelligent than average.

Interestingly, if not ironically, the Diagnosis section of the Substance Abuse Evaluation comes before the Testing Instruments section. This is a little bit of the-cart-before-the-horse in terms of layout, but beyond being a bit illogical, it does not change the fact that the Diagnosis is the result of whatever Alcohol Assessment is administered.

The range of possible Diagnoses is not particularly broad. Essentially, after taking an Alcohol Assessment Test, a person can only get 1 of 3 rather general diagnoses:

1. "no diagnosis" (meaning no alcohol problem),
2. "alcohol abuse," or
3. "alcohol dependence."

In the real world, a "no diagnosis," meaning "no alcohol problem" diagnosis almost never occurs. In fact, even if such a diagnosis were reached in any particular case, the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) would have grave doubts about it. This is because it is pretty much assumed that anyone with 2 or more DUI's has some kind of alcohol problem. This means that there are really only 2 plausible and realistic diagnoses: Alcohol Abuse, or Alcohol Dependence.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - The Diagnosis in a Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 1" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the Testing Instruments section of the Substance Abuse Evaluation used in Driver's License Restoration Appeals. We'll pick up where we left off, shifting from a more general inspection to some of the more important specifics of this section.

License Appeals are decided by Hearing Officers in the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). In my Practice, I have ALL of my cases heard in the Metro-Detroit DAAD Office in Livonia. I know each of the Hearing Officers there very well. Having been in front of each countless times, I have likewise come to know that all of them have a very good understanding of the whole Alcohol Assessment process, and several know more about these Assessments than a person could ever imagine. It is, after all, what they do all day. Even the busiest, most senior Judge will see only a fraction of the alcohol cases that will come before any DAAD Hearing Officer. To put it bluntly, they are experts at this.

Because of their expertise, the Hearing Officers not only know how to read a Substance Abuse Evaluation and the specific Testing Instrument used in any case (and the ACTUAL Test a person took, and their actual Results sheet MUST be attached to the Substance Abuse Evaluation), but they also know how to look for anomalies between any such test, and the other information or conclusions presented or reached within the Substance Abuse Evaluation form itself. Moreover, they can "sniff out" an unusual test, or test result, or any information within the Substance Abuse Evaluation that seems inconsistent with a person having racked up 2 or more DUI's.

This means I have to tread carefully around this facet of preparing my Client for the Substance Abuse Evaluation. Too much attention will trip the "over-prepared" alarm. Not enough preparation can result in all kinds of problems. Let's be honest for a moment; all of us, from on school days onward, have had to take it on the chin as a result of not being prepared enough for something. Your License Appeal is not the situation in which to relive that sinking feeling.

Beyond the local Clinic I prefer (which as noted I the first part of this article, uses the SASSI-3 Test), many Evaluators use the MAST Test. This test is often used by Courts in DUI cases, and is relatively short. It is, quite frankly, easy to prepare for, and easy to do well on. Unlike the SASSI, the MAST does not have any kind of "defensiveness" score. In a DUI case, I can make sure a Client scores as low as possible on this test, sparing them all kinds of time sitting in Counseling sessions, Classes, and singing "kumbaya " with their new DUI friends.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Appeals - The Alcohol Screening Test, or "Testing Instrument" - Part 2" »

An inherent part of my Practice, as a Driver's License Attorney, is preparing my Clients for their Substance Abuse Evaluation. After that, I must review the completed Substance Abuse Evaluation to make sure it is both Legally adequate (meaning it contains everything it must), and favorable (meaning it helps the Client win the License Appeal). This preparation, which takes place at my first meeting with a new Client, takes about 3 hours. Once the Evaluation has been completed, both my Ann (my Senior Assistant), and I, will go over it with a fine-tooth comb.

I have covered some of the prerequisite requirements for a good Substance Abuse Evaluation in other articles within the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog. In this article, we're going to focus on one specific aspect of this Evaluation, the Testing Instrument. This will be a long, highly-detailed article, and will be broken into 2 parts.

Many of my Clients have a keen interest in exploring every facet of the License Restoration process as they do their homework, and that, in my opinion, is a good thing. For those not interested in the minutia of all that's involved, however, I have a few articles that simply overview the License Appeal process. This article will appeal to those who are more "detail people" rather than those who simply want to call my Office, find out if they qualify, make an appointment, and rely upon my guarantee that I'll win your License Appeal, or your next is free.

The "Testing Instrument" part of the Substance Abuse Evaluation is actually a section of the form in which the Evaluator gives the person being evaluated a written Alcohol Screening Test, and thereafter "scores" it.

The "score," or result of whichever specific Testing Instrument is used is a Diagnosis. This is really a fancy way of determining the degree of, or "staging" a person's alcohol problem. This makes sense: Take a screening test, and you get a Diagnosis. Examining and explaining the resultant Diagnosis will be the subject of a separate article.

In a way, having to take a written Alcohol Screening Test as part of the overall Substance Abuse Evaluation is sort of like taking a test within a test. This can more clearly be understood by remembering back to a person's DUI cases. As part of the DUI process, after a Plea has been entered, but before a person is Sentenced, they have an interview with a Probation Officer, and part of that interview process (technically called a PSI, or Pre-Sentence Investigation) is having to take a written Alcohol Screening Test.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Appeals - The Alcohol Screening Test, or "Testing Instrument" - Part 1" »

As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, one of the first things I do in any case is determine a Client's eligibility date to file a License Appeal. Sometimes, this takes on a life of its own, as any number of people "think" that they're eligible, but don't have any verification of that. This article will focus on how I make that determination, and what I need to do that.

To be fair, any number of people who call me are well past any eligibility date to file a License Appeal, and there's really no issue with that. Also, lots of people have already obtained a copy of their Driving Record, and have confirmed that fact.

The single best thing I can examine is that Driving Record, like a Doctor will examine a Patient's x-ray before determining what course of action to take. Having examined perhaps thousands of these Records, I can make short work of interpreting the information contained therein. In a matter of a minute or two, I can tell a person if they are eligible, or not, to file a License Appeal, or if there is something they can do to make them eligible.

To bypass any difficulties, if a person can get a copy of their Driving Record, and get it to my Office (we accept them by fax, mail, in-person drop off, or e-mail/scan), I can instantly make a determination.

An example of where things aren't so clear came up just the other day. I was contacted by a person who had moved out of Michigan, and went to get a License in his new State. Of course, he was told that he could not obtain a License until he "cleared" his Michigan hold. Next, he contacted me.

It turns out this person has had 3 DUI's in the last 6 or 7 years; 1 in Michigan in 2010, and 2 out-of-state, before that. Now, under Michigan Law, he should be Revoked for at least 5 years for having 3 DUI's within 10 years. Yet he indicated that when he called the Michigan Secretary of State, he was told he became eligible to file a License Appeal earlier this year.

Something is wrong with that. And the last thing I want to do is take someone's hard-earned money, file an Appeal, and be informed, at the Hearing, that there was a mistake. Even if 1 of those out-of-state DUI"s doesn't show up on his record right now, he is going to be asked, at the Hearing, how many DUI's he's had. Even if he lied (and he never suggested he would, nor would I let him...), and won that Appeal, if (and more likely, when) that 3rd DUI ever did hit his Record, it would cause all kinds of problems, and would likely get him back in front of another Hearing Officer. That Hearing Officer would know the guy lied at his last Hearing, and they'd take everything else he said with the knowledge that he has already lied under oath. He'd be doomed.

Continue reading "Reviewing a Driving Record to Determine License Restoration Eligibility" »

A large part of my Practice, as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, involves helping people who now live out-of-state "clear" their Michigan Revocation so that they can be Licensed in the state in which they now live. This article will explain the difference between the License relief typically given to a Michigan resident and that available for someone who now lives out-of-state.

Usually, I am contacted by someone now in another state who has tried to obtain a License in that state, only to be informed that they are not eligible to do so until they take care of an outstanding Michigan "hold." Almost everyone who contacts me has done enough investigation (often having read the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog) to discover that the "hold" on their License stems from 2 or more DUI's that have resulted in the Revocation of their (former) Michigan Driver's License.

Sometimes, these individuals had a License in another state for a while, and this previously undisclosed "hold" comes up when they try to renew. Most of the time, however, and in large part due to what is know as the National Driving Register, the Michigan "hold," which is actually a Michigan Revocation, turns up before any License is issued.

In many cases, I am contacted after a person has filed for an Administrative review and lost. It's then that I almost always have to tell the caller that they'll have wait a year in order to correct the errors that caused them to lose their first, do-it-yourself Appeal, and then try again, this time with a Lawyer (like me) who specializes in License Appeals.

It is not uncommon for me to hear a familiar desperation in the caller's voice, telling me that they'll settle for any kind of relief, and would do anything just to get some kind of Restricted License.

And that is the whole point of this article. There is no "Restricted License" option for out-of-State residents. Instead, those who now live out-of-state but have a Revoked Michigan Driver's License can only obtain a "Clearance," which is essentially the same thing as a full, un-Restricted License.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - "Holds" for Multiple DUI's for Former Residents" »

As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I deal with the details and nuances of the License Appeal process every day. One Rule, in particular, is the centerpiece by which pretty much every License Appeal wins, or loses.

The Rule which governs Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals is known as "Rule 13." You'll find it quoted in any number of the articles within the Driver's License Restoration section of my Blog, as well as in my website. Similarly, you'll find it splashed all over the web. It's not a particularly difficult Rule to read, but I honestly think that practically no one, including most Lawyers, understands the single most important facet of this Rule.

This article will examine what's really at the core of making a License Appeal so difficult. Rather than reprint the whole of Rule 13, we need only look at the very first part of it to see what I mean:

Rule 13. . . .

(a) The hearing officer shall not order that a license be issued to the petitioner unless the petitioner proves, by clear and convincing evidence, all of the following:

The key words here are "shall not." There really is no other Law or Rule of which I know that is written in the negative. This one is.

In Criminal cases, the Prosecutor must prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." In a Civil Lawsuit, the person suing must prove their case by a "preponderance of the evidence." These standards of proof are written in the affirmative, meaning that Judge or Jury is NOT instructed to look for reasons to convict, or rule against someone. The DAAD Rulef, however, is essentially written in the negative. The Hearing Officer is instructed to deny a License Appeal unless the person proves their case by "clear and convincing evidence."

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Why so Many Appeals Lose" »

Sobriety. Few words in the English language can contain so many different, yet related meanings. Depending on the person, the word Sobriety can mean anything from a welcome change of behavior in a family member or friend to the feeling of practically being "born again" in the person who experiences it.

In my line of work as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, Sobriety means several things. It is a minimum requirement in order to win a License Appeal. It is the starting point from which my Clients begin to rebuild their lives, and often discover things are better than they ever could have imagined. It is a state of being that cannot be faked, although any number of people try to do just that.

In the rather large collection of articles in the Driver's License Restoration section of my Blog, I examine the License Restoration process in detail, often pointing out that central to any winning License Appeal is the story of a person's Recovery. I have also pointed out that, beyond just looking for Clients to pay my Fee for a License Restoration Appeal, I am looking for people who really, truly have achieved that wonderful state of Sobriety.

The truth is that I've grown used to winning License Appeals. In fact, I'm so confident in my ability to win a License Appeal that I recently added a guarantee in my License cases promising that if I don't win a Client's first License Appeal, the next one is FREE! A necessary component of that success, however, is screening my Clients to make sure they really have gotten Sober.

Merely not drinking is a far cry from real Sobriety. Anyone who is truly Sober knows this, while anyone who isn't is wondering what the big difference is, anyway.

I have had people sit across from me and tell me that they'll say whatever I want them to, but that in reality, no one is going to tell them not to have a glass of wine, or a bottle of beer, every now and then with dinner. I've declined representation in those cases. I have more than enough good work to keep me busy without the need to destroy my reputation by trying to pass off a Sobriety pretender as the real thing.

Continue reading "Sobriety as a Requirement for a Michigan License Appeal" »

In the previous article about Driver's License Restoration eligibility, we learned that 2 DUI's within 7 years requires a License Revocation of at least 1 year, and that 3 within 10 years results in a License Revocation of at least 5 years. In this article, we'll examine how picking up any Driving convictions, including Driving While License Suspended/Revoked/Denied (DWLS/DWLR), will extend that period of Revocation, and for how long.

Many years ago, The Michigan Secretary of State used to impose what was then called a "Mandatory like additional" period of Suspension or Revocation if someone was caught driving during a period of valid Suspension or Revocation. Since those days are long gone, and the lingering cases from that period growing fewer, we won't waste a lot of time revisiting ancient history. The major upshot of the Laws that existed prior to 1999 was that a person who got caught driving during a period of Revocation due to multiple DUI's would get another identical period of Revocation slapped upon them.

This meant that a person with 3 DUI's within 10 years, whose License was Revoked for a minimum of 5 years, and who got caught driving during that period would have another 5 years of Revocation imposed upon them.

If they wound up with 10 years to wait before they could apply for a License Appeal, and got caught driving during that time, then they'd get another 10 years of Revocation added. If, after that, they got caught driving during that 20 year Revocation period, they'd get another 20 years.

Recently, I received a Driving Record from someone who, because of those old Laws, is Revoked until the year 2034.

The good news for this shrinking class of people is that they can go to Court and have those pre-1999 Revocations set aside and become eligible to file a License Appeal. There are, of course, certain requirements and conditions that must be met in order to do this, but if they've not been caught driving within the last 5 years of so, then the way can be cleared in order to file a License Appeal.

More common, however, is the situation where a person has been Revoked for a 2nd, 3rd or subsequent DUI after 1999, and then gets caught driving during that 1 or 5 year Revocation period.

Continue reading "How a Revoked License Charge will Affect a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeal" »

Sometimes, in the course of doing whatever we do for a living, we lose sight of the fact that not everyone understands all the little details involved in our line of work. In my capacity as a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, the issue of a person's eligibility to file a License Appeal is an inquiry I make multiple times every day. One look at a Driving Record, or a few quick answers from a caller, and I can tell in a heartbeat when the person will be eligible to file a License Appeal. This article will attempt to explain the timing issues of License Appeal eligibility in a clear, straightforward manner.

In the Driver's License Restoration section of this Blog, I have tried to cover the License Appeal process from every possible angle. The issue of eligibility isn't really about the process as much as when that process can begin.

The primary rules regarding License Revocations are actually pretty simple: If a person has 2 alcohol-related (DUI) and/or substance-abuse related convictions within 7 years, then their Driver's License will be Revoked for a minimum of 1 year.

If a person has 3 or more such convictions within 10 years, then their Driver's License will be Revoked for a minimum of 5 years.

That sounds rather simple, but, it should come as no surprise that it's more complicated than that.

First of all, when we speak of a person being Revoked for a "minimum" of either 1 or 5 years, we principally mean that the person will be ineligible to even start the Driver's License Appeal process until that "minimum" time period has passed. To put it another way, if a person has 2 DUI's within 7 years, their License will be Revoked for a minimum of 1 year. If they wait for 5, or 10, or even 25 years, they cannot just thereafter go to the Secretary of State and have their License Reinstated. The Secretary of State will inform them that they must go through the License Appeal process, and only if they win that Appeal will they be able to be re-licensed. If they lose, then they'll have to wait another year to Appeal again.

Thus, a "minimum" of 1 year means just that; there is no way they'll be able to be re-licensed for at least that long. It could be longer.

Continue reading "Michigan License Appeals - When can I File?" »

In my Practice as a full-time Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I have attempted to put out as much information as possible about this subject. The Driver's License Restoration section of my Blog, which you're in right now, has well over 50 highly detailed, informational articles covering the whole panorama of License Appeals. This article will be about License Appeals for those who live beyond the Metro-Detroit area, and how I handle those cases.

I'm motivated to write this article because it seems that not a day goes by without my Office being contacted by people from all around the State of Michigan (and, of course, from those who have moved outside of the State) asking if I can do their License Appeal.

So I want to be clear:

I CAN DO YOUR MICHIGAN LICENSE APPEAL NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE.

All you have to do is come and see me in my Office, located in Downtown Mt. Clemens, right across from the County Building. I'm located about a minute off of I-94, at the North River Road exit.

Many people with whom I speak have already read many, if not most of my Blog articles about License Appeals. Those who have know that I prefer to have the Substance Abuse Evaluation completed at a Clinic just a few blocks from my Office. I have pointed out that I have no connection with this Clinic aside from liking the fact that they do an excellent, honest job in completing this ultra-important part of the License Appeal process. As it turns out, I'm going there myself in the next week or so to update the staff as to the ever-evolving requirements of the Michigan Secretary of State Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD).

For anyone coming in from anyplace other than the local area, we'll schedule the initial Client meeting with me (which lasts about 3 hours) right before the Client has their appointment with the Clinic, if that's where they choose to do their Substance Abuse Evaluation. This means the Client can come see me, then go and have the Evaluation completed, and then go home, wherever that may be. As I have noted, I have no problem with someone going elsewhere for this Evaluation, but it has been my rather considerable experience that, more often than not, Evaluations from other sources fall short of what I feel is necessary to begin a successful License Appeal.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration for Those who Live Anywhere" »

Having a keen understanding the concepts and principles of Sobriety and Recovery is necessary in order to be a successful License Restoration Lawyer. Beyond a working knowledge of the 12 steps of AA, or the somewhat simple notion of Abstinence, there lies a whole, vast world of different Recovery strategies people use to get and stay sober. This article will focus on how everyone has their own, unique approach to Sobriety, and how being able to articulate that approach is fundamental to winning a License Appeal.

In the body of my various Driver's License Restoration articles, I have pointed out how the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) has evolved from an agency that pretty much used to only grant Licenses to those actively involved in AA to an agency that has taken on a much broader, more progressive view of the Recovery process. One thing that has not changed a bit, however, is the fact that simply showing up at a Hearing and declaring "I quit drinking" is a sure-fire way to lose a License Appeal.

I have likewise noted that more than half of the Clients for whom I win back a License are NOT actively involved in AA. Of those, about a third to a half have some prior AA contact. A fair number have never been to a 12 step meeting in their life.

As a group, however, my Clients, meaning people who can and will win (or already have won) their License Appeal, are able, by the time we get to our Hearing, to talk about their personal Recovery strategy. Often enough, when I first meet a Client, they need some help in being able to recount, much less describe, the kinds of changes they went through from being a drinker at the time of their last DUI Arrest to being a non-drinker ready to win a License Appeal. Many of them, at least at first, can't do much better than say "I quit drinking." That's where I come in.

In another article about License Restoration, I observed that everyone undertaking a License Appeal has a "Recovery story." It may not be written yet, but as I discussed in that article, the process a person undergoes in changing from a drinker into a non-drinker is a "story" in every sense of the word. My job as the person's Lawyer is to be, amongst other things, a kind of "ghost writer" who helps the person put the words to that story. And make no mistake, those words are important. In order to win a License Appeal, a Recovery story has to hit certain marks. Certain phrases are important. As different as they may be, every Recovery story has certain elements in common.

Some people find and fall in love with AA. AA is still the "golden child" of all Recovery programs. Even if a person never stepped foot into an AA meeting, chances are, if they went through any kind of Counseling or Rehab, they learned certain concepts that have their origin in AA.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restortation Appeals - Everyone's Recovery is Different" »

Amongst my many articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have not spent much time examining the required Letters of Support that must be submitted in every case. In truth, I have been reluctant to tackle this subject because I have thought that too much of what I could say about it is part of the "proprietary blend" of ingredients that is my stock-in-trade. In other words, I'm not about to give out the specifics of how I do this, any more than Coca-Cola is going to give the specifics of the "Natural Flavors" that are the basis of the Coke flavor. This is how I help my Clients win License Appeals. This is what I get paid to do.

After thinking about it for a while, however, I have concluded that there is plenty enough to be said about the Letters of Support without giving away any trade secrets.

First, its important to note that the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) requires, in every License Appeal, at least 3, but not more than 6 Letters of Support. This is a procedural requirement, not a suggestion.

The Letters of Support must be submitted with the Original Request for a Hearing. In my Practice, almost all of my Clients will be in a position to submit finalized Letters at the time the Request for Hearing is made. In some cases, there might be a Letter or two that cannot be obtained or finalized by the time the Request for Hearing, Substance Abuse Evaluation and at least 3 Letters of Support are filed. If I don't submit them with the original Filing (sent to Lansing), I'll have the Client get them to me for review, and, if and when they're good enough for submission, will take them to the actual Hearing, where I'll present them to the Hearing Officer as we review the evidence and he or she asks if there is any additional evidence to be submitted.

And that's a very important point. Any Lawyer worth his or her Fee will be reviewing, and helping revise the Letters of Support long before anyone even THINKS about submitting them. Not that long ago, I was sitting in the waiting room at the DAAD Hearing Office, and my Client and I watched some Lawyer come in, take a few Letters from his Client, and being to review them. We sat in shock as he told the Client something like "I wish [the letter writer] would have said something about..."

What good were those Letters going to do? Why weren't those Letters of Support reviewed, and, perhaps more importantly, revised, beforehand?

I generally have revisions to almost every Letter of Support I review. Certainly, more than 90% of the Letters I review are sent back with proposed corrections. And this is after I've explained to the Client, at our first meeting (which lasts anywhere from 2 and ½ to 3 hours), in considerable detail, what the Letters must (and must not) say, and given them sample Letters to use as a starting point.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - The Letters of Support" »

As a Driver's License Restoration Attorney, I get questions about every part of the License Appeal process. In this blog, I have tried to answer as many of those as possible, and anyone interested in learning about this Process should read through the whole Driver's License Restoration category.

Since a good part of my Practice involves handling License Appeals for people who have moved out of State, I've run across pretty much every situation imaginable as it relates to having a Michigan License that has been Revoked for 2 or more DUI's. One such circumstance has come up several times recently. This article will focus on those situations where a person whose Driver's License has been Revoked in Michigan has been able to obtain a License in another State, only to find that they cannot renew it and must clear up the Michigan Revocation before they can be re-licensed elsewhere.

As a general rule, once a person's License has been Revoked in Michigan, they will be unable to secure a License in any other State. This is because the National Driving Register ( NOT the "National Driving Registry," which is a for-profit site trying to cash in on the similarity of the names), maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety administration, keeps a record of all state actions against a person's License. Thus, when a person goes into a Department of Motor Vehicles in a state other than Michigan (where we call such a bureau the "Secretary of State"), a check is run both through that state's records, and the NDR. Once a person comes back as Revoked in Michigan, the state in which the Person is trying to get a License will inform them that they are ineligible for a License until they clear up the Michigan Revocation.

This wasn't always the case. In fact, although I have no specific data regarding when any particular state started using the NDR, what's clear is that any number of years ago, some states clearly did not. I have 2 License Appeal cases right now, one for a person who was able to get a License in Florida, and another in Oregon, some years ago. In each case, they were told that they would be unable to renew those Licenses until the Revocations from Michigan are cleared. Obviously, since the time each of those Clients first obtained their out-of-state License, both Florida and Oregon began checking the National Driving Register.

To the best of my knowledge, every state in the Country now runs a check of the NDR before issuing a License. Of course, I know that anyone contacting me about a Michigan Clearance has already been denied in another State.

To clear the way for being Licensed in another state, a person must obtain a "Clearance" of their Michigan Driver's License. In other words, a person who has moved out of state is not eligible to have a Michigan Driver's License "Restored," unless they're moving back to Michigan.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Clearance - Can't Renew in Another State" »

As a License Restoration Lawyer who typically handles over 70 License Appeals per year, I only conduct live, in-person Hearings as part of my Practice. Beyond that, I have every case for I handle scheduled for Hearing in the Metro-Detroit Office of the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) in Livonia, where I appear before the same Hearing Officers again and again. I do not believe in "Video Hearings," and will not schedule a case for one.

This article, shorter than those typically found in the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, will examine the main reasons why I feel so strongly about that.

First, I believe that part of consistently winning any kind of case is a function of knowing the person before whom you're going to appear. In a Court case, for example, I would much prefer to be represented by a Lawyer who is familiar with the Judge, rather than one who isn't. The same holds true for License Appeals. Each and every Hearing Officer will first ask a core group of essentially the same questions, then turn to those areas that they feel are most important. And those areas differ a bit from Hearing Officer to Hearing Officer. This means that the Client who has been well-prepared for what is going to be asked will know what's coming, and be ready for it. A person who has not been prepared, especially for those questions unique to this or that Hearing Officer, is likely to be in for a surprise, and there are seldom any pleasant surprises in Legal Proceedings.

Second, it has been my experience, over and over again, that when I meet with a new Client who has tried a License Appeal before they hired me, and lost, many of those losing cases involve video Hearings. Whatever the reasons for that, when one thing follows another often enough, we just begin to accept that "that's the way it is," like thunder follows lightning. I have seen no track record for video Hearings except a losing one.

Continue reading "Why I say "no" to Video Hearings in Michigan Driver's License Restoration Cases" »

In part 1 of this article, we began an examination of how active involvement in AA can help a person win a Driver's License Appeal.In this 2nd part, we'll pick up with some more examples of why this is the case.

Within the body of my various License Restoration articles, I have written a lot about how I prepare my Client for a Driver's License Restoration Appeal. All of that preparation is put under the spotlight on the day of their actual License Hearing. During the Hearing, I have a number of jobs to do simultaneously. Amongst them is paying attention to my Client's answers to the Hearing Officer's questions. This helps me determine, what, if any questions I ask my Client when I subsequently re-examine them. In the larger picture, this helps me control the impression that is ultimately made at the Hearing.

A few years ago, I was sitting in a Hearing with a Client who was an active AA participant. This man credited the program with not only bringing him to sobriety, but also saving his life. During the course of the Hearing, he was asked by the Hearing Officer to talk about a step or steps, other than the 1st, that were particularly important to him, and to explain why. I felt a surge of satisfaction run through me, as I knew this guy could step up and hit this one out of the park.

Imagine how that feeling of confidence drained out of me, only to be replaced by a cold panic, as I heard him begin an answer that went something like this:

"A lot of people talk about AA as being a 12 step program, but the truth is that it's more like one big jewel, which is really the 1st step, with 11 facets to it." At this point, I was wishing I could kick him under the table, but in the Hearing Room, there's no way to do that without being seen. I struggled to keep a straight face, all the while feeling like our Appeal was dropping like a rock.

My Client continued: "If you took a guy to just 1 meeting in his life, and he heard the 1st step, and never even knew there were 11 more, and if you really explained that 1st step to him, he might just get it, and get the idea that he can't ever drink again. On the other hand, if you exposed him to steps 2 through 12, no matter how many times he heard it, it wouldn't help him quit drinking. Those steps improve a person's sobriety, but only the 1st step can actually give it."

I felt somewhat relieved that the Client had explained himself this way. Just moments before, I thought we were about to crash and burn. As I looked up, I felt even more relief as I saw the Hearing Officer smile and nod. The end result was that the guy won his Appeal.

Continue reading "How Being Involved in AA can Help win a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Case - Part 2" »

In a my various blog articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have written in some detail about how someone who does not go to AA can still win a License Appeal. I have noted that somewhat more that ½ of the people for whom I win a License Appeal are not involved in AA. To date, I have not addressed how those who are actively involved in AA have an advantage in that regard. This article will focus on a Driver's License Appeal for someone who is active in AA. Because even a relatively brief overview of this subject will take some space, this article will be broken into 2 parts.

The reader should bear in mind, as we begin, that I never encourage anyone who does or has not gone to AA to start doing so. I believe that whatever a person has done to get and remain sober is, at the core, the truth of their "story" of recovery. Winning a License Appeal is all about properly relating that process. Thus, when someone who has become and remained sober asks me if they should start going to, or going back to AA, I always say "no."

Perhaps part of that is because those who are actively involved in AA undergo a number of transformations as part of their growth within the program. One of those transformations involves becoming honest, both to themselves, and with others. The AA credo, "To thine own self be true" mandates a personal honesty that is an anathema to the practicing alcoholic. AA people want to tell their story because its both true, and because one of the ways they learn to get better is by sharing stories.

If winning a License Appeal was as simple as going in and showing that someone has been in AA for some number of years, this would be about the end of our discussion, and I'd be out of business. The reader seeking to learn about the legal issues involved in Driver's License Restoration Appeal should take the time to read most of the articles from the Driver's License Restoration section of this blog, starting from the bottom, and reading up. For purposes of this discussion, the most important issue (and the one that causes more License Appeals to lose than any other) is set forth in DAAD Rule 13 as follows:

The Petitioner, by clear and convincing evidence, must prove the following:

* * *
(2) That the Petitioner's alcohol problem...is likely to remain under control.

In other words, the person needs to prove that they are a safe bet to never drink again.

At first glance, it would seem that just being involved in AA is enough to satisfy that requirement. However, the State knows that any number of people become involved in AA, for varying lengths of time, and then have a "slip," or relapse. The upshot of that is that there are people are going to meetings at any given time who will drink again. In that sense, they may be able to parrot the steps or words of AA, but they clearly don't yet "get it." Lots of people who finally and subsequently embrace sobriety will say they needed that "slip," or relapse, to reinforce those lessons of AA, that, until then, were perhaps understood intellectually, but not as the immutable truths they are. "Getting it" means coming to an understanding, at the core of a person's being, that the principal lesson of AA, that a person can never drink again without picking up where they left off, is unquestionable. Therefore, an important part of what the DAAD tries to discern is if a person going to AA has really "gotten it" or not.

Continue reading "How Being Involved in AA can Help win a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Case - Part 1" »

Within the catalog of my Driver's License Restoration articles, is has been my goal to cover every aspect of these cases, and address those questions which come up regularly. In that vein, I am often asked about the chances of winning a License Restoration Appeal if someone does not go to AA. I can answer that question with a bit of good news: AA is not required. In a recent blog article I began an examination of the difference between going to AA, as opposed to NOT going to AA. This article will continue that examination in more detail, with a brief look at how someone who has never gone to AA can win a License Appeal Hearing.

To be clear, active involvement in AA is helpful. But in my Driver's License Restoration Practice, more than ½ of the people for whom I win a License Appeal are not active in the AA program. It is not necessary. Amongst my license Restoration Clients who are NOT currently active in AA, I'd say that about ½ of them had previously attended the program, even if such attendance was Court ordered. The other ½ have never been to a meeting in their lives.

It is true that back more than 10 years ago, it at least seemed impossible to win a License Appeal without being involved in AA. This lingering impression is why many old-time AA attendees will tell anyone within earshot that the only way to get a License back is to keep coming to meetings. In fact, it was the case in my own office that, about 10 or more years before now, I wouldn't even consider accepting a License Appeal unless the person was actively involved in AA.

Much has changed for the better, and not a minute too soon. In the first instance, it needed to be recognized that imposing an AA requirement on License Restoration Petitioners was contrary to the treatment outlined by many Substance Abuse Counselors, who did not feel, in any particular case, that AA was necessary for a person's recovery. It has always been the case that a qualified Substance Abuse Counselor would evaluate a new Client and develop the Treatment Program they felt best suited the person. In some cases, AA was recommended, and in others, it was not. So how is it that these people who spend all day, every day, treating Alcohol and Drug problems could be so wrong about what a person needs?

They could not. The State had to accept that, whatever it might prefer, diagnosing and treating an alcohol problem, and calculating what, if any, ongoing support a person may or may not need thereafter, is properly the job and role of the Substance Abuse Counseling Professional, and no one else. In other words, if a Substance Abuse Counselor assesses Joe Blow, and says that he needs one-on-one counseling once per week, then that should stand. No one can possibly be in a better position to make that determination over the Counselor, and particularly not the State.

Continue reading "Winning a Michigan License Appeal Without Going to AA" »

In my Driver's License Restoration Practice I have come to realize that very few people know that a person on Probation, or Parole, cannot win a License Appeal. Almost all of those with whom I speak are surprised to learn this. Often, I am asked something like "but I just received a notice from the State that I'm eligible to file for my License. How can that be?" This article will examine that conundrum.

To begin with, the reader should take note of the fact that License Restorations are really the bread and butter of what I do. I say this because the reader should bear in mind that I'm in business to make money, not turn away potential paying Clients. Therefore, when I tell a person they must wait before they can win a License Restoration case, I don't so so because I'm too busy counting piles of money, I say it because I know exactly what it takes to win such an Appeal. In the year 2010, I brought over 70 cases to Hearing, and won every single one of them. This means I passed on any number of those Appeals just not ready, or able, to succeed.

The reason a License Appeal cannot be won while a person is on Probation, or Parole, is that the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), the department that handles all License Appeals, deems anyone on Probation or Parole to be "living in a controlled environment." In pretty much every case where a person is on Parole or Probation, they are subject to drug and alcohol testing. Even if a person was required to test so many times per week for the first several months of Probation, and then allowed to terminate that scheduled testing, by virtue of the fact that they are still under the Court's jurisdiction in Probationary cases, and under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections in Parole cases, they are still under Order to not consume any drugs or alcohol, and are always subject to a random test requested by their Probation or Parole Officer.

In order to win a License Appeal, a person must show that their abstinence from alcohol is voluntary, and that they have chosen not to drink without fear of consequence. The fact that someone is subject to testing, even if they are rarely (or never actually) tested, means they cannot prove that any period of abstinence was completely voluntary. At least that's how the State sees it.

Let's examine why it works out this way. The 2 biggest issues in a License Appeal are:

1. That the Petitioner's alcohol problem is under control, and

2. That the Petitioner's alcohol problem is likely to remain under control.

Proving that the problem is under control involves proving the person has not consumed any alcohol for a certain period of time. That's the easier of the two.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - You must be off Probation, or Parole, to win" »

In my Driver's License Restoration Practice, all of the people I represent are either current AA attendees, or not. Often, I am asked by those who do not have current, or even past AA attendance, if there's any chance to get a License back without being active in AA. Sometimes, I'm asked if I think it's a good idea for someone who has not gone, either for some time, or never before, to start going to AA. This article will focus on those inquiries.

In the year 2010, I handled over 70 Driver's License Appeals, and I was successful in every one. I won 100% of the cases I took to Hearing. Of those cases, less than half of the People for whom I won were currently involved in AA. In other words, the majority of the cases I take (and win) are for non- AA people.

I think some of the confusion about this stems from a lack of understanding about the Driver's License Restoration process. Many years ago, there was certainly a widely accepted perception, if not reality, that the Michigan Secretary of State, through the Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), would not grant a License if a person couldn't prove they were going to AA. This misunderstanding is often repeated by those who have tried to win a License and lost, as well as some who are AA regulars. More than one person has told me they remember going to AA for a while and hearing that you'd never get a License if you didn't keep going.

This is simply not true. Lot's of people get cleaned up and remain clean and sober without having to make a lifelong commitment to AA. Unfortunately, AA attendees sometimes lay it on a bit thick, and say that anyone who has a drinking problem, and is not drinking, but also not attending meetings, is a "dry drunk."

AA is a great program. For some, it is the difference between being sober and not. For others it may have been a great place to get some advice and help as they got themselves better, but then they moved on. For still others, it just wasn't a good fit, or anything they needed.

What AA does provide for anyone, and especially anyone trying to get their Michigan Driver's License Restored, is the full spectrum of sobriety strategies. AA people typically have a cliche, or phrase, for just about everything sobriety-related. If you are into AA, you've heard them all.

If you're not into AA, however, for whatever reason, then you will need to learn some of these basic sobriety concepts elsewhere. For many people, these concepts are learned through Counseling or other Outpatient Treatment.

Continue reading "Getting a Michigan Driver's License Restored Without Going to AA" »

In part 1 of this article, we began as brief an overview as I can provide of the License Restoration process. I noted that I have over 40 rather detailed articles about every aspect Driver's License Restoration on this blog, so this is an attempt, admittedly difficult for me, to provide a synopsis, rather than an expose of this subject. I am a License Restoration Lawyer by trade. My day to day work involves Representing people who need to win these Appeals and get back on the road. Still, I can see that the time has come to provide something of a summary of the process. Perhaps this will make understanding each of my more detailed articles a bit easier.

We left off by noting that the standard by which these Appeals are decided is pretty tough.

If a person loses a regular License Appeal, they have to wait a full year to try again. They can file a Circuit Court Appeal of the Hearing Officer's decision, but those Appeals are uniformly a waste of time and money.

A person who files an Administrative Appeal and who loses can, within a number of days, request an in-person Hearing. The problem with that is that whatever errors or problems caused them to lose the first time are now a matter of Record. Thus, a bad Substance Abuse Evaluation, or inadequate Letters of Support cannot be "fixed" until the following year. Those documents are re-evaluated as part of the in-person Hearing Appeal of the Administrative Review.

The 2 issues which must always be proven by "clear and convincing evidence" in every Appeal are:

1. That the Petitioner's alcohol (or substance abuse) problem is under control, and

2. That the Petitioner's alcohol (or substance abuse) problem is likely to remain under control.

In some cases, usually where the person filing a License Appeal has been caught Driving since their License was Revoked, a 3rd issue must be addressed at the Hearing:

3. That the Petitioner is motivated to drive safely, and within the Law.

Obviously, the Secretary of State has a legitimate concern about someone following whatever restrictions are placed upon their License when their prior conduct demonstrates that they'll just go ahead and drive when they have no License to do so. Accordingly, the Hearing Officer will need to be convinced that the person will follow whatever rules are set for them, and not just disregard them and do as they please. Again, this rule only becomes relevant when a person has demonstrated, by prior behavior, that they tend to disregard things, like NOT having a License, and driving anyway.

Of the first 2 issues, it is almost always the 2nd that causes an Appeal to fail. The 1st issue basically requires that the person prove a sobriety date, which almost always must be at least 1 year prior to their Hearing.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - An Overview of a License Appeal - Part 2" »

In my numerous articles about Restoring a Michigan Driver's License, I have quite literally picked the process apart, thrusting each stage under the microscope for detailed inspection. If you want details down to the molecule, I've covered it.

This article, separated into 2 parts, will focus on a much briefer overview of the whole process from my point of view as a License Restoration Attorney. If my more than 40 previous articles demonstrate anything, its that these Appeals are detail-oriented, and I a detail kind of guy. Thus, it goes against my inclination to try and "summarize" a process which, by its very nature, is loaded with details. Still, I recognize that not everyone is interested in reading the Encyclopedia a la Jeff about License Restorations. That said, here goes:

The term "License Restoration" applies when someone has had their License "Revoked." Almost all Revocations I deal with involve 2 or more DUI's. Sometimes, there's a Drug-related Driving Offense in there, but all of my License Appeals begin with 2 or more DUI's, or combination of DUI"s and Substance-Abuse Related Driving Convictions.

After a specific period of time (either 1 year for any combination of 2 DUI and/or Substance-Abuse Related Convictions within 7 years, or 5 years after a combination of any 3 such related Convictions within 10 years) a person becomes eligible to file an Appeal in front of the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). This is the body that either grants, or denies these Appeals.

The Process is formally begun by filing a Request for Hearing and Substance Abuse Evaluation, along with notarized Letters of Support with the DAAD main Office in Lansing. In practice, the process is begun well before that, when the person actually makes an appointment with a Licensed and Credentialed Substance Abuse Counselor to have that Evaluation completed. Taking even 1 more step back, when I Represent someone, the process begins when they meet with me, for about 3 hours, to prepare to undergo that Substance Abuse Evaluation.

The Substance Abuse Evaluation, once completed, must have 2 qualities in order to help an Appeal. If it is lacking either of these qualities, it will GUARANTEE that the Appeal is Denied:

1. It must be "Sufficient," or Legally Adequate, and

2. It must be "Favorable," or helpful to the person Appealing.

A minimum of 3, but not more than 6 notarized Letters of Support must also be submitted along with the Request for Hearing and the Substance Abuse Evaluation. THe content of these Letters is extremely important.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - An Overview of a License Appeal - Part 1" »

In part 2 of this article, we examined some of the reasons that an initial, usually "do-it-yourself" License Appeal is lost. In this third and final part, we'll conclude our discussion with a review of some of the more serious errors that can occur, and how they are fixed in order to win the next Appeal.

Whatever the reason or reasons for a loss, they cannot just be overlooked next year. They must be addressed, and fixed.

I mentioned earlier that the kinds of things that can result in a denial range from the easily fixable to the catastrophic. The examples above (in part 2) would be considered rather easily fixable. What would be catastrophic?

In plenty of my other articles, I have pointed out that the Substance Abuse Evaluation itself is the very foundation of an Appeal. While it can never win an Appeal on its own, it can absolutely be the cause of one that's lost. In order to help a case, and not hurt it, the Substance Abuse Evaluation must really have 2 essential qualities:

1. It must be "legally adequate" in the eyes of the DAAD, and

2. It must be "favorable" for the person filing the Appeal.

Those qualities are explained thoroughly in my articles about the Substance Abuse Evaluation. Here, we're looking for an example of a catastrophic error in a "do-it-yourself" Appeal. So we're clear, this kind of error should never happen when a person has a real, bona-fide License Restoration Lawyer handling their Appeal. In fact, it's precisely this kind of error that I avoid for my Clients.

Let's assume a person has submitted a Substance Abuse Evaluation that was "legally adequate," or, in the DAAD's view, "sufficient." Let's also assume that the Evaluator notes in the Comments section that the person should involve themselves in some kind of Recovery support, such as AA or Counseling. Let's further assume that are not actively involved in that kind of support at the time of their Hearing.

Of course, they'll lose their Appeal. That's a given. The Hearing Officer will note that the Evaluator felt that such support was important to the person's Recovery, but the person was not so involved at the time of their Hearing.

Yet again: Game over.

But what should they do for next year's Appeal? Do they now start going to AA? What if they testified that they didn't like AA, or found it wasn't for them? How do they address this problem next year, and rectify any inconsistency between their prior testimony and the advice of the Evaluator?

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals - Fixing Errors That Caused the First Appeal to Lose - Part 3" »

In part 1 of this article, we began outlining how the biggest obstacle to winning a License Appeal after an initial loss is addressing and fixing the problems that cause the loss. Now we'll move onto a more detailed discussion of some of those things, focusing on the less severe problems first, and getting into more serious, or catastrophic problems in part 3.

If the reason or reasons for the loss are significant, however, things are different than if they were not that bad.

In a recent article, I noted that I NEVER call witnesses in my cases. The long and short of that article was that anything a witness can say live can be included in a Letter of Support. Of course, knowing what should specifically be in those letters, and what is a waste of space (like how the person has suffered without a License, how they've learned their lesson and will treasure the ability to drive again, what a good and different person they are, or how their employment opportunities will be so much better if they could drive) is the result of considerable experience practicing before the DAAD. Anyway, many less-experienced Lawyers or "do-it-yourselfers" drag witnesses to the Hearing in the hopes that their testimony will help their case.

Quite often, it does not. As I noted in that witness article, Letters of Support cannot be cross-examined, do not get nervous, and certainly don't make mistakes in testifying, because Letters don't testify. Witnesses do all of the above, even if unintentionally.

As I sit across the conference table from someone who is hiring me to handle their second try at getting back on the road, and I read the Order denying their first Appeal, I often find inconsistencies between the testimony of various witnesses, or between what the witness says and what the person Appealing said earlier. To be clear, witnesses are kept outside of the Hearing Room while the person testifies, so they have no clue what was said. They are called in afterward, having no idea of what has transpired.

Let's say Dan the Driver has testified that he has been sober for 2 years. In response to the Hearing Officer's questions, Dan admits that he had a back injury at work about 9 months ago, and had a prescription for Vicodin, which he used then, but discontinued when his condition improved. Okay, not the best situation, but in and of itself, not the end of the world.

Dan lives at home with his parents (or it could be that he lives with his girlfriend) and either mom or the girlfriend are called in to testify. Even with a Lawyer asking the first questions, there will come a point when the Hearing Officer has an opportunity to question the witness, and be sure, they will.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals - Fixing Errors That Caused the First Appeal to Lose - Part 2" »

In the last series of License Restoration articles, I provided a rather candid look, from my perspective as a Driver's License Restoration Appeals Lawyer, at why I'd rather deal with someone who has tried a License Appeal on their own, and lost, instead of someone who isn't quite sure if they need or even want a Lawyer, and needs to be convinced of that. I noted that to anyone thinking about doing this on their own, I absolutely say "go for it." I then pointed out that a pretty substantial part of my practice involves handling the subsequent Appeal for those who have tried on their own, and lost. And given that the overwhelming majority of those "do-it-yourself" Appeals do lose, it's just easier to deal with them as they gear up for the second round, rather than have to explain all of this over and over again.

This article will focus on the major drawback to that "do-it-yourself" approach. There are plenty of drawbacks, to be sure, to the self-represented Appeal, and perhaps the most obvious amongst them is the overwhelming likelihood of losing, and having to wait another year to try again. I think I've covered that well enough, even if indirectly, in the previous pair of articles. While losing the Appeal is perhaps the most easily identifiable drawback, it is not the biggest.

The biggest drawback to the "do-it-yourself" License Appeal is that whatever caused it to fail the first time will have to be addressed and fixed the second time around.

This can mean anything. And that's not imprecise language, that's rather specific. The range of problems that can cause a License Appeal to fail, especially where it's done without the oversight of an experienced License Restoration Attorney, can include anything from small, easily fixable inconsistencies or problems, to huge, catastrophic deficiencies that cannot be fully rectified even within the 1-year between Appeals waiting period.

If the reader has, in fact, tried a License Appeal before (either on their own, or, perhaps, with a Lawyer whose expertise in this area was merely that he or she "does" License Appeals, instead of being someone who concentrates in this rather niche area of the Law) and lost, then they already know how that loss is communicated. Anyone who has not been down that road, however, may not understand this part of the process. Let's clarify:

When a person files an Appeal for Restoration of Driving Privileges, a Written Decision is eventually issued. This is technically called an "Order." Whenever a person loses their Appeal, the Hearing Officer who denied it must write up the very specific reasons why the Appeal was denied. When I say "very specific," I mean that every single reason why an Appeal loses must be noted in detail. This is not only done to advise the person who filed the Appeal of what was deficient, or wrong, about their case, but so that any subsequent Court Appeal of that ruling will be sustained on Appeal. This requires even more explanation.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals - Fixing Errors That Caused the First Appeal to Lose - Part 1" »

In part 1 of this article, I began a more detailed explanation of why I'd rather represent a person in a License Appeal who has tried on their own and lost, rather than spend the time trying to convince a skeptic that they should use the services of a License Restoration Lawyer. In this second part, we'll pick up that discussion right where we left off in the first part, and examine this from my perspective as the License Restoration Lawyer.

When that call comes in from someone who has tried on their own, and lost, they know, without fail, that they need guidance. They are, in every sense of the phrase, "all ears." Once I explain that our first meeting will take at least 3 hours, and that's only the beginning, they start to see that there is much more to this than they had at first realized, when they thought they could do it on their own.

Many of those who previously used some Lawyer who said that he or she "does" License Appeals will have read many, if not most or all of my articles about the License Restoration process before they decided to call me. They frequently tell me that their old Lawyer didn't tell them any of the things I go over in my articles, and are sometimes a bit angry about that, feeling a bit mislead. Happy as they are to be speaking with someone who knows this stuff, there is an understandable reticence on their part to hand over money to another Lawyer. It's kind of like getting a bad nose job, then looking for a better Plastic Surgeon to fix it up; a person will be a bit skeptical of the whole medical (or in my case, legal) industry.

While I can't turn back the hands of time and undo what's been done, I can promise two things to anyone whose case I take:

1. If I take your case, it means I think it's winnable. Given that I will close out 2010 with a 100% win rate (having done over 70-some Appeals), and that I always maintain a win rate of well over 90%, that promise is based upon experience, not just hope, and

2. I will do everything humanly and legally possible to make sure we prepare their case as best as can be done to insure a victory. There is nothing more that can be done, but doing any less is just plain wrong.

[Update: as of March of 2011, I have instituted a "Guarantee" that if I don't win a person's first License Appeal, the next is FREE. This guarantee applies retroactively to all Appeals Filed or Heard in 2011]

In the end, I wind up with a Client who understands that my advice is based upon real know-how. They don't question me at every turn, looking for shortcuts. There are no shortcuts in these Appeals, period. Instead of having to explain why I say everything that I say, I have a Client in front of me who already knows how well things (don't) go when they try and play Lawyer. Usually, they take notes (I make it a point to provide a pad and pen for every Client at our meetings) and seek to clarify what they don't get right away, which is part of the process of doing this right.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restoration Appeals - Why Those Who Have First Tried on Their Own and Lost Make the Best Clients - Part 2" »

In any number of my previous articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have outlined the various risks involved in a "do-it-yourself" Appeal without a Lawyer. In the most recent of those articles, I also noted that I have a very strong belief that anyone thinking of doing a License Appeal on their own should absolutely go for it. In reconciling those two seemingly-contradictory positions, I pointed out that, in all honesty, the best and often easiest Clients to have are those who have tried on their own (or tried with some Lawyer who claims to "do" License Restorations) and lost, because they're "all ears."

Is that self-serving of me? Sure. But let me ask you this: Whatever it is you do for a living, would you prefer to have someone interact with you who defers to your knowledge and expertise in that area, and is glad for your advice, or would you rather work with someone who thinks they know as much as you do, or can at least figure it out on their own, and isn't sure if they want your help or not?

In this series of articles, I will explore this in more detail than before, so that the reader can see why I really believe this, and why it works so well for me.

In that regard, that's why I advise anyone considering doing their own Appeal to "go for it!" Seriously. And since I'm drawing back the curtain here, let me explain a bit more. After 20 years of doing what I do, I am at the peak of my game. I have enough cases to keep me busy, and I would be lying if I even pretended that I have the slightest desire to get on the phone with someone who needs or wants to be convinced that having a genuine Driver's License Restoration Lawyer is the better way to go about getting back on the road as opposed to trying it on their own, without a Lawyer.

Instead, I'd rather that they actually do try it on their own, then call me back after things don't quite work out the way they had hoped. Might there be a few really awesome cases that manage to win without a Lawyer? Absolutely. And good for them! Most, however, will learn a hard lesson, and will come to realize that the saying "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" applies as much to "playing Lawyer" as is does to anything else.

As it turns out, a lot of those "do-it-yourselfers" will call me immediately after receiving a Denial of their Appeal, and want to talk about appealing that loss to a Circuit Court. For what it's worth, I don't do Circuit Court Appeals, and certainly would never consider one where someone represented themselves, or used another Lawyer. Here's why:

The "do-it-yourselfer" blunders into the process, usually with little or no understanding of the Laws that govern License Appeals (DAAD Rules), and often don't even know that the ultra-important Rule 13 exists, much less how it controls these Appeals and the decisions made about them. Thus, when they lose, they have no basis to understand why, much less to challenge the Hearing Officer's Denial as illegal. Instead can only complain about the result being "unfair," which is not any kind of basis for an Appeal.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restoration Appeals - Why Those Who Have First Tried on Their Own and Lost Make the Best Clients - Part 1" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our overview of the importance of the Substance Abuse Evaluation in a License Restoration Appeal. In this 2nd part, we'll continue that overview by examining how a Substance Abuse Evaluation in a License Appeal must meet 2 threshold requirements: First, that is "legally adequate," and second, that it is "favorable."

I noted that part of my motivation in writing this article was the frustration I feel when I see a Substance Abuse Evaluation that hasn't been done properly. This really means that a Substance Abuse Evaluation fails to meet either of the 2 requirements it must meet in order to be deemed "good."

First, and foremost, a Substance Abuse Evaluation must be "legally adequate" in the eyes of the Secretary of State. Take a look at the Form. Every one of those lines and boxes require very specific information. The only requirement for the person completing that form is that they be Professionally Licensed to administer and score an alcohol assessment, and make a DSM-IV diagnosis. In other words, being a Licensed Substance Abuse Counselor is all that's needed to sign off on this form.

Notice that the form does NOT request tons of information. Instead, it requests very specific information. Yet, of the many cases which come to me after having tried and lost on their own, or with a Lawyer who claimed to "do" License Restorations, a fair number of them feel that more information is better. I've literally seen 3 and 4 extra pages of information attached to a losing Evaluation. In most of them, beyond including lots of useless details, the exact, specific information requested by the form was left out!

A legally adequate Substance Abuse Evaluation provides exactly the requested information sought on the form. Anything more is a waste of ink and space. In order to know what the Secretary of State really wants, a Counselor must prepare these Evaluations on a regular, on-going basis, and then get feedback from the subject of the evaluation regarding a win, or loss. In other words, without seeing how those evaluations are "evaluated" by the Secretary of State, the person doing them really can have no idea of whether they're getting it right, or wrong. Even if they manage to get it right, that should be the product of knowing what's being sought, rather than sheer luck.

Thus, "legally adequate" means providing the exact, specific information the Secretary of State wants, in the right place, on the Substance Abuse Evaluation Form. If a Substance Abuse Evaluation is not "legally adequate" because it is deficient in some regard, then the Appeal is lost. Nothing can save it. Game over, in other words.

However, submitting a "legally adequate" Substance Abuse Evaluation does not win, nor come close to winning, a License Appeal. It just means you haven't struck out.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - The Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 2" »

In my numerous articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have examined the process of getting back on the road in fine detail. In many of those articles, I have talked about the role of the Substance Abuse Evaluation and how important it is. In this article, we'll take another look at this first, and utterly critical step in a License Appeal. This is a deep subject. Still, even a somewhat superficial overview will be informative. To do such an overview justice, we'll break the article into 2 parts.

Part of my motivation to write this article is the fact that the Michigan Secretary of State's Driver Appeal and Assessment Division (DAAD), which overseas all aspect of License Appeals, has recently revised the Substance Abuse Evaluation Form. The other part of my motivation is a sense of frustration at the fact that so many Counselors and Therapists who have the academic and professional credentials to fill out and sign this form DO NOT have sufficient experience to know specifically what information the Secretary of State needs and wants, and what information, while perhaps interesting, does nothing to help a case.

Part of the problem I've seen with Evaluations that I've not a hand in obtaining is the omission of specific, required information. This is sometimes compounded by the inclusion of lots of other, irrelevant information. We'll discuss this a bit more as we talk about the 2 threshold requirements for a Substance Abuse Evaluation in a License Appeal; that it be "legally adequate," and that it be "favorable."

In response to simply not getting the information it needs to decide a License Appeal, the Secretary of State has recently revised the Substance Abuse Evaluation Form. Instead of just leaving blank lines under the Prognosis section, the new Form actually has check boxes so that it gets an actual Prognosis, rather than a discussion about one not actually written. It is noteworthy that the new Form has a check box for a "Guarded" Prognosis, and omits one for "Very Good."

The same thing has happened to the section for Diagnosis. Rather than hope an evaluator will give a DSM-IV diagnosis, the Secretary of State has created check boxes for all those that are relevant to an alcohol problem.

The reason for this whole revision is that too many people who have the Professional credentials to complete an Evaluation try their hand at it, even though they don't have the requisite experience. My Law License does not prohibit me from taking on a complicated Medical Malpractice case. My lack of training and experience in that field means I should not.

Even with these changes, the fact remains unchanged that there are relatively few Counselors who have a thorough understanding of the License Restoration process. For that matter, there aren't a lot of Lawyers who have that understanding, either.

Continue reading "Driver's License Restoration in Michigan - The Substance Abuse Evaluation - Part 1" »

In previous Blog articles, I have covered the broader subject of Driving While License Suspended/Revoked/Denied. We have examined how each of those Offenses is part of the same Michigan Law. We have examined how DUI's can eventually lead to Driving While License Revoked charges, but we haven't really focused in as much on the bread and butter of all Traffic Offenses, the simple Driving While License Suspended.

This article will focus specifically on Driving While License Suspended (DWLS), and instead of a wider, more inclusive focus, we'll narrow in on what is becoming, by far, the most common Criminal Traffic Offense being charged, and how an ever-increasing number of these charges are the result of unpaid Driver Responsibility Fees.

The term "bread and butter" really has multiple meanings here. In terms of revenue, a DWLS brings into Court the lowest severity Criminal Defendant on the planet. Many DWLS Defendants have no prior Criminal Record, or, if they do, just have a few Driving Offenses upon it. They are typically non-violent, not dangerous, and often accurately describable as a "creampuff." They come to Court scared, and are more than willing to part with money to avoid any kind of Jail sentence.

From the Police perspective, these "creampuffs" are the least threatening (although every Traffic Stop does present a certain threat level to a Police Officer) and usually the most easily managed of all encounters.

From a Defense Lawyer's point of view, these Clients are typically amongst the easiest to deal with. I'm not likely to have a phone consultation with some hardhead who begins by saying "I got a Suspended License charge, and I want to sue the Police for arresting me because they never read me my rights."

Instead, I'll often speak with someone who is a bit of a "Nervous Nellie" and whose first concern is, in fact, staying out of Jail. In most cases, staying out of Jail is so much more likely than getting thrown in that it's a waste of time to dwell too much upon it.

Let me repeat that, and be clear: In most DWLS cases, it is easily manageable for a person to NOT be put in Jail. Even in those cases where a person has racked up a pretty bad Driving Record, and owes a King's ransom in Driver Responsibility Fees, and seems a million miles away from being anywhere close to having, or even being eligible to have their Driver's License reinstated, with some diligent Legal work, they can walk out the front door of the Court and avoid Jail.

And that is NOT a set-up for some outrageous Legal Fee, either. A DWLS case should NEVER cost more than about $1600 total. Of course, whatever Fee a person pays is going to depend on any number of factors, including how far the Lawyer a person hires is going to have to travel.

Continue reading "Driving on a Suspended License (DWLS) in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County" »

This article will examine Driver's License Restoration Appeals without a Lawyer. Let me be clear, up front: I am a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer. A significant part of my Practice involves handling these Appeals. Therefore, I have a strong bias toward having a License Restoration Lawyer handle a License Appeal. Still, I think you might be surprised at my analysis of this issue. In the end, I think that, if you want to try doing this on your own, then you should go for it.

I handle Michigan License Restorations (and Clearances for out-of-state Clients) almost daily. I consider myself as much a "specialist" in this niche area of the Law as anyone. I have never met another Lawyer who handles as many License Appeals as I do. As of this writing, in the year 2010, I have taken nearly 60 cases to Hearing, and have won every single one.

It is not uncommon for me to be contacted by someone who asks something like "Do I really need a Lawyer to do this?" Or, "Can I do this on my own?"

Legally speaking, a person can represent himself or herself in any proceeding, and License Appeals are no different. Whether or not that's a good idea is another matter.

In handling as many License Appeals as I have, certain "patterns" emerge. Those who ask about doing a License Appeal on their own are looking for a way to not spend the money on Lawyer Fees. That's understandable. While a younger Lawyer might at first want to outline all the perils of going at this without proper help (saying such things as "there's no law which stops you from doing your own root canal, but you wouldn't try that would you...?"), I have really taken the opposite approach. I say, "Go for it." Then, after you get Denied, call me next year, when you become eligible to Appeal again.

That may sound harsh, but in my rather considerable experience, I have found that the easiest Clients to deal with are those who have undertaken a License Appeal on their own, and lost, or those who have not gone to the trouble to hire a real, bona-fide Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, and lost. When I meet with those Clients, there is no "convincing" to be done. They come in my Office "all ears," ready to follow whatever advice I give them.

I'm busy enough to wait and see the "do-it-yourselfers" the second time around. And make no mistake, while there might be a few fortunate souls who manage to win their case, the vast majority do not. I truly believe that those that do win, do so more by sheer luck than anything else.

Most "do-it-yourself" Appeals are doomed to fail. However, and I honestly mean this, don't take my word for it. If you're even inclined to try it on your own, then go for it.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Trying it Without a Lawyer" »

This article will briefly discuss why I NEVER call witnesses in a License Restoration Hearing. As of this writing, after having held between about 50 and 60 Hearings so far in 2010, I have won every one of them. That's a 100% success rate. In 2009, I think I only lost 1 case, and had more than 50 Hearings.

And I never called a single witness in any of them. I don't believe in witnesses.

Very often, when someone comes in to hire me to handle their License Restoration, they ask me about who they should line up as witnesses. When I tell the Client that we won't be needing any, their eyes go wide in surprise.

In fact, I don't think I've called a single witness in a few years, and I have always maintained a win rate of well over 90% of the cases I handle.

Now, there are some "trade secrets" here that I simply cannot discuss until the Client is in my office. My reasons for NOT having witnesses will make perfect sense, once explained, but I don't feel I should tip my hand in case "big brother" happens across this article. Whatever else, I know my reasoning is solid, because, as the old saying goes, "the proof is in the pudding."

One of the most important parts of a License Appeal is the Letters of Support. I work extensively with my Client to make sure those letters are top notch, and do what they're supposed to do. In that regard, they are supposed to help prove (and win) the License Appeal.

Thus, we'll make sure the letters give every positive, and relevant fact about the Client. As I note on my website, "good guy" letters which talk about how good the person is who's trying to win back their License, and how hard they've had it without a License, and that they've learned from their mistakes, and how they need to drive to support themselves and their family, and how they will forever treasure a Restored License, do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help a case.

Instead, we'll focus on exactly what we'd want the letter writer to say if he or she was giving testimony.

The main reason I don't bring in witnesses is that a letter cannot be questioned or cross-examined, whereas a witness can. Letters don't get nervous, they don't "think," they don't "say" the wrong thing (at least not if they're done correctly), and they don't make mistakes.

Witnesses do all of the above.

Continue reading "Michigan License Restoration Appeals - No Witnesses Needed." »

In parts 1, 2 and 3 of this article, we defined and examined the role of Drugs in a Driver's License Restoration case. We looked at the concepts of Alcoholism, Addiction, Cross-Addiction, and Recovery. The purpose of this series is really, more than anything else, to point out that while most License Appeals involve multiple DUI's, the issue of Drugs, whether that means a Drug crime, or illicit Drug use, or even Prescription Drug use, will open up what can literally be called a "can of worms."

To be clear, not every Prescription is problematic. It is the use of drugs that are potentially addictive or habit-forming, or which can be considered mind or mood-altering, that creates an issue.

Those who are well-versed in the concept of Cross-Addiction know that a person with an alcohol or substance-abuse problem is expected to inform a physician of that fact before receiving any medication.

This means that if a person is in Recovery from an alcohol problem, and breaks his or her arm, they are supposed to tell the emergency room physician of this fact so that the Doctor can either prescribe a non-narcotic pain medication, or, if a narcotic medication is appropriate, limit the amount of the medication and otherwise closely supervise it's consumption by the patient.

Anyone who has been through a good Counseling or Rehab program, or has spent anytime "at the tables" of AA or NA at least knows of this warning.

And I guess that's as good a spot as any to hit the "pause" button. If the reader has any Drug Record, or any post-sobriety date Prescriptions for any mind or mood-altering substances, and can honestly say that they have not at least heard about this concept of Cross-Addiction, then they are clearly NOT ready to forge ahead with a License Appeal.

There is always an inquiry about what Prescriptions, if any, the person filing for a License Restoration has, or has had.

A 10-panel Urine Test is also part of the "package" submitted when filing a License Appeal. Any drugs that show up in that Test, and which are not adequately and completely explained, beginning with the Substance Abuse Evaluation, and continuing through the Petitioner's own understanding of the addictive, habit-forming, or mind or mood-altering nature of those substances, will result in the Denial of the License Appeal.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals and the Role of Drugs - Part 4" »

In part 1 of this article we began examining the role of "Drugs" in a License Appeal by coming up with a working definition of the terms Alcoholism, Addiction, Cross-Addiction, and Recovery. In part 2, we began examining how those concepts are involved in a License Appeal, and we looked at an example, based upon real-world experience, of a person who has been alcohol-free for a few years, but fails to properly disclose and explain a current prescription for Vicodin, and how that will guarantee that his Appeal will be lost.

In this third section, we'll pick up with another, real-world and fairly common example of how the issue of "Drugs" comes into play in, and can be fatal to a License Appeal, unless properly handled.

There are really 2 kinds of "Drug" offenses that show up on a person's Driving Record. The first, and by far the most common, are "Drug crimes" like Possession, and even Delivery charges. Because the law requires that a person's License be Suspended as the result of any Drug conviction (except those deferred under what's known as Section 7411 or HYTA), the fact that a person had such a conviction automatically shows up on their Driving Record.

The least common kind of case involves Drug-related Driving Offenses. Of those, one of the most common is what's known as OUID, or Operating Under the Influence of Drugs.

The larger point here is that if any of these Offenses show up on a person's Driving Record, the Hearing Officer knows the person has some issue with Drugs. Given that the whole License Appeal Process involves a License Revocation for multiple DUI's or a combination of multiple DUI's and Drug-related Driving Offenses, it doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to figure out that the issue of Drug use by the person Appealing is going to be examined pretty closely.

This means that the person Appealing better have a good, working knowledge of the concepts of Alcoholism, Addiction, Cross-Addiction and Recovery. If those terms don't at least "ring a bell," to anyone facing a License Appeal, then it's fair to say that they're far from ready to begin that Appeal.

If, on the other hand, those terms at least "ring a bell," even though the person may not be able to thoroughly discuss them, a "refresher course" is in order. From my point of view, this is all part of the process of preparing my Client for the Substance Abuse Evaluation. I certainly don't spend nearly 3 hours at that first meeting talking baseball.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals and the Role of Drugs - Part 3" »

In part 1 of this article, we began an overview of the role of "Drugs" in a License Appeal. We sketched out a working definition of the terms Alcoholism, Addiction, Cross-Addiction, and Recovery. In this second part, we'll continue our examination of those concepts, and how they merge into the larger subjects of Mind or Mood-Altering Substances, and the overriding concern that anyone trying to remain clean and sober avoid them all.

Every person with any kind of Substance Abuse problem has a "drug" of choice. This means a favored substance above all others, and one to which they would familiarly retreat while in the grasp of their problem. Thus, a person with an alcohol problem will seek more alcohol. A person with a Vicodin problem will seek more Vicodin. Ditto for Marijuana, and any other substance you can name.

But what happens to a person with a drinking problem if they are kept away from the booze? Or anyone who is kept away from their "drug of choice?"

They will, unless properly counseled and educated, simply substitute another drug. Sometimes it can happen by accident, other times by design, but either way, a person with any kind of Substance Abuse problem is, underneath it all, more addicted to altering their mind and mood than they are their particular substance of choice.

This means a person with a drinking problem who is abstaining from alcohol, and who does not know better, will start getting their buzz from tranquilizers, or pain-killers, or whatever other substance they are exposed to. This is a clear example of "Cross-Addiction."

On the other hand, imagine a person who had a drug problem, but never really cared for alcohol. Even if they are abstinent from drugs, that person will begin to "substitute" alcohol in place of the drug if they ever drink. This is another vivid example of "Cross-Addiction."

So why does the use of another substance beyond one's favorite ("Drug of choice") lead to developing a problem with "Cross-Addiction?"

Because underlying every Drug and alcohol problem is a more basic problem of altering one's mind, or mood. In other words, even though a person has a "drug" of choice, that drug just represents their favorite way of altering their mind, or mood, and not the only way to do that.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals and the Role of Drugs - Part 2" »

This blog contains a rather large volume of articles about Driver's License Restoration. Because such a large share of my Practice involves License Restorations, I have tried to cover this subject from every possible angle. My previous articles explain both the process of winning back a Michigan Driver's License, and the ins and outs of having a Michigan Driver's License Hold cleared so that a person can be Licensed in another state.

Because almost every one of those situations involves the loss of Driving Privileges occasioned by multiple DUI's, I have yet to examine the role of Drugs in a License Appeal. In this article, we'll begin an inquiry into the role of Drugs in a License Appeal. Because this is such an in-depth subject, we'll break this article into 4 parts. I will end each at a logical stopping point in order to keep each of these installments flowing into the next. This first entry will be the shortest of the bunch, as we'll be more or less just defining the terms we'll be discussing later.

Let's begin by defining what is meant by the phrase "role of Drugs." We'll be looking at "Drugs" within the context of both illegal use, as in Substance Abuse, and the role of legitimate, legal prescriptions for the person filing the Appeal. In other words, if there is any Drug Crime on a person's Record, or if they've ever had Counseling or Treatment for Drug issues, and/or even if they are on any Prescription Medication of almost any kind, then the subject of "Drugs" must at least be examined as part of the overall process of preparing for a License Appeal.

To be completely and technically accurate, although the vast majority of License Revocations are the result of multiple DUI convictions, the law applies equally to "Alcohol or Drug-Related Driving Convictions." This means that any combination of 2 DUI's and/or Substance Abuse, Driving-Related Convictions within 7 years, or any combination of 3 such Convictions within 10 years will result in either a 1-year, or 5-year Revocation, respectively.

This, however, does not explain why the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) will so closely scrutinize a person who has a valid prescription for Xanax, but whose License was Revoked for 2 DUI's. To understand this whole concern better, we need to understand the prevailing view of Alcoholism, Addiction, Cross-Addiction, and Recovery, and the roles they play in a License Restoration Appeal. We will NOT be undertaking an instructional analysis of those concepts. That would take years. Instead, we'll establish a working definition of those terms and see how they figure into this whole process. And make no mistake about it, they figure prominently into the License Restoration Process.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration Appeals and the Role of Drugs - Part 1" »

In previous blog articles about my License Restoration Practice, I have noted, albeit somewhat cavalierly, that very often, the best and easiest clients are those who have tried before and lost. Sometimes these individuals were represented by a Lawyer for whom License Restoration cases are not a substantial, bread-and-butter part of their Law Practice. Other times the person goes in on their own, unrepresented.

Whatever the situation, I get the call to come in for the 2nd round.

Fortunately, given the fact that I have had a 100% success rate so far in 2010, and have maintained a win rate of well over 90% for as long as I can remember, none of these "2nd timers" are former Clients of mine. What I do observe is that they come to my office with a fundamental understanding that there are a lot of small details to the License Restoration process, and that failing to take care of any one can be, and often is (as their prior experience indicates), fatal to a case.

I have noticed that beyond being eager to listen, and learn, about the process and all of the many nuances involved, pretty much all of my Clients want to take notes. This is even more so the case for those who are coming to have me represent them for their second Appeal. In fact, it has long been standard procedure for me to hand my Client a pad of paper and a pen so that they can jot down things as we proceed.

Now, given that the first meeting in my office, which is primarily dedicated to preparing for the required Substance Abuse Evaluation, lasts from 2 and a ½ to 3 hours, there is certainly a lot of ground to cover. Once in a while, if I notice the Client listening, but not writing, I'll slide the notepad over to them and say something you like "you may want to write some of this down."

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Notes of Success" »

It seems that Driving While License Suspended cases have been steadily increasing, at least in the Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County area. Likewise, I have seen a noticeable jump in the number of multiple-offense cases amongst those who have to deal with this charge. In a previous blog article, I pointed out that I am often asked about "package deals" in multiple offense cases. Of course, I'm always willing to work with someone regarding Fees in a multiple offense situation

Most often, a person will have an older DWLS case in one city, and a newer one somewhere else. This can create a certain logistical problem, and part of my job as a Lawyer is work that out for the Client. Here's what I mean:

Often, the Client will have a Warrant out in one or both cases. Let's examine that situation. Say a person has 2 DWLS charges. The first is in Fraser (Which is heard in the Roseville Court), and the second is in Warren. For whatever reason, they want to take care of these now (as opposed to earlier...). They come and see me. I need to contact each City and see if there is, in fact, a Warrant out in either case, and, if so, if there is a cash Bond amount that can be posted to have that Warrant recalled.

Now, let's say that person has a Warrant in both Fraser and Warren. If they were to walk into the Warren Court and try to take care of that Warrant, it would turn up that they also have a Fraser Warrant. Instead of leaving Warren on their own, they would be held for Fraser to come and pick them up on that Warrant.

This example is based on a real case I'm handling right now. My Client had a Warrant in both Fraser and Warren. I called the Courts in each city, and learned that Fraser had a $1000 cash Bond that could be posted. Warren, on the other hand, had a $2500, 10% Bond, meaning that $250 would be required to have the Warrant recalled and the matter set for a Court date.

Because most people don't have loads of cash just sitting around, my Client and I decided that she'd have the $250 Bond posted in her name in Warren, and that we'd go to Fraser together where I would be able to present her for Arraignment on the outstanding Warrant and likely get her release on either a Personal (meaning no money), or a much smaller cash Bond.

Had she been pulled over or otherwise had any Police contact before these things were straightened out, she'd have been taken into Custody and likely transferred from one city to the next over the course of several days.

Given that most people can have a Probationary Sentence imposed in one of these cases, that Jail time would have been time wasted. For my Client, in may have cost her job, and would have been terribly upsetting.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended in Michigan - Dealing With Multiple Cases" »

A large share of my Practice involves License Restoration Appeals for people who have moved out of Michigan. In previous blog articles, I have mentioned that any Lawyer who practices long enough will begin to see "patterns" in terms of how things work. This is particularly true with my out-of-state License Appeals.

Most often, my Office receives a call from someone who has been searching the internet and comes across my website, or some of my License Restoration articles on this blog, usually after unsuccessfully having tried to win their License Back on their own. I can't tell you how many times per week I hear something to the effect that "I wish I had found you BEFORE I sent in all my paperwork!"

In fact, chances are, if you're an outside-of-Michigan reader, you may be checking out your options after receiving a Denial.

It may sound smart-alecky, but it is nevertheless true that the best, and easiest Clients are those that have already tried on their own, or have tried with an Attorney who is not a bona-fide License Restoration Practitioner, and lost. They will listen intently, follow directions, and otherwise just do what is necessary to win a License Appeal, no questions asked.

That isn't always the same for those who have not previously tried and lost.

There are some callers who cannot understand why I require a new License Restoration Client to come to Michigan and meet with me in order to begin this process. I have had plenty of offers to pay my whole fee (or any portion I'd name) for just phone time and guidance. I could easily offer that service, whether at a discount, or not. It seems there would be any number of takers, and beyond earning money I otherwise would not make, it would take less time to do it. So why do I turn down those offers and make it seemingly more difficult?

The truth is that I feel that I have the perfect, or as close to a perfect system, as one can develop, to win License Appeals. I also truly and honestly believe that there are no shortcuts to this process, and that winning Restoration of a Driver's License takes a lot of work. For me, that work begins with an initial Client meeting that typically lasts from between 2 1/2 to 3 hours. This meeting takes place PRIOR to the Client going in to have a Substance Abuse Evaluation performed, so that I can make sure the Client is well-prepared for it.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Appeals for Non-Residents" »

It's the 4th of July Holiday, so I'm going to cheat a little bit, and instead of writing a new Blog article, I'm going to "update" a previous article from earlier this year. As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, the percentage of cases won is, for better or worse, a benchmark of your ability. Just like a baseball Pitcher's ERA, or a Bowler's average, those numbers tell a story.

For as long as I can remember, I have maintained a win rate of well over 90%. This year, I decided to try and improve that. And, I have. So far, as of this writing, I HAVE WON EVERY DRIVER'S LICENSE APPEAL I HAVE FILED THIS YEAR! I have filed around 40 cases in 2010, and after the Hearing, have had a favorable decision in each one.

So this article is a little bit about bragging. Imagine you had a medical condition, and were looking for a Doctor. Wouldn't the fact that one has been able to cure 100% of their Patients interest you? I know it would interest me.

This success rate is the function of a number of factors. Perhaps the most important amongst them is that I will give a person an HONEST appraisal of their readiness to undertake a License Appeal. I will give them an HONEST evaluation of what it will take to win. And, I will be equally HONEST and tell someone that they're just not ready yet.

So what does this do for me?

To be blunt about it, it costs me money.

Instead of taking every case that comes along and is willing to pay, however, I feel that I have an ethical and moral obligation to NOT accept fees from someone if I don't TRULY BELIEVE, based upon my rather considerable experience, that their case can be made a winner.

For all of that, I often point out, in my various articles about Driver's License Restoration, that the process of Finding the Right Lawyer is about, more than anything else, finding someone who's the right fit for you. A winning success rate is, of course, important, but none of that will mean anything if the Lawyer and the Client don't communicate well.

Thus, when a person undertakes this process, they should read what any particular Lawyer has written on the subject of Driver's License Restoration, and feel both free, and, in fact, encouraged, to call or e-mail that Lawyer with any questions or concerns they have.

Whatever else, my 100% success rate up to this point in 2010 was certainly based, in large part, upon good, honest and open communication with each of my Clients.

In some of my previous articles about Driver's License Restoration, I have gone over as many of the legal elements as possible. In others, I have explained how I prepare and present the facts of anyone's Appeal within the limits and requirements of those legal elements. One thing I have not gone over, however, is what I might call the "magic" element of helping my Client define and relate his or her "story" at the DAAD Hearing.

For all the particular steps in preparing a License Appeal, none of it matters if all of it doesn't sort of come together and present a picture, or a "story," of the person's recovery. And make no mistake about it, the events leading up to a person first making the decision, followed by the commitment, to not drink again, is a "story" in every sense of the word.

Some people have a good idea of their own" story," while others know it, but need a lot more help in bringing it out. Think of the best date in your life. You know it, you remember it, and when you think about it, you can almost kind of feel it again. That's a story. Now think about telling it out loud. It probably needs some work to be as remotely interesting to anyone else as it is to you.

I think that in order to do that, a detached, 'third person" is needed. I doubt that, despite my own experience, I could do as good job with my own life "story" as I could with someone expert help.

Beyond just getting someone's "story" in shape, that "story" has to fit within the framework of the issues relevant to a DAAD License Appeal. While some aspects of a person's "story" may be interesting, or even moving, if those things don't help prove the necessary elements of a License Appeal, they're only wasting time.

Perhaps the reason I've never taken this subject up is that, for all the articles I can crank out, it is simply impossible to describe this process in any detail. While I don't cook, I do know that those who do, and who do it particularly well, have a sort of "magic" touch. A person like me might follow a recipe to the tee, and the results would be mediocre, at best, but a real cook just "knows" how to combine the ingredients, and will have his or her own special way off adding a little more of this, or a little less of that, or a little something not in the book, to produce something truly special.

Getting a person's "story" ready for a License Appeal is similar. Of course, each person is a different "recipe." From my point of view, helping flesh out their "story" involves listening to their answers to my questions, not just for the specifics of what they have to say, but how they say it, and what other details they either give out or hold back. I suppose, without sounding immodest, that it involves a certain talent, as does cooking. I know I can't boil water, but I have won every License Appeal I've filed so far in 2010 and have a better than 90% success rate overall. That's no accident.

As a DUI Lawyer, the title of this article makes perfect sense to me. Anyone who holds a CDL undoubtedly understands it as well. The purpose of this article is to examine what happens to a CDL when a person gets a DUI while driving their personal vehicle. If you don't know what the term CDL means, then the good news is that you probably don't have anything to worry about, even if you're facing a DUI. For the curious, however, CDL is an abbreviation for "Commercial Driver's License."

A CDL allows a qualified driver to operate a commercial vehicle. This includes panel trucks and big rigs, and all kinds of other vehicles.

If you have a CDL, and especially if you use it as part of your livelihood, then getting a DUI is devastating. Back in 2005, Michigan increased the penalties for CDL holders to require that all CDL privileges be completely suspended for a full year when a person pleads to, or is found guilty of, any DUI related charge, such as OWI, Impaired Driving, or Operation Under the Influence of Drugs.

The Law itself is very clear. This action is mandatory, and there is no way to Appeal it, or have any kind of "restricted" license. The bottom line here is that if you get convicted of a DUI, even if it involves operating your personal vehicle, your CDL is completely gone for a year.

It certainly is understandable that a getting a DUI while operating a Commercial Vehicle would result in losing a CDL. However, the law here goes much further. It imposes upon a CDL holder a higher standard of driving responsibility than it does on a non-CDL holder, including when a CDL holder is simply doing his or her normal, personal driving. In an upcoming Blog article, we'll examine in more detail just how far this goes, because the law also imposes CDL penalties for a bunch of other offenses, all while the CDL holder is only involved in personal, and not commercial, driving.

Anyone with a CDL can imagine just how devastating this 1-year suspension can be. If a person drives a truck for a Utility Company, for example, they can no longer do that for the year during which their CLD is suspended, although typically, they never lose the right to drive their personal vehicle, except, perhaps, for a short period of dealing with a Restricted License.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI Convictions and the Mandatory CDL Suspension" »

It's kind of funny to be called "The License Guy" by your fellow Lawyers, but because such a large part of my Practice involves Driver's License Restoration cases, I take it as a compliment. Occasionally, I am pulled aside in Court by some Lawyer (even on the Prosecutor's side) and asked a question about License Restoration. Frequently, the question involves a complicated issue, and within a minute or two, the person to whom I'm speaking says something like "give me your card, I'll have them call you."

One of the things I have learned from these "do you have a minute?" questions is that there is a prevailing belief that has almost reached mythical status about the impossibility of winning back a Driver's License once the person has had it Revoked because of multiple DUI's. Most people are surprised to learn that winning back a License is very possible. A few, on the other hand, think all a person has to do is file for an Appeal, show up, and say they haven't been drinking, and the License will be Restored. Neither of these are true at all. The truth, as usual, lies somewhere in the middle.

Even the Secretary of State knows that lots of people think that once the License has been Revoked, it's gone forever. In the Secretary of States' Official Publication, the DLAD Practice Manual (published before the DLAD, then known as the Driver Appeal and Assessment Division, changed it's name to the DAAD, or Driver Assessment and Appeal Division) the Secretary of State even says, about itself, that:

The Department is aware that there is a perception that the agency "never returns a license" in habitual violator appeals.

This underscores the fact that there is a widespread belief that these cases are impossible to win, and yet nothing can be farther from the truth. In the previous Blog entry, I noted that of the 25 or so Appeals I had filed and for which I had gone to Hearings at the time of the article, I HAD WON EVERY ONE!

Now, there's no magic wand that I have that allows me to do that. Sure, I'm darn good at this, but part of that being good is deciding which potential Clients are ready to file an Appeal, and who needs some more work and must wait.

Continue reading "License Restoration in Michigan - Getting Back on the Road Legally" »

As of this writing, I'm gearing up for a number of my usual, informative Blog articles. I have a few interesting, relevant and useful topics in the oven. For now, though, I thought I'd just engage in a little shameless self-promotion and demonstrate how all that hard work and effort that both the Client and I put into each Driver's License Restoration case pays off.

Up until this year, I have been able to honestly boast that I win more than 90% of the Driver's License Appeals that I handle.

As of today, I have conducted somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 License Appeal Hearings this year (2010) and have WON EVERY CASE I FILED!

That's a 100% success rate!

This success is due to 2 main factors:

1. As much as I'm in business to make money, I only take cases where the potential Client has a very good, bona-fide chance of winning the Appeal. If I am speaking with someone who asks something like "So, for how long do you need me to say I've been sober?" I know I'm not talking to someone who is ready to file a License Appeal.

2. These cases take a lot of work. I don't know anyone who puts in anywhere near the effort that I do in these Appeals, but the results speak for themselves. My first meeting with a new Client usually takes about 3 hours. You simply cannot expect success in this endeavor if you're not willing to invest the time and effort necessary to do it right.

If you've been without a License due to multiple DUI's and wonder if you'll ever get your License back, or if you are inclined to believe the myth that you can never win one of these Appeals, please explore the Driver's License Restoration section of this Blog, and read the License Restoration section of my Website.

If you are ready to begin the process, then I can help you get back on the road. Believe me, at this stage of my career, I'm not looking to do anything to jeopardize my perfect record. I'm looking for winning cases. Perhaps yours might be one of them!

My Practice involves filing a lot of Driver's License Appeals. The other side of that coin is the number of Appeals I do not file. Often, I must turn away a potential Client because he or she has not done one or more things that I feel is necessary to win an Appeal. Usually, in those cases, it's a matter of a short while, a little work, and then we can begin.

Another, rather ironic and unfortunate problem occurs to those who simply wait too long to begin the process of License Restoration. They get caught driving without a License, and in the process, send themselves right back to square one in the waiting game. A recent example in my own practice highlights this point.

A fellow came to see me in order to begin the License Restoration Process. Like most people, his License had been Revoked for multiple DUI's. He was legally eligible, and, I felt, ready to start the process. So he did. He went and paid to have his Substance Abuse Evaluation done, the first step in the process after I meet with a new Client. His Substance Abuse Evaluation came back wonderful, and I was anxious to get this guy on the road.

Then, a week or so later, he called the office with dreadful news; he had gotten arrested over the previous weekend for Driving on a Suspended/Revoked License.

I have covered the various aspects of these charges in a series of Blog articles on Driving While License Suspended/Revoked, and using that link, the reader can learn as much as they want to about those subjects.

Our point here is about the real consequence to his ability to file that License Appeal, which I only discuss briefly in the linked articles.

The short version is that he screwed himself. No matter how good a deal I eventually get for him on this new Revoked License Charge, he has dealt himself a serious blow and will have to wait anywhere from at least 6 months to a year (or even more) before we can file that License Appeal. And, by the way, his Substance Abuse Evaluation, which must be filed with the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD), the body that decides these cases, expires 90 days after it is signed by the Substance Abuse Evaluator. So my Client blew $200 on that, and for nothing.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - The Danger of Waiting too Long" »

In my Practice as a Michigan Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I am often called to help people who've moved away and find that they cannot get licensed in their new state because of a "hold" from Michigan. I have written several articles on this Blog relating to applying for an out-of-state License, the types of Appeals that can be filed, and why I don't believe in Appealing "by mail." Anyone interested in clearing up a "hold" on a Michigan License should read those articles, as well as the "Quick Start" guide to License Restoration on my website.

Recently, I have represented some Drivers who were willing to move back to Michigan in order to at least get a Restricted License. In many cases, however, moving back here is not an option, so the relocated Driver must file for what's called a "Clearance" which is basically a release of any and all "holds" on their Michigan Record, which in turn will allow them to get the out-of-state License.

For those Driver's whose License has been Revoked for multiple DUI's, then the series of articles on this Blog regarding the Driver's License Restoration process is a necessary starting point. In that series, I go over how a person files for a License Appeal, and cover all the ins and outs of both the process and the mindset needed to successfully go through it.

In one of the article previously mentioned about Administrative Reviews, I pointed out why I do not believe in them, and why I think the best way to get a License Restored (or get a Clearance) involves coming back here, to Michigan, to clean things up. Let's be clear about one thing: a person, wherever they may be, does not need to go through the License Restoration, or "Clearance" process if their License is merely Suspended. Those individuals can pay off what they owe, or set up some kind of payment plan, and get a "Clearance" that shows the outstanding matter is, or is being, cleared up.

The formal "Clearance" process only applies to Driver's whose Licenses have been Revoked, and the vast majority of those cases stem from multiple DUI's. Anyone in this boat has 2 options (3, if you count not doing anything and never being able to drive legally as an option):

1. File for the "Appeal by Mail," meaning sending in for an Administrative Review, or

2. Apply for an In-Person Hearing before the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD).

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Holds - Getting a License in Another State" »

In the 1st part of this article, we did an overview of DWLS 2nd charges, and saw how where a case is being handled can affect it's outcome. In that regard, we've said a lot, but only learned a little. Let's now turn to the reality of DLWR 2nd and Subsequent charges and how they're handled in Court. As we have noted, the vast majority of DWLR cases originate from multiple DUI's.

A person facing a "true" DWLR 2nd, meaning they only have 1 prior DWLR conviction on their Record, will still have to explain themselves to a Judge. Even if they were caught driving to work, the Judge will point out that they absolutely knew they were not allowed to drive, but chose to do so anyway. What do you say to that?

Before you answer that question, let's add in that many Judges will also point out to the person that all the excuses and promises in the world hold little meaning to them, because this person undoubtedly said those things last time. You know, "been there, done that."

This is were the value of a good Lawyer comes in. Beyond droning on about how old you're client is, and where they work, and how they just want to get on with their life (which is about the most useless waste of words I ever hear come out of a Defense Lawyer's mouth - who doesn't want to "get on" with their life?), a good Lawyer will point out to the Judge that the Client understands that, no matter what happens in Court, they have effectively "shot themselves in the foot." Remember, with each subsequent Offense, a Judge has to figure that whatever sentence the person got last time, it wasn't enough. In order to keep the Judge from "ramping up" the consequences, the Lawyer has to point out to the Judge that there are other consequences to the person's actions, outside of Court, that will automatically be "ramped up" anyway.

What I mean is that the Lawyer needs to point out that the Client is going to get nailed, financially, by the Secretary of State for additional Driver Responsibility Fees. And here's a catch: Even if a DWLR 2nd Offense is reduced to a 1st Offense, the Secretary of State simply counts the number of prior Offenses within 7 years. Thus, a person with 2 DWLR 1st Offense convictions within 5 years is going to pay the same Driver Responsibility Fees as a person who has both a DWLR 1st and a DWLR 2nd Offense. For DRF purposes, such a Plea Bargain has no effect.

Continue reading "Driving While License Revoked in Michigan - 2nd (or Subsequent) Offense - Part 2" »

In the previous articles in this series, we examined the charge of Driving While License Revoked (DWLR) 1st Offense. We learned that, although part of the exact same Law, DWLR is still a different crime than Driving While License Suspended (DWLS), and the majority of DWLR cases arise because the Driver has accumulated multiple DUI's. This article will focus on DWLR 2nd and Subsequent (meaning, 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc.) Offense. Like the other articles in this series, this one will be broken into 2 parts, the first part being more of an overview of DWLR 2nd Offenses, and the second looking more at how 2nd and Subsequent Offenses are actually handled in Court, and the other consequences they cause. From here on out, we'll simply refer to DWLR 2nd or Subsequent Offense as DWLR 2nd Offense. It will be clear when were talking about 3rd, 4th and additional subsequent offenses.

At first glance, one might think that DWLR 2nd Offense is just a more serious crime than DWLR 1st Offense, and that's partly true. As I frequently point out in these Blog articles, my observations are limited to the Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties. Thus, what I say here may not be accurate in the Courts of other Counties.

Unlike so many "doom and gloom" observations about how bad things are or can be with any given charge, a DWLR 2nd Offense charge does not have to be the end of the world. Of course, if this charge is made out as part of another DUI arrest, it can't get much worse. On it's own, however, a true 2nd Offense is really quite survivable. That's not to say there aren't consequences. As a Driver's License Restoration Lawyer, I can point out that right out of the gate, anyone getting a DWLR 2nd charge has set themselves back at least a whole year as far as any License Appeal goes.

And while that's certainly a valid concern, for anyone facing a DWLR 2nd Offense charge, a more immediate consideration is staying out of Jail. Just like DWLS 2nd Offenses, DWLR 2nd Offenses are Misdemeanors punishable by up to 1 year in the County Jail. As far as Misdemeanor's go, a 1-year Misdemeanor is the most serious of all Misdemeanor charges.

When a person hires a Lawyer to help them in one of these cases, they usually have 2 big concerns: staying out of Jail, and avoiding Probation from Hell. Depending on where the case is being heard, how this works out can be very different from Court to Court.

Continue reading "Driving While License Revoked in Michigan - 2nd (or Subsequent) Offense - Part 1" »

In Part 1 of this article, we did an overview of DWLR, compared and contrasted it to DWLS, and left off by noting that anyone facing a DWLR 1st Offense is usually already in "hot water" by virtue of their prior Record. In this second part, we'll look at why that's the case, and how this charge can negatively impact a person's hopes of having their Driver's License Restored anytime soon.

Every Judge hearing one of these cases is going to look at the Defendant's prior Record. That means, to put it plainly (if not harshly), almost every DWLR Driver will be seen as a repeat-offender Drunk Driver who, after all of that, still can't follow the law. That may seem mean spirited (although it's not meant to be), but it's certainly far more accurate than saying almost every DWLR Driver is safe bet to stay out of trouble.

Given that perspective, it only makes sense to make sure the Defendant not only has a Lawyer, but a good one. Hiring some person from far away, or who is not a "regular" at handling these cases makes less sense than taking a Court-Appointed Lawyer. Whatever else, at least the Court-Appointed Lawyer will have an idea of how the Judge will handle the case, which is a lot more than can be said for the Lawyer from far away or the one who doesn't regularly handle this kind of case.

In my Practice, that means only handling these cases when they arise in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne Counties. Whatever "shopping" a person does, bear in mind that the term "local" means a lot here. While it's not for me pass judgment on other Lawyer's practices, or those who hire them, I can certainly give my opinion. Knowing what I know, if I had to hire a Lawyer for a DWLR charge, I'd look for someone from the local, Tri-County area and steer away from those "1-800" number, statewide, "go anywhere, handle any case" kind of outfits. If my case was in a County outside of the Tri-County area, I'd hire a Lawyer from that County. Now, I realize there are exceptions, but a s a general rule, I'd mark that as number 1.

Continue reading "Michigan Driving While License Revoked 1st Offense - Part 2" »

In the previous series of articles, we have examined Driving While License Suspended (DWLS) cases (both DWLS 1st Offense, and DWLS 2nd and Subsequent Offense) and noted that the subject of this series, Driving While License Revoked (DWLR) is a more serious offense.

In Representing Clients with DWLR charges in the Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, I have learned that, beyond the actual Law, there is another, real-world dimension to how these cases are viewed and handled.

This article will be broken into 2 Parts, and will deal specifically with Driving While License Revoked (DWLR) 1st Offense. The next articles in this series will deal with DWLR 2nd and Subsequent Offenses.

I point out that DWLR is a more serious Offense than DWLS, but the fact of the matter is that both DWLS and DWLR, and both 1st and 2nd (or Subsequent) Offenses for each are both violations of the very same Law, and are both subject to the exact same penalties. So why is it that I call DWLR more serious than DWLS?

This is what I meant about there being another real-world dimension to these cases beyond the actual, written Law. While it is possible for a person to pick up a DWLS case as the result of a DUI, there is only a very limited scope within which that can happen, and either involves a Breathalyzer Refusal or a 1st Offense DUI (actually and technically, an OWI) wherein a person's License has been suspended for 6 months, and where they were granted a Restricted License for the last 5 months of that period, after they served a mandatory 30 day "hard suspension," meaning no driving privileges whatsoever.

That means that the only DUI matters that can cause a person's License to be Suspended are either Suspensions for Breath-Test Refusal, or a 1st Offense OWI where there was no reduction of the charge to an "Impaired" driving."

However, the number of cases involving Revoked Licenses (DWLR) due to DUI convictions is way higher than the number of DWLS cases attributable to a DUI. That's because unlike the narrow time frame when a person can have a License Suspended because of a DUI, any combination of 2 DUI-related convictions within 7 years will cause a person's License to be Revoked for LIFE, unless and until they are approved, after a Hearing before the Secretary of State's Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD). Such a Driver can't even apply for this Hearing until at least 1 year has passed.

Continue reading "Michigan Driving While License Revoked 1st Offense - Part 1" »

In Part 1 of this article, we began reviewing DWLS 2nd (and Subsequent) Offenses. This article picks up where the previous one left off. We'll examine how a Lawyer approaches and handles DWLS 2nd (and Subsequent) cases, and how, with each successive prior DWLS conviction, a person edges closer to actually getting locked up for this charge. As in the previous article, we'll simply use the term "DWLS 2nd" or "DWLS 2nd Offense" to mean both an actual 2nd Offense, meaning a person has only 1 prior DWLS conviction, as well as all "Subsequent" Offenses, where a person has 2, 3, or even more prior DWLS convictions.

In my Practice, DWLS 2nd Offense cases are handled much like 1st Offenses. When I am hired by someone to handle a DWLS 2nd, I fist want to know why their License was Suspended. As much as we've talked about DUI's, the most common reason for a License Suspension stems from either an unpaid Traffic Ticket or Tickets, or unpaid Driver Responsibility Fees.

If at all possible, the first thing a person with ANY Suspended License charge should do is clear up whatever it was that caused their License to be Suspended in the first place. Obviously, if the reason is for a DUI, all the person can do is wait. If the Suspension is the result of an unpaid Ticket or Tickets, then the person should pay them, or at least begin scheduling Court dates or work out some kind of payment plan to at least set the ball in motion.

The reason this is so important is that, as a Lawyer representing someone for a DWLS 2nd, I want to work out some kind of Plea Bargain for that person. Even if I know a Client is not likely to go to Jail, I need to try and minimize every other negative consequence of charge so that they can get back on the road as soon as possible, and so that they don't go broke in the process.

Let's look at a few examples. Let's say Dave the Driver gets pulled over in Warren for a DWLS 2nd. Lets say he already has a DWLS on his Record, which is the result of some unpaid Tickets elsewhere. When I go to Court for Dave, if I can show the Prosecutor that Dave has either taken care of his outstanding matters, or has at least started the process (meaning done more than simply saying he's going to take care of them), it is still possible for me to work out the poster-boy of all Plea Bargains in this kind of case, which has the whole DWLS charge dropped to what's known a s a "No-Ops." A "No-Ops" stands for No Valid Operator's License on Person, which amounts to being pulled over and having left your Driver's License at home. It carries no Points, no Mandatory Additional Like Suspension, and no Driver Responsibility Fees.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended 2nd or Subsequent Offense in Michigan (Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County) - Part 2" »

In Part 1 and Part 2 of the previous articles about Driving While License Suspended (DWLS) 1st Offense, we reviewed some of the reasons for and consequences of that charge. In this and the next articles, we'll look at DWLS 2nd Offenses and examine how and why that charge is (and is not) sometimes made, as well as the consequences that accompany a 2nd Offense. This overview will be based upon the many DWLS cases I have handled in the Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties.

Given the sheer number of DWLS cases that I handle, it only makes sense that a pretty fair share of them involve DWLS 2nd (or Subsequent) Offenses. It should be obvious at the outset that a DWLS 2nd or Subsequent Offense charge means a person has at least 1 prior DWLS conviction on their Record. From here on out, we'll refer to DWLS 2nd or Subsequent Offense as just plain DWLS 2nd Offense.

When someone is Arrested and then Charged with a DWLS 2nd, it's usual for their first concern to be staying out of Jail. If I have done anything in these blog articles, I think it's fair to say that I have NOT been any kind of alarmist, or used any scare tactics to frighten anyone about the real-life consequences of their situation. In fact, I have gone to great lengths to point out just how unlikely going to Jail is in many different kinds of cases, including the previous series of articles about DWLS 1st Offenses.

That changes a little bit now. While a DWLS 1s Offense almost never (and simply never, in my experience) results in someone going to Jail, Second (2nd), and especially that part about Subsequent (meaning more than 2 prior DWLS convictions) Offenses brings a person much closer to being locked up.

First of all, DWLS 2nd Offense is a Misdemeanor, like DWLS 1st Offense, but it carries a penalty of up to 1 year in Jail (a 1st carries a maximum penalty of up to 93 days in jail). In addition, it carries a maximum fine of up to $1000 (DWLS 1st carries a max of $500), 2 Points on the Driver's Record, and a Mandatory Additional Like Suspension. Beyond that, there is yet another, cumulative Driver Responsibility Fee, meaning that any DRF for a 2nd Offense is added on top of whatever other DRF a person might owe.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended 2nd or Subsequent Offense in Michigan (Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County) - Part 1" »

Part 1 of this article focused on defining a DWLS 1st Offense charge, and what the law sets forth as possible consequences for such a charge. In part 2 of this article, we're going to talk about the real consequences of a DWLS 1st Offense charge, and what can be done to avoid them, and perhaps the whole DWLS charge altogether.

While there are exceptions, pretty much all DWLS cases involve someone getting pulled over and caught driving. In that sense, the usual Client is caught "red handed," as the term goes, and there are seldom any evidentiary issues to challenge, except, occasionally, the underlying Police reason for the Traffic Stop.

Therefore, in the usual, garden-variety DWLS 1st Offense case, a person has been pulled over for some reason and is found to have their License Suspended. Most of the time, they'll be arrested and taken back to the Police Station, but sometimes, they'll be let go with a Citation (Ticket). Of course, they're not let go to keep driving; either someone in the car with a valid license will have to drive, or they'll be allowed to call someone to come and pick them up. Depending on the circumstances, the car may or may not be impounded.

After all of that, they start looking for a Lawyer. They want to know several things, and first among them is whether or not they can be kept out of Jail. Good news here; unless the person has a really horrible prior Record, a 1st Offense DWLS is almost a slam-dunk for staying out of Jail. In fact, I cringe when people sometimes tell me some Lawyer or other told them he or she would keep them out of Jail. To me, that's like a Dentist telling a person with a cavity that because of the filling they can put in, they'll keep the person from getting brain-cancer. In fact, I can't remember anyone I've ever represented even coming close to going to Jail on a DWLS 1st Offense charge.

Okay, so we know that in all but the rarest of rare cases, we're not talking about Jail. Next on anyone's list is (or at least should be) what can be done to avoid all the other consequences (Mandatory Additional License Suspensions, Points, Driver Responsibility Fees, etc.)? The answer to that question depends, more than anything, on the driver's prior Record. If the person gets a DWLS 1st charge after having ignore 22 Tickets in 14 different Cities, and has 20 outstanding Suspensions for failure to take car of any of them, their chances of working out a deal to avoid all the consequences of a DWLS are a lot slimmer than a person who has 1 or 2 (or even 3 or 4) outstanding unpaid Tickets that have resulted in Suspensions.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended in Michigan - 1st Offense in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County - Part 2" »

Driving While License Suspended cases have always been a large part of my Practice, and the sheer number of such cases has been rising over the last several years. The economy has prevented many people from paying off or otherwise dealing with Traffic Tickets, which then results in a "FCJ" or Failure to Comply with Judgment" Suspension of their License. Even those who handle their Traffic Tickets are sometimes unable to pay the Driver's Responsibility Fees, or what's known as the "bad drivers tax." When those Fees are not paid, the Driver's License is Suspended.

There are, of course, lots of other reasons why a person's License may be Suspended. In this article, we'll discuss some issues regarding Driving While License Suspended (DWLS) 1st Offense cases, and how that can affect a person's ability to get their License reinstated. In the next article, we'll examine how this works in cases of Driving While License Suspended (DWLS) 2nd and Subsequent offense. After that, and as this series of articles continues, we'll see how all this works in Driving While License Revoked (DWLR) cases.

The 2 terms DWLS and DWLR are sometimes confused, and despite being part of the same law, are very different, and carry very different consequences. So, to define our subject here, we're talking about matters involving Suspended, and not Revoked Licenses, and Parts 1 and 2 of this article will deal with DWLS 1st Offenses.

Let's clarify one more thing; I only handle DWLS and DWLR cases where the charge is pending in a Court in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County. A recent exception to that limitation only served to reinforce my decision to limit my Criminal Practice to the Tri-County area (this geographic limitation does not apply to my License Restoration or Bankruptcy Practices). Thus, what you read here is how things work in the Detroit area. Some or all of it may apply elsewhere, but I have no inclination or interest in finding out to what extent that is or is not true.

Suspended License cases come in several different flavors. Some cases, like those that we'll be examining in this article, involve a "1st Offense," meaning that the person charged has no prior DWLS cases. Some people, however, do have "priors," and the number of those "priors" can range from 1 prior to many. Not to swap war stories, but perhaps the highest number of prior suspensions I have seen on a Client's record was over 60! Long story about that one, but I kept the guy out of Jail.

Continue reading "Driving While License Suspended in Michigan - 1st Offense in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County - Part 1" »

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 their 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.

As a Criminal Defense Lawyer who handles a substantial number of DUI Cases each year in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, there are some questions that I am asked again and again. Chief among them are questions about what will happen to the Driver's License. This article will focus on what happens to a person's Driver's License as a result of an OWI (Drunk Driving) conviction.

Let's begin with the arrest part first. Under Michigan Law, when a Police Officer arrests someone for Drunk Driving, they must confiscate and destroy that person's Driver's License. In its place, the person will be given a Michigan Temporary Driving Permit, sometimes called a "paper license." Because the person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, that paper license is every bit as good as the original which it replaces. In other words, a person still has the same license they did before the arrest, except that their picture ID has been replaced by the "paper license."

If a person is subsequently convicted of a Drunk Driving offense (whether by a Plea, Plea-Bargain, or a Trial Verdict), the Michigan Secretary of State, and NOT the Court, imposes the License Penalties. These penalties are absolute; they cannot be modified in any way, under any circumstances. They are as follows:

1st Offense:

OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) - 6 month suspension of the Driver's License, with no driving whatsoever for the first 30 days, and a Restricted License for the remaining 5 months. Restricted License allows driving to, from, and during the course of work, school, and to and from any necessary medical treatment, AA or support-group meetings, and to complete anything the Court ordered as a result of the conviction.

OWVI (Operating While Visibly Impaired) - 90 day Restricted License.

2nd Offense (within 7 years of the 1st):

OWI and OWVI - Mandatory 1 year minimum License Revocation. This means no License, and NO POSSIBILITY for any kind of License, for at least 1 full year.

3rd Offense (within 10 years of the 1st):

OWI and OWVI - Mandatory 5 year minimum License Revocation. This means no License, and NO POSSIBILITY for any kind of License, for at least 5 full years.

These License Penalties kick in after the Court handling a Driver's case sends Notice to the Secretary of State of the Conviction. The Secretary of State then sends a Notice of the Licensing Penalty (called an Order of Action) to the Driver. Usually, the Driver will receive the Notice several days before the License Penalties start.

In the first Blog post of this 2-part series, we examined the differences between Suspended and Revoked Licenses in Michigan. In this second part, we will look at how these each of these cases is usually handled in Court, and what a Lawyer can do to help the Client avoid the negative consequences that go along with each.

Whatever the reason or reasons, the most common Misdemeanor Driving Charge is Driving While License Suspended, or DWLS. Driving While License Revoked, or DWLR, while not as frequently cited a charge as DWLS, is still a common Misdemeanor Driving Offense. Here's where things can get strange.

Remember how, in part 1, we learned that DWLS and DWLR are part of the same statute (law), and carry the same penalties for violation? While that's true, in the real world of Courts and Judges, they are often looked at very differently, and a violation for DWLS is often treated much more leniently than a violation for DWLR. Here's why:

As we noted in the first Blog post of this series, most (but not all) License Revocations result from an accumulation of alcohol-related (or sometimes drug-related) Driving Convictions. When a person is cited for DWLR, it often means they are what's known as a "Habitual Offender" of Drunk Driving (of DUI) Laws and has had their license Revoked. In part 1 we saw that we can compare having a License Suspended to being suspended from school, and having a License Revoked to being expelled from school. From a Judge's point of view, a Revoked Driver causes the biggest concern, because not only do they (often) have a demonstrated record of DUI convictions, they also demonstrate a lack of ability to follow the law even after their license has been yanked.

My job in representing a Client in this type of case is to demonstrate that, aside from whatever caused their License to be Revoked in the first place, the Driver is not nearly as defiant as the charge may at first make them appear.

Continue reading "Driving on a Suspended or Revoked License in Michigan - Part 2 - What Happens in Court" »

Most people don't know that the terms DWLS, DWLS/R/D, Driving While License Suspended and Driving While License Suspended, Revoked or Denied are all violations of the same Law. A person arrested for Driving on either a Suspended or Revoked License goes home with a Ticket that has one of the above-mentioned terms written on it. As a Criminal Defense Attorney who handles Driving Cases of every kind, from Traffic Tickets and Criminal Charges to Reinstatements and Restorations, I am often asked why someone's Ticket says "Revoked" when their License was only "Suspended?"

First, let's clarify the difference between the terms:

Suspended License means the driver has a License, but driving privileges have been suspended. Think of it like you would a student in school. A suspended student is still a student at the school, but is not allowed to come back for a specified period of time. The same is essentially true with Licenses. The vast majority of suspensions have a "From-To" date, meaning, for example, the Driver's privileges have been suspended from September 1, 2009 through July 4, 2010. This means that on July 5, 2010, the Driver can go to a Secretary of State Branch Office and get their License reinstated, usually upon payment of a $125 Reinstatement Fee.

Sometimes, although less often, a Driver's License has been Suspended "Indefinitely." Unlike the usual "From-To" suspension, there is no absolute duration for this type of suspension, although there can be a minimum period of suspension. Instead, the Driver can have their License Reinstated upon the completion of or the happening of some event. This most often involves something like the payment of outstanding Court fines and Secretary of State Driver Responsibility Fees (more on those later). To use our school example again, a Driver with an Indefinite Suspension is like a student who has been suspended until they complete a certain, specific task, like write an essay or turn in a bunch of overdue homework assignments. The sooner whatever needs to be done gets done, the sooner they're back "in."

Revoked License means that a Driver once had a License, but it has been taken away, or "Revoked" by the Michigan Secretary of State. Using our school example again, a Revoked Driver is the same thing as a student who has been expelled. That person is no longer a student, and they may not return to school until they re-apply and are approved for readmission. In the case of both the Revoked Driver and the expelled student, there is no automatic reinstatement or readmission after a specific date, or upon the happening or completion of some particular thing. Instead, both the Driver and the Student must start from "square one" by reapplying and proving that whatever got them in trouble in the first place is no longer a problem. In the world of Michigan Driver's Licenses, this is done through the process of License Restoration.

Continue reading "Driving on a Suspended or Revoked License in Michigan - Part 1 - The Different Charges and Meanings" »

A fair share of my time, as a Metropolitan Detroit Attorney, is spent in Court handling Traffic Tickets. When I get a call from someone who is considering fighting a Ticket, they usually want to know 1 of 2 things:

1. Is there a way to "get out of" or "beat" the Ticket? or

2. Is there a way to at least avoid the Points?

1. What does your Driving Record look like (i.e, any points, and if so, for what)? and

2. In what City did you get the ticket you're calling about?

The answers my questions allow me to give a good answer to the caller's questions. Let's look at an example: The other day I went to Court in the City of St. Clair Shores for a guy who received a speeding ticket on I-94. He had no points on his record, and it had been more than two years since his last ticket. He asked what could be done about the ticket. He knew that "beating" the ticket would be an uphill fight, as he had been caught going about 16 miles an hour over the speed limit by radar. When I learned he had no active points, I explained that it was quite likely I would be able to negotiate a deal with the Prosecutor for him to plead responsible to a "no point" offense which would not go on his record.

He was pleased with my answer, and then asked it there was a way he could just have me handle the ticket and not have to go to Court himself. When I explained that in Ticket, or "Civil Infraction" cases a lawyer could go to Court and handle the matter without the Client having to be there, he was thrilled. He made arrangements to send me the ticket, my fee ($400 in his case) and another check for $150 to cover the fine. I went to Court, worked out the deal I had discussed with him, paid his fine and sent him the receipt. Two days later, I received an e-mail from him thanking me for helping him out.

Continue reading "Getting out of a Michigan Traffic Ticket or Avoiding the Points" »

For anyone thinking of filing an Appeal for a Michigan Secretary of State Driver Assessment and Appeal Division Hearing, listen up. If you lose after your Hearing, the chances are overwhelming that you will also lose any appeal that you file. As a rather well-seasoned Driver's License Restoration Attorney, I handle a large volume of License Appeals. That does not mean, however, that I get involved with every, or even the majority of cases that come along. Part of having a successful record of wins involves having a good sense of which cases can and will be successful. That means knowing when a case is not likely to win, and not going forward with it.

A fair number of the calls that come into my office are from Driver's who have already gone to the DAAD for their Hearing and lost. Most went without an Attorney, but a few hired one that they now think wasn't familiar enough with this area of the law. Either way, they are looking for help in appealing a decision to deny their License Appeal.

The problem is that all-too-often, there's very little that can be done. A common misconception is that if you lose at the DAAD hearing, you can simply appeal to Court. While that's technically true, it's the type of Appeal that makes winning so unlikely. After the DAAD Hearing Officer issues his or her opinion, a Court can only overturn their decision if it finds it to be, to use a more understandable term, unlawful.

In other words, as long as the Hearing Officer lawfully conducted the Hearing, and as long as their decision is supported by material and competent evidence, a Court cannot overrule it. As the section on Relief Available in Circuit Court (beginning on page 32 and continuing to page 34) explains, and as some of the cases cited in the "Habitual Alcohol Offender Appeals section (beginning on page 41 and continuing to page 43) of the DAAD Practice Manual illustrate, a Judge cannot overrule the DAAD, even if he or she would have granted a License, unless that Judge is convinced that the Hearing Officer's decision was not supported by competent and material evidence, or the Hearing Officer otherwise conducted the Hearing in a manner that does not comply with the Law. That doesn't happen too often.

Continue reading "Michigan Driver's License Restoration - Secretary of State Denial" »

In recent years, the number of Michigan residents who are moving out of state has been growing. Given the current downturn in the economy, and the huge manufacturing job losses here, especially in the Tri-County Area, that number will likely continue to grow.

Among all those people leaving Michigan, any number have had their Driver's License Suspended or Revoked. Let's speak candidly for a moment; If I wasn't a Driver's License Restoration Attorney, and I didn't have a valid Michigan Driver's License, and I was moving out of state, the first thing I'd wonder is "can I just go and get a license in the state to which I'm moving?" As it turns out, the across-the-board answer to that question is "no."

Many years ago, it was possible to obtain a license in certain, different states, even if you had a Suspended or Revoked License in your former home state. Those days are long over, however. Part of that has to do with the reason you're reading this - the computer revolution.

The law basically boils down to this: If your license is suspended or revoked in Michigan, you must clear whatever underlying suspension(s) or revocation(s) you have here before any other state will issue a Driver's License. In a previous blog post, I discussed the differences between Suspended and Revoked Licenses.

Depending on the status of your Michigan License, the problems on your Michigan Driving Record can be "cleared" in order to make way for the out of state license. The best way to determine that status, if you're not completely clear about it, is to obtain a copy of your Michigan Driving Record. This link will help you do that.

Continue reading "License Restoration - Out of State Licenses and what if I've moved out of Michigan?" »

NOTE: MY OFFICE CANNOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU OWE, WHY YOU OWE IT, WHAT KIND OF PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS ARE AVAILABLE OR ASSIST IN MAKING THOSE ARRANGEMENTS. YOU MUST CALL THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY AT: 1-800-950-6227.

Many Drivers who are required, for any of many reasons, to pay a Driver Responsibility Fee to the State of Michigan are unaware that there is a new Payment Plan option available, and it has recently become even better.

It goes without saying that in these tough economic times the last thing anyone needs are additional fees tacked onto their Driver's License, but the Courts in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County are filled with cases involving Suspended License Violations because drivers could not afford the Driver Responsibility Fees assessed against them, and wound up driving with a suspended license, and getting caught.

It becomes a vicious cycle of sorts, but those drivers face not only new Criminal Charges, but additional Driver Responsibility Fees on top of additional license sanctions and suspensions.

In April of 2009, the Michigan Secretary of State changed its policies regarding payment of these Driver Responsibility Fees. Perhaps the most significant and best part of the change is that outstanding fees can be paid over a 24 month (2 year) period. Prior to the April change, payment plans were limited to 12 months (1 year). Some drivers are even unaware that there has long been a Payment Plan which can be set up with the Secretary of State.

Anyone facing a Driving While License Suspended charge would be well advised to speak with an Attorney before appearing in Court. While many drivers simply want to put the mater behind them, eating a conviction for Driving While License Suspended not only requires and additional, like period of license suspension, but 2 points are also added to the driver's record. Worse yet, another Driver Responsibility Fee will be assessed, making a bad situation much worse.

As part of my Criminal Practice, I routinely handle Driving While License Suspended cases, and am usually able to convince the Prosecutor to reduce the charge to something other than DWLS, thereby saving my client from having his or her license suspended any further, sparing them the two points that such an offense carries, and, most of all, saving them from incurring any additional Driver Responsibility Fees. Given the relatively small legal fees involved in handling this kind of case, and given the substantial benefit that results from having it properly handled, the overall savings quite literally means more money in your pocket.

In the previous two sections of this series on Restricted Licenses, we talked about Drunk Driving and Drug Cases. This section will review what can be done in those cases in which a Michigan Driver accumulates too many Driving Points, or is otherwise notified of a license suspension due to bad driving. Most drivers are aware that you lose your license after you rack up 12 points. Suspensions resulting from too many points, and many other kind of "Bad Driving" suspensions can be appealed in Court, and surprisingly often some form of a restricted license is granted after such an appeal.

Some suspensions are automatic, like those called "Mandatory Additional Suspensions" which occur when a person is caught driving during a period of suspension. These "Mandatory Additional Suspensions" cannot be appealed or modified, and no restricted driving privileges are available or possible until the mandatory additional period has passed

The two most important terms to understand are "Revocation" and "Mandatory." "Mandatory" means just that; there is no possibility of obtaining a restricted license during a period of mandatory suspension.

A Revocation means the driver's license has been "revoked." In schoolyard terms, a revoked license is the same thing as being expelled from school; there is no automatic readmission, or in the case of a license, reinstatement. Instead, a driver (or student) has to reapply and start from scratch. This is the most serious consequence that can occur to a driver's license, and generally, (but not always) only the Secretary of State can restore a revoked license, and only then after a hearing.

Now, bearing those two terms in mind, in most other circumstances, there is a good possibility of appealing, either to the Secretary of State or to a Court, and then winning some type of restricted driving privileges. Of course, that's a very general statement, and lots of exceptions apply. However, in virtually every license suspension that I have appealed to a Court, I have won some kind of restricted driving privileges for my client.

Continue reading "Restricted Licenses in Michigan - Part 3 - Bad Driving Records " »

This section examines what happens to a driver's license after a conviction for a Drug Crime, and what can be done about it.

In the first installment of this series on Restricted Licenses, we saw that in Drunk Driving Cases, the action taken by the Secretary of State against a driver's license is mandatory, and cannot be appealed. When Drug Crimes are involved, things aren't so bleak. Sometimes it's quite possible to avoid any license consequences altogether. In many cases involving a first-time offender, a "deferral" or "under-advisement" deal can be worked out which avoids an actual conviction for the offense, and therefore there are no consequences to a driving record. When that is not possible, even though the Court must impose some suspension of driving privileges, it can be modified, and some sort of restricted license is almost always available, although not necessarily immediately. In the end, it's up to the Judge.

The most common drug crimes are Possession charges. Marijuana Possession is a misdemeanor, and Possession of all Other Drugs is a felony. Like Drunk Driving charges, penalties and license sanctions increase depending on whether the person is charged as first or second (or subsequent) time offender.

Other, less common Drug Crimes involve Possession with Intent to Deliver, and Delivery or Manufacture. These offenses, like simple Possession offenses, carry mandatory license sanctions. This means that after a conviction, whether by guilty plea or trial, the Judge must suspend the driver's license. In first offense cases, the suspension is for 6 months, and in second-offense cases, the mandatory suspension is for 1 year.

With Drug Crimes, it is the Court, and not the Secretary of State, that imposes the driver's license suspension or restriction. Exactly what the Court does, and is required to do, is mandated by state law. Most Judges in the Tri-County area tend to be understanding of a person's need to drive, and are usually more lenient than not in granting Restricted Driving Privileges. The point here, though, is that the Court has discretion to order some sort of restricted driving privileges in Drug Cases.

Continue reading "Restricted Licenses in Michigan - Part 2 - Drug Cases " »

The list of criminal offenses that involve some sort of Driver's License Suspension or Revocation is long, and always seems to be getting longer. Everyone knows that Drunk Driving convictions result in some loss of license, but many people are not aware that Drug Possession offenses also require license suspensions.

Whether due to a Drunk Driving, a Drug Crime, or simply a Bad Driving Record (too many points), anyone who has lost, or is facing the loss of their license, usually asks "Isn't there some kind of Restricted License I can get to at least go to work?"

And the answer to that question is always the same: Maybe.

To make things easier to understand, we'll look at the three of the most common situations that occur. We'll examine each of these three areas in a separate article, beginning with Drunk Driving Cases. In the second installment, we'll examine the availability of restricted licenses in Drug Cases, and in the third and final installment, we'll review what can be done for drivers who lose their license because of too many Points, or a Bad Driving Record.

First, certain kinds of offenses, like Drunk Driving, require that the Michigan Secretary of State automatically take certain, specific actions against a license. These are known as mandatory penalties. They cannot be appealed in Court, nor can they be modified in any way.

When a person is convicted of a Drinking and Driving offense, the Court immediately sends notice of the charge they pled to or were found guilty of to the Secretary of State. Based upon the person's prior driving record and the conviction offense (the one that the Court is notifying the Secretary of State about), certain specified-in-the-law Driver's License sanctions must take place.

Consider this example: A Detroit-area resident with no prior drug or alcohol convictions on their record receives a First Offense Drunk Driving charge (OWI). If the person pleads to, or is found guilty of, that original charge, then once the Court sends notice of that to the Secretary of State, that driver's license will be suspended for6 months. Under the law, the driver will not be allowed any driving privileges for the first 30 days, and will then have a restricted license for the remaining 5 months of the suspension period.

If that same driver is able to have their lawyer work out a deal to reduce the charge from OWI to the lesser charge of Impaired Driving (OWVI), then upon notice from the Court, the Secretary of State will suspend the driver's license for 90 days, with a restricted license being granted for all of those 90 days. In other words, that driver will basically have their license restricted for 90 days.

Continue reading "Restricted License Availability in Michigan - Part 1 - A Definite "Maybe" " »