Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

In Part 3 of this series, we undertook a very brief overview of DUI Trials. If the reader detected a theme something like "DUI Trials are very complicated," then I succeeded in delivering my message. The larger point was simply no one should go to Trial in a DUI case unless they have a rock-solid likelihood of winning, or at least emerging from it appreciably better off than if they had not.

After a DUI (meaning Criminal) Trial, a person is either found Guilty, or Not Guilty. Occasionally, a case results in a "hung jury," meaning no verdict was reached, and the Prosecutor must then decide if they want to re-try the case, meaning do it all over again. Hung juries, while not incredibly rare, are rather uncommon; therefore, we won't waste any of our time discussing that unlikely type of outcome.

Having started our discussion at the Arraignment stage in Part 1, through Pre-Trials in Part 2 and Trials in Part 3, we have ended up at the stage where a person facing a DUI (called the "Defendant") will have either pled Guilty to some kind of charge after a Pre-Trial, or have been found Guilty, or not, after a Trial.

The next "legal" step in any Drunk Driving (or other Criminal) case is the Sentencing. This is where the Judge decides what is going to happen to the Defendant, and Orders things like classes, counseling, breath or urine testing, Probation, and, in really bad cases, like 3rd Offense Felony DUI's, Jail.

Obviously, there will be no Sentencing if a person has been found "Not Guilty" after a Trial. In that case, a person simply goes home, and the matter is ended.

In EVERY DUI, however, where there has been a either Plea, Plea-Bargain, or Sentence-Bargain (or a Verdict of Guilt, if there was a Trial), there is a step BEFORE the actual Sentencing: The PSI, or Pre-Sentence Investigation. A PSI is required by Law. We'll explore it in detail shortly (this subject is rather involved, so we'll use two installments just to cover it), but before we do that, it is important to understand that the Pre-Sentence Investigation, and the legally required alcohol assessment test that is a part of it, will determine, more than anything else, what actually happens to a person at Sentencing. To put it simply, the PSI and its accompanying recommendation is the blueprint, or script, for what will happen to a person at Sentencing.

Continue reading "DUI, DWI and OWI in Michigan - A Detailed Look at how These Cases are Handled in the Detroit-Area - Part 4" »

In Part 2 of this article, we examined DUI Pre-Trials, and we learned that, more than anything else, a Pre-Trial is a meeting where the Defense Lawyer and the Prosecutor discuss their case, and try to work out some kind of resolution (usually meaning a plea deal) in order to avoid having the case decided at a Trial.

In this 3rd installment, we'll discuss the components of a DUI Trial. The reader should note that the Library of any Lawyer who makes his or her living in Court usually contains numerous books about Trials, and Trial strategy. Since even the most abbreviated overview of Trials would result in a rather long book, our review will necessarily be rather brief. Accordingly, we will focus on the more important and relevant aspects of a DUI Trial.

To begin, it is fair to say that a DUI Trial occurs because the Prosecutor and the Defense Attorney are unable to agree upon a resolution. Beyond that rather "legal" description, it typically means that the Prosecutor has offered no kind of "deal," and the Defense Lawyer believes he or she can either beat the case at Trial, or at least get a better (always meaning less-serious, or severe) verdict than whatever plea offer (or not) is on the table.

In a Criminal Trial, a person's guilt must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." To put it plainly, at a Trial, the Prosecutor must essentially hit a home run.

If a Trial is held before a jury, then a "Guilty" verdict can only occur if ALL of the jurors (6 in a Misdemeanor case, and 12 in a Felony case) agree that the Defendant is guilty. If even 1 of the jurors does not agree, the jury is considered "hung" and the person will not be found guilty, although they may later be re-tried. If the jury, however, returns a unanimous verdict (meaning all 6 or 12 jurors agree) of either Guilty or Not Guilty, then that is the final decision.

Which brings us to as good a place as any to talk about the end result of a Trial. Everyone knows that a Criminal Trial (and a DUI case is a Criminal case) can result in a verdict of either "Guilty" or "Not Guilty." Yet there are other outcomes that can occur, and understanding them can have a huge impact on deciding whether or not to have a Trial in the first place. Let's explore this further...

Continue reading "DUI, DWI and OWI in Michigan - A Detailed Look at how These Cases are Handled in the Detroit-Area - Part 3" »

In Part 1 of this article, we began our detailed review of the steps in a DUI case. We examined what happens when a person is released from Jail, and then we looked at the various facets of the Arraignment stage. We ended by noting that the next step in a DUI (or any Misdemeanor Criminal case, for that matter) is called the "Pre-Trial." In this second part, we'll talk about what the Pre-Trial really is, and we'll see what does (and sometimes doesn't) happen at this rather important stage of a DUI case. We'll end our discussion once we are ready to move on to the step after a Pre-Trial: an actual Trial.

This is important. Sometimes, a person facing a DUI (or any other Criminal case) thinks that their case must go to Trial. While we'll examine Trials more fully in the next section, a Trial is what happens if no Plea, or Plea-Bargain can be worked out at the Pre-Trial stage. In other words, Trials are pretty much limited to situations where a person maintains his or her innocence ("I didn't do that...") or the Lawyer feels that the person's guilt cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt for some reason or other.

The overwhelming majority of DUI cases are resolved through a Plea agreement, and that usually occurs as the result of a Pre-Trial Conference. In most cases, the Defense Lawyer and the Prosecutor come to an agreement called a Plea-Bargain. A Plea-Bargain means the charge the person is facing is reduced to something less serious. Typically, in a 1st Offense case, a person will be charged with OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) and their Lawyer will negotiate with the Prosecutor to reduce the charge to the less severe offense of Impaired Driving (OWVI). This assumes, of course, that there is no defect in the evidence that could lead to the case being "knocked out" or that could result in a "Not Guilty" verdict if the case actually went to Trial.

Sometimes, when the Defense Lawyer and the Prosecutor meet, they find that there is other information that might help them come to an agreement, or that maybe they are unable to come to an agreement right then and there, but at least feel that there is a reasonable chance they might find some common ground later on, if they meet again. In truth, there are loads of reasons why a Pre-Trial might just result in the scheduling of another Pre-Trial. In my Practice, this happens all the time.

The more important point is that most of the time, whether there is only 1 Pre-Trial, or there are 2 or 3, a DUI charge is resolved by agreement between the Defense Lawyer and the Prosecutor. In 1st Offense cases, as noted above, this "deal" is usually a "Plea-Bargain" tht reduces the original OWI charge to Impaired Driving. Of course, there can be no "deal" unless the person facing the charge also agrees. The Client always has the final say.

Continue reading "DUI, DWI and OWI in Michigan - A Detailed Look at how These Cases are Handled in the Detroit-Area - Part 2" »

It has been quite some time since I've gone over the steps involved in a DUI case. This article will examine every part of the process following a person's release from Jail as their case winds through the Judicial system. Because I intend to cover this subject in detail, and use some examples along the way, this article will be broken into multiple installments. This first installment will focus primarily on getting out of Jail after a DUI Arrest, and will examine the Arraignment stage, which occurs right before, or, in other cases, right after a person's release.

As a DUI Lawyer, part of my everyday experience involves handling DUI cases. I've handled so many that I can navigate my way through the process blindfolded, so to speak. Yet even as a Drunk Driving Lawyer who has handled thousands of DWI and related cases, I need to remember that for most people, a DUI Arrest is their first experience being taken to Jail, and having to deal with a Criminal charge.

Even for those facing a 2nd Offense DUI, such a charge is often only their second time dealing with the Criminal Justice system, and they were often too nervous the first time to recall everything that occurred, beyond remembering that things weren't as bad as they feared. Now, facing a 2nd Offense, they know things are more serious.

Accordingly, we'll do a step-by-step breakdown of what a person facing a real-life DUI, whether a 1st or 2nd Offense, will be dealing with once they have been released from Jai.

To keep things clear, we'll insert 2 imaginary characters into this article, and sometimes refer to them: First-time Freddy, and Second-time Sandra. For the most part, the steps in each of their cases will be the same, but where either those procedural steps, or what they're likely to experience differs, we'll compare and contrast those differences.

One of the first things that can be different from case to case, and depends, more than anything else, on where a case occurs, is how a person gets out of Jail. In some jurisdictions, once a person's BAC (Bodily Alcohol Content) is low enough, they'll be released from Jail without having to pay a dime. In other jurisdictions, they might have to post a $100 Bond, called an "Interim Bond." In some places, they might be held until a higher amount is posted. This might mean calling someone to come and post the money.

In still other jurisdictions, before a person is released, they are actually "Arraigned" on the charge. This means they go before a Judge or Magistrate.

Continue reading "DUI, DWI and OWI in Michigan - A Detailed Look at how These Cases are Handled in the Detroit-Area - Part 1" »

As a DUI Lawyer, I see almost every scenario that ends with a Drunk Driving Arrest. These scenarios include a Driver being rather simply pulled over for weaving in and out of his or her lane, to a person being found passed out behind the wheel of a running car after having crashed into something. I've even had cases where people have been Arrested after having parked their car and gone into a home or other building (these kinds of cases often present wonderful opportunities to successfully challenge the case, or evidence that is a part of it, and get the charge "knocked out").

A situation that has become far more common over the last several years starts with a cell phone call from an anonymous "tipster" alerting the Police to a suspected Drunken Driver. This article will focus on this increasingly more common situation, and will examine the evidentiary and legal requirements that must exist for such a case to proceed through the legal system, and how these things actually play out in the real world. For all the legal complexity the reader might suspect is involved, this can actually be boiled down to a rather simple and straightforward analysis.

It all begins with a tip called in by another driver. Whether that driver is an overly-zealous "do-gooder," or a decent citizen honestly concerned for the safety of others really doesn't matter. What matters is that a description of a vehicle (meaning some identifying information such as make, model, color, and/or the plate number) is given, along with enough geographic information for a Police Officer to locate it.

Legally speaking, the Police can't just pull up to the identified vehicle and pull it over. By law, the Police have to observe the driver either do something that would otherwise justify a Drunk Driving stop, or otherwise violate some traffic Law that, in and of itself, would justify a Traffic Stop. In other words, the Police need a valid reason to pull over the driver of the car that was reported, and can't just pull it over because Joe Citizen suspects the driver of being drunk.

In real life, this typically isn't a problem. Consider for a moment: how many suspected Drunk Drivers have you, the reader, ever called in? Most likely, the answer is none. Usually, it takes a pretty obvious case for Joe Citizen to dial 911. Police Officers are trained to spot Drunk Driver's; citizens are not. By the time a person is weaving or otherwise driving erratically enough for someone to call in a "tip," they are often rather clearly intoxicated.

In such a case, the Police usually don't have to wait very long for the reported Driver to give them a reason to activate the overhead lights.

Continue reading "Drunk Driving (DUI) Charges in Michigan Resulting From a Cell Phone Tip" »

Within my DUI Practice, the majority of Clients I have are first-timers. I suspect it's the same for any DUI Lawyer. This only makes sense because the majority of DUI cases pending in any District Court at any given time are 1st Offense cases. Nevertheless, a rather large percent of my DUI Clients are facing their 2nd Offense. I suspect this is the case because, having already been through this once before, they are able to identify with the information I have provided on my website, especially that dealing specifically with 2nd Offenses, and find my various Drunk Driving blog articles to be spot-on in terms of the accuracy of the information presented.

One of the more common questions I am asked deals with the difference between a 1st and 2nd Offense DUI in terms of outcome, or what happens to the person facing the charge. This article will focus on those differences from the perspective of someone who has a prior DUI and is facing a 2nd Offense. Despite that focus, those facing their 1st Offense may want to read this article, as well.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a 2nd Offense DUI is going to be a lot tougher than a 1st Offense. Many Courts, especially those in Macomb and much of Wayne Counties, are understanding enough to at least consider the possibility that a 1st Offense DUI can be an out-of-character incident for someone, and not necessarily the manifestation of an alcohol problem. In other words, it can be just an instance of bad judgment. Oakland County Courts are generally more inclined to be cautious in their approach to a 1st time DUI Offender, and will seldom be as lenient as either their Macomb or Wayne County counterparts. For all of that, with the exception of 1 Judge in the 48th District Court in Bloomfield Hills, a 1st Offender can essentially count on NOT going to Jail. The kind of "leniency" we're talking about here has to do with things like classes, community service and counseling, and NOT incarceration.

There are really two ways in which a 2nd Offense differs from a 1st Offense. As noted before, the one about which I am most frequently asked has to do with what will actually happen to the person facing the charge, and, more than anything else, the most important of those concerns is "am I going to Jail?" Beyond that, the legal consequences, such as things like loss of the Driver's License, Fines, Costs, Community Service and Counseling or Treatment are very different, meaning more serious, or severe, in a 2nd Offense case.

One constant that is an inherent part of each and every 2nd Offense case is the belief and perception by just about everyone in the criminal justice system that the person facing the charge has an alcohol problem. Over 21 years ago, when I was a new Lawyer, I was often too concerned about offending my Clients to be as direct and forward as I am now. Tempered by over 21 years of experience, I have long since realized it's my job, and my obligation to help my Client, and an important part of that is to prepare them for what is really going to happen, and how they are really going to be viewed and treated by the Court system.

Continue reading "DUI in Metro Detroit - The Real Differences Between a 1st Offense and 2nd Offense Case" »

"How much do you charge for a DUI?" This is a question that I'm asked almost daily. In truth, I find it somewhat funny, because I list my Fees on my site and my blog under the section at the top marked "Fees." Look up at the top of this page. See it? It's there.

This article will examine Fees in a DUI case, and why some are so low, while others are so high, and what a person can expect to get for their money.

For what it's worth, I only handle charges brought in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, and I charge the following for DUI cases:

1st Offense: $2000. I begin with ½ ($1000) down, and the other ½ ($1000) must be paid prior to the conclusion of the case.

2nd Offense: $2400. I begin with ½ ($1200) down, and the other ½ ($1200) must be paid prior to the conclusion of the case.

3rd (Felony) Offense: $4000. I begin with ½ ($2000) down, and the other ½ ($2000) must be paid prior to the conclusion of the case.

I have repeated this theme throughout many of my blog articles: Looking for a Lawyer on a "low-bidder" basis is about the worst way to find quality representation. There is simply no way to not cut corners when offering a discount price. We'll come back to this later.

Continue reading "DUI Legal Fees in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties" »

As a DUI Lawyer who practices in Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties, I handle DUI cases almost every day. About 2 years ago, our state legislature in Lansing decided that it would be a good idea to "up" the penalties in DUI cases where a person's breath or blood test (BAC) results are .17 or above. This new Offense is known as "High BAC" or "Super Drunk." Since it passed, the new Law has, by and large, been a flop. This article will discuss why almost no one Arrested for DUI, and whose breath or blood test results are .17 or above, at least in the Tri-County area, is charged with the new "High BAC" Offense

With all the things wrong in Michigan, one can only wonder how this subject ever even got on the legislative agenda, but if there's one thing we can say about Lansing, it's that every time a new law is passed, it will either make life more difficult, or expensive, or both. Ideas for actually making things better just don't show up on the menu.

In their infinite wisdom, our State Legislators decided that anyone charged with a DUI who had a breath or blood test result (technically called a BAC, or Bodily Alcohol Content) of .17 or above should be charged with a more serious Offense which effectively doubled the penalties of a standard, old-fashioned DUI. Of course, it would have been somewhat unpopular, perhaps to the point of being political suicide, to stand against this idea, so both houses fell in step and went along, and the legislation passed without difficulty.

On the face of it, the notion of making "super drunk" drivers face stiffer penalties sounds like it could have the desired impact of discouraging people form engaging in this kind of behavior. Unfortunately, DUI is always an "unintended" Crime. No one sets out to go and get drunk, much less "super-drunk", and then drive home. Instead, as a person gets drunker, their ability to make a sound decision regarding driving gets proportionally impaired. In reality, getting drunk fundamentally impairs a person's ability to make good decisions. At 2 in the morning, and needing to get home, people will inevitably turn to what's most convenient to do that; their car, even though that's about the worst decision they could make, and one, when they were sober they swore they never would.

What no one bothered to consider was the financial impact of this new law. DUI has been called a "cash cow," and is unarguably a big financial boon to municipalities. At its simplest, DUI is big, easy and good money for the Courts, the Towns, and the Police which process and handle these cases.

In their haste to act, the legislature obviously did not consider that in "doubling" the penalties for High BAC cases, they were making this new Offense a state crime that could no longer be handled by local, city and township Attorneys, and would divert the Fines from those municipalities to the state. In other words, the Fines imposed in High BAC cases are paid directly to the State, instead of the city or township where the case has been brought.

This had the potential to cost cities and townships a huge amount of cash. This is like a dam in their revenue stream. And with money being in such short supply, there isn't a city or township anywhere that wants to give up any more than it has to, especially to the state. Although there may not be any accurate statistics, a large enough portion of DUI charges involve a person who tests out with a BAC of .17 or above. The percentage of people who come in over that limit is substantial. This in turn, presented a potentially substantial cut in the money flowing into cities and townships from DUI cases.

Continue reading "DUI in the Detroit-Area - Why so few Cases are Charged as "High BAC" or "Super Drunk"" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the role of the PSI in a Criminal case. We learned that the PSI, or Pre-Sentence Investigation, is a comprehensive process that ultimately results in written Sentencing Recommendation being made to the Judge presiding in any given case. We also learned that the PSI Recommendation could be thought of as a "blueprint" for what the Sentence will be, as almost every Judge out there follows that Recommendation to the letter, or extremely close to it.

Here, in part 2, we'll pick up where we left off, beginning with a look at how the Probation Officer interviewing someone is likely to perceive that person. We'll continue by examining why, in a DUI case, for example, how well or poorly a person scores on the legally required alcohol assessment test impacts what happens to them at Sentencing.

First, bear in mind that everyone showing up for a PSI has been convicted of a crime. Technically speaking, Probation only deals with convicted Criminals. This may seem too harsh or strong a label for someone who has, for example, received their first DUI, and it may not sit well with them, but it does not change the reality that no one is required to meet with a Probation Officer for singing too much in the church choir. A person needs to understand how they are perceived by Probation Officer who will be interviewing them, if they want to positively influence that Probation Officer's conclusions about them.

And make no mistake about it, there is a whole psychological profile to Probation Officers. They are an interesting group, and, whatever else, really are the single most important person in a Criminal case, in that they write the Recommendation that will, in almost every case, be followed by the Judge. Knowing how to deal with them, and understanding things from their side of the desk is an important component in producing a better Sentence.

An example of what not to do in a PSI applies to those first-time Offenders, like the 1st Offense DUI person we mentioned above. Most middle-class DUI Offenders have a hard time thinking of themselves as "Criminals." DUI is, after all, more a crime of bad judgment more than anything else. Almost anyone facing a DUI would never think of robbing or harming someone, or stealing anything. So these individuals, who lack any kind of criminal mindset, are typically horrified at the prospect of being considered, much less treated, as a "Criminal."

Continue reading "How to get a Better Sentence in a Michigan Criminal or DUI Case - Part 2" »

When a person is facing a Criminal charge, they usually have lots of questions. First amongst them, however, is some version of "what's going to happen to me?" In this article we'll take a step back, and instead of trying to answer the question "what's going to happen," we'll examine why whatever does happen, in fact happens. In other words, we'll try to find out why a particular Sentence is handed down in a Criminal case.

Having been a Criminal Lawyer for over 20 years, I certainly have learned a lot. And while I hated to be on the receiving end of these comparisons 15 or so years ago, the reality is that I know a lot more now than I did then. I have learned things that go way beyond knowledge of the Law itself. Often, what is most important in predicting the outcome of any specific case has more to do with where the case is pending, or the identity of the Judge to whom it has been assigned, rather than the rule of Law itself.

This is why, when we speak of Doctors and Lawyers and other professionals who have around 20 years experience, we say they're "hitting their stride." This is also why you'll never see a rich and famous person being represented by a newbie Lawyer. Think of any celebrity Criminal case; the Lawyer who stands in front of the microphones is always a seasoned veteran.

Yet for all that, I began to figure out certain truths about why cases turned out the way they did pretty early on in my career. Here's where anyone who has ever had a prior Criminal case will instinctively understand what I'm about to say, while everyone else will simply have to believe the logic of it:

What happens, meaning the Sentence that a person receives, in any case, is always either identical to, or nearly identical to the Sentencing recommendation sent to the Judge by the Court's Probation Department.

This bears some explanation.

In all Felony cases, and in many Misdemeanor cases (such as DUI), the Law requires that, prior to a person being Sentenced by the Judge, they go to the Court's Probation Department for an evaluation and interview, called a Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI), and that the Probation Department, as a result of that process, generate a written Report and Sentencing Recommendation to be used by the Judge in Sentencing the person.

Continue reading "How to get a Better Sentence in a Michigan Criminal or DUI Case - Part 1" »

If getting a DUI case dismissed outright is like winning the Powerball Lottery, then having a DUI case knocked down to a non-alcohol related Offense is like hitting the Jackpot in a raffle. As a busy DUI Lawyer, these victories are the things that become the highlights of my day-to-day Practice. I have pointed out, in many of the nearly 70 Drunk Driving articles I have published, that these kinds of outcomes are far more the exception, rather than the rule. Any DUI Lawyer will handle quite a few "garden-variety" DUI's before he or she gets one that can be knocked out, or knocked down.

This might explain why I'm so excited about a day in Court, the week before last, when, out of the 3 DUI cases on my schedule, 2 of them were knocked down to non-alcohol related Offenses. What's more, it happened in 2 different Courts!

Obtaining these breaks is not, however, just a matter of luck. It requires a detailed analysis and review of the evidence by an experienced DUI Lawyer. Sure, there is an element of luck in that there is a sufficient defect in the evidence for any particular case in the first place, but finding that defect requires looking for it, first. In a way, this parallels the old saying "you won't know if you don't ask." A Lawyer wouldn't find a problem with the evidence if he or she didn't first evaluate that evidence with a careful and critical eye.

Beyond the benefit to the Client in avoiding the whole DUI charge, and all the negative consequences that go with it, these "jackpots" refresh the Lawyer, as well. Imagine if you were mining for gold, digging through dirt, and year after year you never found any. How much enthusiasm would you be able to sustain as you continued?

In each of the two cases referenced above, the "defect" in the evidence was not something pointed out by the Prosecutor. Nor was the defect obvious. Does this mean the Prosecutor simply hadn't evaluated the case as critically as I did? I tend to think so. Prosecutors, after all, handle tons of cases, and simply don't have the time to study each one like a Defense Lawyer, whose whole focus in on that single case. Even when they do read a Police Report, it's not as if the Prosecutor is looking for a "way out."

In my first case, there was a scientific problem with the Breathalyzer evidence. It would take far too long to explain it here, but the bottom line is that I was able to point out to the Prosecutor that his case was seriously compromised, and in light of the defects in the evidence that I showed him, he had little choice but to agree.

Continue reading "DUI in Michigan -Getting 2 DUI Cases "Knocked Out" on the Same Day" »

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? " »

A fair number of my DUI Clients are individuals who have a CDL, or Commercial Driver's License. Some know, before they contact me, that any kind of DUI conviction, including a 1st Offense, will automatically result in a 1-year Suspension of a person's CDL privileges. Those who didn't already know that are rather unpleasantly surprised to find out.

It used to be, a few years ago, that when a person faced, for example, a garden-variety DUI (meaning OWI, actually), their Lawyer would get the charge dropped to the less severe Offense of Impaired Driving, which only carries a 90 day Restriction of a person's License. During the 90 days the person's regular Driver's License was Restricted, their CDL was Suspended. After 90 days, they'd pay a $125 Reinstatement Fee to the Secretary of State, and their full License, including CDL, would be given back.

Then someone in Lansing had an idea. Honestly, I try to keep politics out of this blog, but the older I get the more I'm convinced that politicians aren't nearly so much crooked as they are incompetent. Really, how many laws have been passed that made your life any better? Maybe the smoking ban was a good thing (sorry smokers...), but beyond that, anything that comes out of Lansing is either going to make life more difficult, or expensive, or both.

Anyway, some Einstein in Lansing figured that it would be a good idea to tack on a mandatory 1-year Suspension of a person's CDL as a punishment for any 1st Offense DUI charge. I can only guess that the idea behind this action was that this would somehow serve as a further disincentive for anyone to drink and drive.

Except that about the only time anyone finds out about this is AFTER they get a DUI charge, when it's too late to do anything about it. And the fallout from this part of the law is pretty substantial.

I've had utility workers who drive trucks for their employers worried sick about losing their jobs. The good news is that in all the cases I've handled, my Clients have been able to manage some kind of work-around. Sometimes this means filling a different position, and other times it means riding shotgun with another driver.

Continue reading "DUI and the Commercial Driver's License (CDL)" »

Anyone facing a DUI understands that the breathalyzer results are very important. Those numerical results are supposed to equate to a person's Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC), and are used by the Police and Prosecutors to show that that a person was "under the influence" or "over the limit" in any Drunk Driving Case. Beyond that, once a person's BAC has been measured at the Police Station, they are not released until that number has fallen low enough to be sure the Police aren't responsible for letting an intoxicated person out of their care and custody.

In my DUI Practice, this number is important to me for a variety of reasons. It goes without saying that any DUI Lawyer, like me, looks at that number with the hope that it can somehow be challenged in a way that makes the whole DUI charge collapse. In this article we'll briefly examine the whole notion of challenging the breathalyzer.

I have pointed out that those situations in which a case can be "knocked out" because of some breathalyzer problem are more the exception, rather than the rule. This is a phrase that we'll repeat a number of times throughout this article. I simply will not set up shop and "cash in" by selling, and telling people, what they want to hear, as opposed to telling the truth. And the truth is that most DUI cases are not going to be dismissed on some breathalyzer technicality.

In a prior article entitled Michigan DUI - How the Rich and Famous Beat the Charges," I pointed out that, in most cases, they don't. I think that's a fact worth repeating. If these charges could be beaten by simple persistence, then every single celebrity and person of fame would just plunk down the cash to "Lawyer up" and get the case dismissed. Yet, almost every day, we hear of someone famous getting charged with DUI, and, sometime later, you hear about them being placed on Probation.

Why?

Because those DUI cases that can be easily knocked out are the exception, and not the rule.

Consider, for a moment, the garden-variety DUI charge. The Officer will claim to have observed the Driver swerve or in some way drive erratically. Sometimes, these observations are made (or at least claimed) after a cell-phone tip. When the person is pulled over, the Officer notes all the usual characteristics of DUI driving. Fast-forwarding a bit, after being taken to the Police Station, the end result is usually a breathalyzer (BAC) score of over, if not well over, the legal limit of .08.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - Understanding and Challenging Breathalyzer Results" »

A fairly common question that arises in my DUI Practice is whether a Client's prior DUI occurred more or less than 7 years before the current case for which I am being hired. This is important, because a 2nd DUI within 7 years is treated as a 2nd Offense, whereas if the DUI occurs even 1 day past the 7-year mark, it is treated, by law, as a 1st Offense.

The consequences of a 2nd DUI within 7 years are substantial, at least when compared to those imposed in a 1st Offense case. While everyone's first concern is, understandably, to stay out of Jail, as a Lawyer for whom a substantial part of his Practice is Driver's License Restoration Cases, I tend to look a little deeper and worry about long-term consequences, as well.

In that regard, the DUI consequences to Driver's License is perfectly clear: If a person is convicted (meaning they are found guilty of, or otherwise plead guilty to) 2 alcohol-related Offenses within a 7-year Period, their License will be Revoked. Technically speaking, that Revocation is for life. Although they become eligible to file for a License Appeal after 1 year has passed, if they do not file, and win, and no matter if 50 years go by, they cannot ever simply go to the Secretary of State and "get" a License. They must file for and win a License Appeal, first.

This becomes even more troublesome when you add in that the Secretary of State DOES NOT grant a License back to a person who is on Probation. In order to win a License Appeal, the Secretary of State requires a person to prove a period of voluntary abstinence, meaning a period of Sobriety where they were NOT subject to any legal or punitive consequences for drinking. This means that even if a person is not tested for alcohol, the State will deem any period of time that they were on Probation as NOT a demonstrable period of voluntary sobriety.

When you factor in that most Probationary Sentences in 2nd Offense cases are for 2 years (although it can sometimes be limited to just 1 year, particularly in Macomb and certain Wayne County courts), this means a person will be without a License for at least 2 ½ to 3 years. To me, that's a huge consequence, and perhaps the biggest (and certainly the longest lasting and most expensive) of them all.

The best way for me to determine if a person has had a prior DUI within 7 years, unless the Client is absolutely sure of the dates, is to review their Driving Record. In another blog article, I described how a person goes about obtaining their Driving Record for a License Appeal, but the same process applies for any reason a person may want to examine it, or have their Lawyer look it over.

Continue reading "DUI in the Detroit Area - Is it a 2nd Offense, or not? " »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the probability of avoiding jail in 1st and 2nd Offense DUI cases. We saw that with the exception of 1 Judge in the 48th District Court in Bloomfield Hills, a 1st Offender can safely assume that they are NOT going to face any Jail time.

We next looked at 2nd Offense cases, and saw that, while Jail can usually be avoided in Macomb and Wayne Counties, things change if the case is pending in an Oakland County Court, and we also noted that, generally speaking, the farther north one goes, the worse things get.

In this second part, we'll pick up by looking at 3rd Offense cases, and we'll wrap up by looking at certain general principles that apply in all cases, be they 1st, 2nd or 3rd Offenses.

To begin, we should bear in mind that 3rd Offense (Felony) cases are an entirely different species from their 1st and 2nd Offense Misdemeanor relatives. Of course, part of that difference is that while 1st and 2nd Offense cases are Misdemeanors, meaning punishable only by a Sentence of either 93 days or 1 year in the County Jail, respectively, a 3rd Offense is a Felony that can carry a Prison Sentence of up to 5 years.

Before anyone starts fearing being carted off to Jackson Prison to start a new career in License Plate Manufacturing, it should be noted that a Prison Sentence is usually reserved for people with far more than 2 or 3 prior DUI's. The law does, however, require a person convicted of a 3rd Offense to serve at least 30 days in Jail. That's not negotiable.

The good news, if you can call it that, is that in Macomb County, a person who has only 2 prior DUI's , and who is facing a "true" 3rd Offense (meaning it is only the 3rd time they've ever been charged with a DUI) can, if things are handled correctly, avoid a Felony conviction altogether. In other words, a "true" 3rd Offense, if things are done right, can be reduced to a 2nd Offense Misdemeanor (and can, possibly, also avoid a Jail Sentence). This is not an option in Oakland County, and is seldom, if ever done in Wayne County. This is almost entirely a Macomb County deal.

Continue reading "DUI - Staying out of Jail in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 2" »

Amongst the various articles within the Drunk Driving section of this blog, I have addressed the issue of avoiding Jail in 1st Offense DUI cases, 2nd Offense cases, and 3rd Offense cases, albeit separately. It has been politely suggested to me that not everyone wants to engage in the kind of time consuming, in-depth research that I find so interesting, and that some would prefer a single, more overview-type article about staying out of Jail in DUI cases covering all 3 levels of the Offense. This 2-part article will be my best attempt to do that.

At the risk of being both repetitive and overbearing, it is, I think, worth pointing out that my experience as a DUI Lawyer spans more than 20 years. I don't handle Divorce cases (never have), Don't do Wills (never have), and don't sue anybody. The bread and butter of what I do is DUI and Driver's License Restoration (which itself arises from multiple DUI's). Accordingly, what I am about to describe below is the product of tremendous experience handling DUI cases. It's not merely a part of what I do; it is the very foundation of what I do, day-in and day-out.

That said, in more recent years I have been able to restrict my DUI practice to the Tri-County area around Detroit. My Website's name, macombduidefense.com, should be a clue to that. I handle DUI cases in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties. Once in a while, I'll take a case in Lapeer or St. Clair County, or even Livingston County, but I do not and will not go beyond these areas. As a result, some, or even much of what I say may not apply to cases pending in other Counties.

After being hired, the first thing any good DUI Lawyer is going to examine is whether there is some way to beat the charge, or have some of the evidence (usually from the Stop, the Field Sobriety Tests, or the Chemical Testing, meaning Breath or Blood) "thrown out."

Even if a challenge to the evidence may not result in an outright dismissal of the charge, it can possibly aid the Lawyer in getting the case knocked down to a non-alcohol traffic charge. To be truthful, this examination is (and should be) undertaken in every case, but finding such "problems" with the evidence is far more the exception, rather than the rule.

This means that the vast majority of DUI Arrests will hold up, and the person will have to deal with a DUI charge as a DUI charge. Still, it doesn't hurt to "dot the I's and cross the T's" and make sure that case is solid.

Continue reading "DUI - Staying out of Jail in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 1" »

One of the most common questions I am asked as a DUI Lawyer is whether or not someone facing a DUI should get involved in some kind of Counseling. In a prior article, I examined some general rules about when a person should consider getting into counseling, when they absolutely ought to, and when it is really unnecessary. In that article, I examined Counseling and Treatment from a legally strategic point of view, with no reference to the actual needs of the Client. This (long) article will focus on the needs of a DUI Client relative to a potential drinking problem, and how those actual needs can sometimes seem to be at odds with the best legal strategy.

I have a rather extensive background in alcohol and substance abuse diagnosis and treatment. This field of study has been a specialty of mine for over 20 years. It is this specialized knowledge that has been the basis for my success as a Driver's License Restoration Attorney, a field in which I maintain a win rate so close to 100% that I guarantee I'll win any License Appeal I take. It is not my experience as a License Restoration Lawyer that makes me so knowledgeable about alcohol and substance abuse maters; rather it is my knowledge of those things that makes a better License Restoration Lawyer.

Based upon my 20-plus years' experience handling DUI and License Restoration cases, I have certainly honed the skills necessary to assess the best legal strategy for a Drunk Driving Client. However, as noted at the outset, the best legal strategy sometimes differs from the best choice to meet the personal needs of the Client. Let's examine the considerations, conflicts and matters of conscience that are part of the mix, and, at times, the dichotomy of being an "Attorney and Counselor at Law."

We sometimes confuse the notion of a "good" Lawyer with someone who is bold and aggressive. Those qualities are, on occasion, necessary when defending someone, but as personality traits they are rather standoffish. Unfortunately, the media too often gives airtime to those Lawyers who are simply brash, confrontational and loud. If there is one lesson I have learned well as a Practicing Lawyer, it is that the most successful people in any field, be it business, sales, politics or even law, are those who win people over by persuasion, and not by intimidation. Being argumentative and loud may attract attention, but it does not attract much else.

I have often likened my job to being a diplomat. In a DUI case, I have to temper my Client's hopes of simply beating the case, and I have to temper the Prosecutor's ambition to convict the person of everything under the sun, and lock them up for it. Except for those lucky occasions when there is a significant enough defect in the evidence to get the case knocked out, I explain the realities of the situation to my Client, and I thereafter persuade the Prosecutor and the Judge to take it easy on the Client, essentially brokering a deal that both sides can live with.

Part of that "diplomatic" role I play is to earn the Client's trust, and to not offend them, or in any way put them off. This means that when I meet someone who clearly has a drinking problem, but is likewise clearly in denial, I don't just bull-rush in and scare them off with a lecture that will only fall on deaf ears, anyway. Instead, I gauge the person's receptiveness to the suggestion that they might want or need to look at themselves from a different perspective, and proceed accordingly.

That sounds straightforward enough, right?

Continue reading "Drunk Driving in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - the DUI Charge, Drinking, and Counseling" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the PSI process and the role of the Alcohol Assessment Test in DUI cases. We'll continue with a more detailed discussion of the Alcohol Assessment Test and the role of the Probation Officer is determining what happens to a person facing a DUI.

People often ask if doing well on an Alcohol Assessment Test is more a matter of common-sense than anything else. To a degree, it is, but there's way more to it than that. From a clinical point of view, a standardized Alcohol Assessment Test looks for and measures 5 traits, or markers, of an alcohol problem. If a person is NOT thoroughly familiar with these 5 "markers," and cannot explain them and their implications in detail, then they are just going though the Assessment blindly. Again, it takes hours to go over this stuff, but the 5 "traits" or "markers" of an alcohol problem are:

1. Family History of Alcoholism,
2. Instances of Social Comment,
3. History of Blackouts,
4. Instances of Social Conflict, and
5. Increasing Effects Threshold.

Preparing the Client for the Assessment Test, and how that Test will measure these things, is absolutely paramount to minimizing the consequences they will endure as a result of a DUI.

This means that if a person is not properly prepared for an Alcohol Assessment Test, and they'll go in to Probation and do, at best, an "okay" job on the Alcohol Assessment Test and in the PSI Interview.

As a result, they'll wind up with an Assessment Report and Recommendation that looks far worse than it would have if they had been properly prepared for the Alcohol Assessment and PSI Interview. A typical example would be something like this:

Continue reading "Getting Better Results in DUI Cases in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 2" »

In previous articles about Drunk Driving, I have pointed out that the most important "step" in a DUI case is the legally required alcohol assessment. Lately, within the context of my DUI Practice, I have handled an increasingly large number of 2nd Offense cases for people who had some other Lawyer represent them in their 1st case. I have repeatedly been told by them that their prior Lawyer never so much as mentioned preparing them for this step (the Alcohol Assessment). Then, when they came across my blog articles describing how important this step is, and how much of what happens at this point affects the outcome of the case, they immediately recognized, from their prior experience, how true this is, and called me.

In previous articles, I have outlined the steps in a DUI case. This article, which will be separated into 2 parts, will focus on one of those steps: The Pre-Sentence Investigation and the Alcohol Assessment Test that is a required part of that.

More than 20 years ago, as a young Lawyer handling DUI cases, I saw that what actually happened to the Client in a DUI case, meaning the results of a person's Sentencing, was almost identical to what was Recommended as a Sentence by the Probation Department.

In a DUI case, after a person has worked out some kind of Plea arrangement, the Court sets 2 dates. The first of those dates is a return date for the Client, and the Client alone, to come back to the Court for an interview with a Probation Officer, who has the job of preparing a written Recommendation for the Judge to be used at Sentencing. The Law requires that such a Recommendation be based upon the person's score on an Alcohol Assessment Test.

This means that a person will show up to the Court's Probation Department, take a written Assessment Test, fill out an information packet which asks about their background (a short life-history), and then meet with a Probation Officer for an interview. This process is called a "PSI," meaning Pre-Sentence Investigation. The result of this whole process is a written Sentencing Recommendation to the Judge indicating what should be Ordered for each particular person facing a DUI.

The second of those dates is the Sentencing itself, where the Judge decides what will be done to the person facing the DUI. And the reality of the situation is that in each and every Court out there, and in each and every case, the Judge will follow that Sentencing Recommendation, if not to the letter, then darn close to it.

Continue reading "Getting Better Results in DUI Cases in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 1" »

As a DUI Lawyer, I am in Court almost every day. Ask any Lawyer who has a DUI Practice, and you'll soon find that each and every one will note a profound difference in the way these cases are handled in Macomb County as opposed to Oakland County. Right down to the garden-variety Drunk Driving case, the differences between the 2 Counties are so significant that it almost makes the Lawyer feel like he or she is Practicing in 2 different States.

It is a well-known fact that Oakland County is the toughest of the 3 "Tri-Counties" in which to face a Criminal charge. In DUI cases, that difference is often made clear even before the person even Bonds out of Jail.

In most DUI cases, a person is Arrested in the evening, and typically let out of Jail sometime the next morning. Most often, the person will either post a small Bond (frequently about $100) at the Police Station, or simply be let go with a Notice to contact the Court within 10 or 14 days.

Sometimes, however, a person will be Arraigned, often by video, by a Judge or Magistrate, before they are let out of Jail. In those cases, the Judge sets a Bond amount, and imposes various Bond Conditions. Those conditions always include not leaving the State without prior permission of the Court, and no use of alcohol or drugs. Sometimes, especially in cases involving a 2nd or 3rd Offense, or those involving a high BAC result, those conditions include breath or urine testing. Such testing is far less frequent in Macomb County than it is in Oakland County.

Once the person and their Lawyer come to Court to begin resolving the case, the differences become more pronounced. In those 1st Offense cases brought by a State Police Arrest, the County Prosecutor, as opposed to a local City Attorney handles the charge. In Oakland County, it begins to becomes more difficult to get a Plea Bargain to Impaired Driving when a person's BAC (Breath Test Result) goes above a .12. In Macomb, the general cutoff for that kind of a deal goes up to about .16. Of course, exceptions abound, and the reason a person pays a Lawyer is to try and get one of those "exceptions" in the first place. Still, facing that kind of hurdle at the outset of a case is only a sign of things to come.

Even in a 1st Offense case, for example, where a Plea Bargain to Impaired Driving is worked out, what actually happens to the person can be strikingly different in one County as opposed to the other.

Continue reading "DUI in Macomb County -vs- DUI in Oakland County" »

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 examining the role of in-car Police video in DUI cases. We left off after reviewing the role of in-car video right up through the Traffic Stop. In this 2nd part, we'll pick up with what typically follows in any DUI Traffic Stop, the Field Sobriety Tests.

Beyond the Traffic Stop itself, in-car video can record the Field Sobriety Tests. In these cases, the audio is also important. Therefore, it shouldn't come a surprise that in any number of these videos I've obtained, there was no audio, or the Sobriety Tests were performed outside the angle of view of the in-car camera.

To be fair, in most of the videos I've seen and heard, the Client has, to put it nicely, not been at their best. Told, for example, to count backward from 89 to 72, the Client will continue on past 72 into the 60's. Letters are skipped during alphabet recitals. "I've seen enough. Turn it off" is a request that has been made of me any number of times while the Client and I watched the video.

Again, even if the video offers no help in avoiding a DUI, it does bring a certain peace of mind to the Client, because they can at least move beyond any belief (or clouded memory) that they did "fine."

Although it may be exception, rather than the rule, finding that video where the Client does just fine is a bonus. It's like finding a pound of gold in a ton of dirt.

Before any of this can be done, however, it must be determined whether or not there was any in-car video. As a general rule, most Police departments will "recycle," or erase over any video in about 30 days after it is recorded. This means a person must not delay in hiring a Lawyer to make that inquiry to prevent destruction of this evidence.

Which should bring to mind two very important questions. Why would the Police destroy any video that supports their case? Wouldn't they really only be interested in getting rid of any video that did NOT help their case?

Continue reading "The Role of Police Video in a Michigan DUI Case - Part 2" »

In my capacity as a DUI Lawyer, I have read, in my 20-plus years, thousands upon thousands of Police Reports. Careful examination of the Police Report in any DUI case is absolutely essential to proper handling of the case. In the last number of years, however, the presence of Police in-car video has added another ingredient to the mix of things that must be reviewed by the Attorney before any plan of intelligent action can be formulated. This article will be a bit longer than most of the others in the Drunk Driving section of this blog, and therefore will be divided into 2 parts.

We live in a video world. The advent of shows like "Cops" introduced us to seeing Police in action. And if you want to take about media "bias," how often do you see Police video of innocent people being questioned, and the let go? Short of the Rodney King video, and perhaps a few other examples of Police misconduct, all captured by third parties, by the way, we've essentially been trained to expect Police video to demonstrate guilt.

If you tune in to the local news, and there is Police video being run as part of any story, it almost always shows the Police arresting someone who should be arrested. DUI drivers are shown as staggering, and if there's audio, you hear them slurring their speech, or sounding otherwise drunk.

In DUI cases, it is not uncommon for me to be asked by a new Client, before I ever even get that far, about the Police video. "Can you get it? I'd like to see it."

In-car Police video has the potential to derail a DUI prosecution more than any other single piece of evidence. Admittedly, those examples of cases where the Police video contradicts the Officer's written version of events aren't very common, but for an investment of about $50, it amounts to a small price that can result in a huge payoff.

It is important to note, however, that Police are not required to have video-equipped Police cars. And even if the car has such equipment, there is no Law requiring that it be operational.

In the real world, Police video can really impact 2 major areas of a DUI arrest: The initial Traffic Stop, and the Field Sobriety Tests.

Continue reading "The Role of Police Video in a Michigan DUI Case - Part 1" »

As a DUI Lawyer who has been in practice for over 20 years, I have seen the landscape of the whole Drinking and Driving field change considerably over that time period. Within the body of articles in the Drunk Driving section of this Blog, I have covered many aspects of DUI cases, from the Traffic Stop, to the Field Sobriety Tests, to the actual Breath Test, right up and through how a DUI case is handled in Court, including the Alcohol Assessment Test, how and why that is so important, the steps in the DUI process, through what actually happens to the Driver in Court.

This article will not be as informational as are most of my others. Instead, my aim here is to look at how the DUI world has changed in the last 2 decades. I don't do this because I'm getting long in the tooth, or anything like that. Recently, a number of my DUI Clients have come to me with a prior DUI conviction or two from many years past, and can hardly believe what I'm telling them about how these cases are handled today.

To start with an example, I remember well when many Judges, in Sentencing someone for a DUI, would Order, as a condition of Probation, that the person simply NOT drink and drive. Today, there isn't a single Judge who does not, as a matter of course, Order a person to not drink at all during the term of Probation. In the overwhelming majority of cases, including most 1st Offenses and all 2nd and 3rd Offenses, this is backed up by an order for breath and/or urine testing. Sometimes this testing is done at random, other times it is carried out more regularly.

A number of years ago (okay, at this point I'll admit I've been doing this so long that I don't remember exactly when) a few Courts would order someone with a DUI to complete an "Impact Panel," often called a "Victim's Impact Panel." Now, every single Court, without exception, includes this as part of the punishment for a DUI. If the Pope got a DUI, the Judge might kiss his ring, but he or she would next order His Holiness to complete an Impact Panel.

Similarly, there has been an explosion of "Classes." With names Like Alcohol Highway Safety Class, to Alcohol Awareness Class, to what's called the ARM (which stands for Accepting Responsibility is Mandatory) Class, there seems to be no end to the kinds of Alcohol Education Classes a DUI Driver faces.

Today, just paying Fines and Costs is a relatively rare exception. 15 or 20 years ago, it was far more common.

Continue reading "DUI in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - How Things Have Changed" »

Most people have already heard about the recent change in Michigan's DUI Law increasing the Charge and Penalties for what's called a High BAC case, meaning any case where a person's Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC) is .17 or above. The new Law adds a whole new, intermediate Drunk Driving offense to the palette of DUI Laws and consequences already in place.

This article will focus on how these charges are being handled in the Local Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties. In other words, what happens when a person is Stopped and Arrested in the Detroit-area for DUI and their breath or blood test results (BAC) are .17 or above.

In that regard, perhaps the first, and most important distinction we need to make in this examination is the difference between a .17 or higher BAC result, and a .17 or higher BAC charge. This distinction is HUGE.

As it turns out, the way the Law works, most 1st Offense DUI charges are Ordinance Violations, meaning there is a Local (City, Township or Village) Law against Drunk Driving. There are, or course, a number of State Laws that prohibits Drunk Driving, but the key difference between being charged under State Law, or a corresponding Local Ordinance is that the Fines assessed in any given case go to whichever entity brings the charge. This is going to requires some discussion:

Under Michigan Law, municipalities can enact Criminal Ordinances of all kinds. They cannot however, make a Law that punishes a Crime by anything more than 93 days in Jail. There are all kinds of subtleties and technicalities involved in this, but we'll skip those in favor of a more simple explanation.

State Law punishes a 1st Offense DUI by up to 93 days in Jail. Any Municipality can likewise enact its own ordinance punishing a 1st DUI by up to 93 days in Jail. When a Police Officer Arrests someone for DUI, he or she can either write them up under the Ordinance of the Municipality in which the Arrest is made (usually, the City of Township for which they work), or under the State Law. The State Police, for example, always write up any DUI under the State Law. The Clinton Township Police Department, however, will write up a 1st Offender under the Township Ordinance. This makes the Fines assessed by the Court payable to the Township. In the case where the State Police write someone up for DUI, the Fines go to the State.

Continue reading "How High BAC (.17 and Above) DUI Cases in the Detroit-Area are Being Handled" »

In part 1 of this article, we looked at how the particular County in which a person's 3rd offense DUI charge is pending plays an important role in how things ultimately turn out. In this second part, we'll begin examining why the threat of being sent to Prison is more bark than bite, and what kind of Sentences are really passed out in 3rd offense cases.

In the first part of this article, we confirmed the rather well-known fact that Oakland County is the toughest of the 3 local Counties in which to face a 3rd offense (Felony) DUI, or any DUI charge, for that matter.

Let's hit the "pause" button here for a moment. If Oakland County is the toughest of the 3 Detroit area jurisdictions, and a person is realistically facing a deal where the worst case is about 100 to 150 days in Jail, what all that racket about "up to 5 years in Prison?"

In order to be sent to Prison for 5 years, a person must usually have a number of prior 3rd Offense DUI Felonies. In 20 years of handling DUI cases, I've never seen anyone with 2 or 3 prior DUI convictions be sent to the State Prison. Remember, Jail is where a person goes for up to a year, and Prison is where they're sent for a Sentence that calls for a minimum of 1 year. In other words, you have to be a really hard case to actually be facing a Prison term. This means that the overwhelming majority of 3rd offense DUI Offenders are facing, at worst, a Jail term, and not a Prison Sentence.

I think one of the most underrated components of successfully handling DUI cases involves the degree of the Defense Lawyer's enthusiasm for the Client. I might ruffle a few feathers here, but I strongly believe that it is extremely difficult, if not downright impossible, to switch sides and go from being a Police Officer, or a Prosecutor, to being a Defense Lawyer who has a real empathy for someone facing a DUI charge, particularly a 3rd Offense. To the Police, Drunk Drivers are (understandably) people best taken and kept off the streets. Prosecutors are the ones who try and keep them off the streets. An old investigator I once knew believed that those formative career years shape a person's natural disposition and can never be completely stripped away. His phrase about hat he perceived as the inability of a Prosecutor to become, heart and soul, a Defense Lawyer (or, for that matter, the other way around), is that "the die has already been cast."

For the most part, I agree with that, because it has always been my job to help my DUI Clients avoid any, or as much Jail as possible. I look for, and see the good in them, and share with them the regret for what's happened, and the fear for what is going to happen. I try with every fiber of my being to coax a better deal, or get a bigger break, or do whatever I can to make the outcome of their case as good and lenient as possible for them. If I suddenly became a Prosecutor, I would not be able to just not shake my concern for the person standing in front of the Judge, even though my job would be to make it tough on them. In short, I'd make a lousy Prosecutor because I just couldn't invest my whole heart into what I was doing. I picked my side long ago. The die, in other words, has already been cast.

Continue reading "3rd Offense (Felony) DUI cases and the Realities of Jail, or not - Part 2" »

This article will examine 3rd Offense (Felony) DUI cases. I have written extensively about 1st and 2nd Offense DUI cases in the Drunk Driving section of my blog. This article will examine the most serious of all DUI charges not involving a death or serious injury. Because this is an important subject, this article will be long, and divided into 2 parts.

Having been a DUI Lawyer for over 20 years, I know firsthand that absolutely no one needs to be reminded that a 3rd Offense DUI is serious business. My hope is to present a somewhat different perspective about these cases which, instead of focusing on how bad things are, or can be, will focus on how a 3rd Offense case can be handled in a way to minimize all the agony and misery so many other discussions seem to dwell upon.

About 4 years ago, on January 3, 2007, the Michigan Law regarding 3rd Offense Drunk Driving charges was drastically changed. Prior to that date, a person had to accumulate 3 alcohol-related traffic offenses within a 10-year period to be charged with a Felony. In other words, a person needed 2 prior DUI's (or, more specifically, alcohol-related traffic offenses, because a "zero tolerance" conviction could count as a prior offense) and then acquire a 3rd, all within 10 years, before the 3rd Offense Felony charge could be brought.

On January 3, 2007, what is known as "Heidi's Law" took effect. The purpose and effect of this law was to abolish the 10-year limitation for bringing a Felony DUI charge. Instead, ANY combination of 3 DUI's within a person's lifetime was enough to make that 3rd Offense charge a Felony. To this day, while many people know this, many do not.

What cuts across every 3rd Offense case is that sinking feeling a person has when they hear the words "Felony" and "up to 5 years in Prison." As I noted, everyone facing a 3rd offense DUI knows that things are not looking particularly rosy at the moment. And while there's no way to turn any DUI charge, much less a 3rd Offense, into a pleasant experience, there are plenty of things that can be done to avoid much of the unpleasantness a person fears. Even the most "red-handed" and clear-cut cases can be worked out in a way to not ruin a person's life. It may not feel that way at the moment, but there is light at the end of the tunnel.

This article will concentrate on those cases where there is no viable challenge to the stop, the arrest, or the evidence. You could literally write volumes about all the things that could be wrong with a DUI case and could be used to beat the charge, or be acquitted at Trial. However, and statistically speaking, those cases which are thrown out of Court, or in which a person "beats" the charge, are far and away the exception, and not the rule. This article is about real hope in real cases, not hope for a miracle in the once-in-a-blue-moon kind of case.

Continue reading "3rd Offense (Felony) DUI cases and the Realities of Jail, or not - Part 1" »

I have written a number of articles about DUI's in general, and 2nd Offense DUI's in particular. This article will focus on only one, and by far the most important aspect of 2nd Offense DUI cases: Staying out of Jail.

My DUI Practice involves handling loads or 1st Offense cases, plenty of 2nd Offense cases, and a good share of 3rd Offense (Felony) cases. Handling a typical 2nd Offense case is often more challenging than handling either a 1st or a 3rd Offense. The reason for this is quite simple; staying out of Jail in a 1st Offense case is pretty much in the bag in all but the rarest of circumstances, and staying out of Jail in a 3rd Offense case (assuming its not plea-bargained to a 2nd Offense case) is legally impossible, short of going to Trial and being acquitted of the charge. A 2nd Offense case puts a person as close as they can get to Jail, without any legal requirement that they actually be put in.

To be clear, the first inquiry that should be made by a Lawyer handling any DUI case is whether or not there is some way to have the case "knocked out." This means looking closely at the Police Stop, and at the method by which any breath or blood evidence was collected and/or analyzed. Statistically speaking, and all opinions and "sales pitches" aside, those cases in which the evidence can be successfully challenged to the point of getting a DUI case dismissed are far and away the exception, and not the rule. The vast majority of DUI Arrests are not going to be thrown out of Court, dismissed or beaten on some technicality.

This means that, unless a person gets really lucky, and the case is so compromised that the Judge decides to throw it out, it will ultimately be up to the Judge to decide what to do with a 2nd Offender. And you cannot escape the sinking feeling that, whatever kind of Sentence a person received for their 1st Offense, it apparently wasn't enough. This puts a person standing before the Judge right in the crosshairs of a Jail Sentence.

Not surprisingly, most people instinctively know this. When I speak with someone who is hiring me to handle their 2nd Offense DUI, there is one primary concern they have, and reason for hiring me, and that's to stay out of Jail. The good news is that, with the right work, most people facing a 2nd Offense DUI can be kept out of Jail. The key element to this is "the right work."

In another group of articles about 2nd Offense DUI and the issue of a Drinking Problem, I pointed out that a person facing a 2nd DUI needs to understand that the Law presumes, and the Judicial system perceives them as having a problem. A 2nd Offense within 7 years is considered a "habitual offender" violation and results in the REVOCATION, and not merely the Suspension, of the Driver's License for at least 1 year, with no possibility of Appeal. Part of that "habitual offender" status is the additional legal requirement that a person with a 2nd DUI within 7 years be Court Ordered into some kind of Counseling and/or Treatment. And let's be clear; the Law REQUIRES Counseling or Treatment, it does not merely suggest it.

Continue reading "Staying out of Jail in a 2nd Offense DUI Case in Metro-Detroit" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining the question "Do I need a Lawyer for this?" in a DUI Case. We looked at a few reasons why a person might really consider going it alone, and we examined a few risks to going into a DUI case unrepresented. In this 2nd part of the article, we'll take a closer look at what a good, qualified DUI Lawyer brings to the table in a DUI case, and why not having that kind of help places someone at a distinct disadvantage. We left off examining the role of the PSI (Pre-Sentence Investigation) and the mandatory Alcohol Assessment and how the outcome of those processes essentially results in the "blue-print" for what's going to happen to someone in a DUI Case.

If a person can have the help of a Lawyer who knows every facet of the PSI process, and fundamentally knows what specific information is being sought in an Alcohol Assessment Test, and how to score as low on it as possible, then what will happen to them in a DUI Case will be much better (meaning lenient), all other factors aside, than would be the case if they tried it alone.

The Alcohol Assessment Tests all focus on five "traits" or "markers" used in identifying an actual or potential alcohol problem:

1. Biological History,

2. Social Comment,

3. Memory Integrity,

4. Social Conflict, and

5. Effects Threshold.

Learning the meaning and application of these terms is the first step in preparing to produce a good (or low) score on whichever test is administered. And a good DUI Lawyer will have an active, working knowledge of these principles, and be in a position to teach the Client. Unfortunately, too few of those who style themselves as DUI Lawyers know the first thing about any of this. This should be a important consideration as someone "shops" around for a Lawyer.

In terms of "outcomes," a person who is properly prepared (and in my Office, this takes about 2 hours) for an Alcohol Assessment Test will usually be able to score the lowest number of points possible. There will always be some points assessed, because one of the questions asked by any test is whether or not the person taking it has ever been Arrested for any Alcohol-Related Traffic Offense. You already know the answer to that one.

What's more, some of the questions are "better" answered in a way that seems counter-intuitive. In other words, the answer that might first appear to be "common sense" may, in fact, add points to a person's score. These tests are designed to diagnose either an actual or potential alcohol problem in someone who might be very resistant to that idea. In other words, these tests take into account that a person may try to "fool" it.

Continue reading "Do I Really Need a Lawyer for a DUI in Metro-Detroit? - Part 2" »

As a DUI Lawyer, I get calls on a daily basis from people who've recently been Arrested for a Drinking and Driving Offense. One goal of the Drunk Driving section of this blog has been to address the questions that I am frequently asked. Lately, and no doubt because of the tight economy, a number of people have candidly asked "Do I need a Lawyer for this?" This article, divided into 2 parts, will examine that question.

Rather than go in the predicable direction of listing all the things that can go wrong without a Lawyer, I thought we'd start by looking at a few aspects of a typical DUI case that can actually work out favorably even without Legal Representation. Then, we'll examine exactly what a good DUI Lawyer can and will do in every case to make the outcome better than if a person had gone forward unrepresented by a Lawyer.

For the uninitiated, even the steps in a DUI Case are mysterious. In practice, however, many of those who get to the point of asking whether or not they can proceed without a Lawyer are generally smart individuals who have done their homework. They've often read all kinds of articles (including mine) about DUI's, and are somewhat familiar with the steps in a typical DUI case. Here are a few things they often learn that supports their idea of going it alone:

1. Most DUI cases are resolved by a Plea Bargain, and without any kind of Trial.

2. Some Prosecutors will not restrict the offer of a Plea Bargain to only those individuals with a Lawyer.

3. Virtually no one winds up doing Jail time in a 1st Offense DUI case.

Looking at those facts alone, the idea of spending a few thousand dollars on a Lawyer might change from an automatic response after a DUI Arrest, to something that needs a bit of consideration before a decision is made.

In terms of risks in proceeding unrepresented, let's look at a few:

1. Some Prosecutors will not offer the same quality Plea Bargain, if any, to an unrepresented person.

2. A non-Lawyer might miss a critical problem in the Evidence that could be trouble for the Prosecutor's case.

3. The Judge may not be very enthused dealing with someone choosing to "play Lawyer."

These considerations are enlightening, but do not answer the question "Do I need a Lawyer for this?"

Continue reading "Do I Really Need a Lawyer for a DUI in Metro-Detroit? - Part 1" »

This is the final article in my series about DUI Cases in local, Macomb County District Courts. I have saved this Court for last because, in all truth, it's about the toughest of all Macomb County District Courts on DUI cases.

Located on 11 Mile Road, at Jefferson, the St. Clair Shores (or, as its commonly called, the "Shores") District Court is run by 2 Judges, Cragen Oster and Mark Fratarcangeli. From my perspective, as a veteran DUI Lawyer with over 20 years' experience, these Judges represent the "younger" and more modern trend. Technologically savvy, this is not the same 40th District Court of a decade earlier.

Both Judges are the very definition of fairness and kindness. Even though this Court tends to hit a DUI Defendant harder than most in the County, you'll NEVER meet anyone who claims either of these Judges treated them unfairly, or was anything less that kind and polite.

Judge Craigen Oster has an ability to really converse with those who come before him. And he does that. Rather than just "pronounce" a Sentence, or simply tell a Defendant "This is what I'm going to do," Judge Oster tries to engage the person in some dialogue in the hopes of having them come to a better understanding of the need to change their behavior to avoid further problems. Ask anyone who has had him as their Judge, and they'll inevitably say that he's "a nice guy."

Judge Mark Fratarcangeli is equally "a nice guy." However, he is a strong believer in being proactive in alcohol and drug cases. Perhaps more than any other Judge anywhere, he has a stronger "nose" to sniff out BS. In other words, he's heard it all, but in a very careful and practical way, tends to operate in the belief that, whatever a person says, or promises, its what they ultimately do that matters. In that regard, he embodies the old adage that "the proof is in the pudding."

And this is partly what I meant when I noted these Judge's are more part of a "modern trend." After all is said and done, I am a DUI Lawyer. I help people facing DUI's get out of that bad situation with as little grief as possible. This means I will always find a more lenient outcome, or one with less "stuff" like Classes, Counseling and Testing, to be better. To me, the less that happens to a DUI Defendant, the better.

Continue reading "St. Clair Shores DUI cases - the 40th District Court" »

In this 8th, and next-to-last article in my series about DUI cases in local, Macomb County Courts, we'll take a look at the 38th District Court in Eastpointe. Formerly a "Municipal" (meaning part-time) Court, the caseload in Eastpointe had long ago grown to the point that a full-time District Court was needed.

Since this article is an overview of the Court, rather than the DUI process in general, anyone seeking more information about DUI's should read the Drunk Driving section of this blog, and scroll down, past the local Macomb County Court ratings, and read those articles which apply to their situation.

Located on Nine Mile Rd., the 38th District Court anchors the southernmost part of Macomb County. Although it may be a bit away from the County seat in Mt. Clemens (where my Office is located), the Eastpointe Court is solidly "Macomb County," and that's a good thing.

Elected to the Bench in 2009, the Court is headed by Judge Carl Gerds. Like Judge William Hackel in the 42-2 District Court in New Baltimore, this guy is a gift. Judge Gerds is a "real guy" in every sense of the word, and you couldn't find a someone with a bad thing to say about him if you spoke to every person on the planet. Intelligent, and personable, Judge Gerds took the Bench after a long and successful career as a Private Lawyer. His down-to-earth approach allows him to speak to those Appearing before him as real, regular people. In other words, he'll never "talk down" to anyone.

Judge Gerds, like Judge LeDuc in the 42-1 District Court in Romeo, tends to be "fatherly" in his approach to DUI Defendants. This means that beyond being intelligent and nice, but firm, he actually and obviously cares about those that come before him.

His kindness, however, should not be confused with any lack of resolve. Anyone who Violates a term of his Probation will get a quick lesson in Jail etiquette.

In a 1st Offense DUI, Jude Gerds, like most of the Judges that make being a Macomb County Lawyer such a plus, is more than willing to give anyone a break and chalk things up to a misjudgment. This means a 1st time DUI Offender can, if their case is handled properly, not only avoid Jail, but either avoid Probation altogether, or at least avoid difficult "Probation from Hell" and even wind up on Non-Reporting Probation.

2nd Offense DUI's are not quite so easy. When a person appears before Judge Gerds for a DUI 2nd Offense, they had better have been adequately prepared by their Lawyer before they ever even walk into Court. If that's done, however, a DUI 2nd can be worked out to not only avoid Jail, but to keep the terms of any Probation manageable.

Continue reading "Eastpointe DUI Cases - the 38th District Court" »

In this 7th of my 9-part series about DUI Cases in local, Macomb County District Courts, we'll turn our attention to the County's largest District Court, the 37th District Court in Warren. We'll also include a look at the 37th District Court's "outpost" in the City of Centerline. Because the same Judges as the Warren Court staffs it, the Centerline Court is basically the same thing in a smaller, different building.

Any discussion of the Warren Court must begin by noting how busy it is. While every other Court in Macomb County has a parking lot, the Warren Court has a parking structure. Usually, the busier a place, the less efficient it is. Not so in Warren. Despite its huge caseload, this Court maintains the feel, at least for those of us local, Macomb County Attorneys, of a much smaller community Court.

There are 4 Judges in Warren, and despite being rather diverse in personality type, they are, as a group, amongst the nicest around. You will not find a Macomb County DUI Lawyer who has a bad thing to say about handling DUI Cases in Warren. Except for the fact that, because of the large caseload, things can, understandably, get bogged down a bit (someone has to be first, and someone last...), this Court is always amongst every Lawyer's favorite. But it's also a great place to be, if you have to be anywhere, to deal with a DUI. And as I've noted before, my ratings in this series is based upon how I'd feel as a DUI Defendant, and not as a Lawyer, if I had to face a DUI in any particular Court. In other words, there are Courts I can deal with that are efficient and pleasant and prompt, but aren't so easy on the Client. That's great for me, but I'm paid to take care of the Client, so it's how easy or tough things are for them that is the measure of my ratings.

Anyone facing a DUI, whether in Warren, Centerline, or anywhere else, should scroll through the Drunk Driving section of my Blog, past the Local Court information, and read the articles that are relevant to them.

Let's take a look at the 4 Judges of the 37th District Court:

Continue reading "DUI Cases in Warren and Centerline - the 37th District Court" »

As I continue this series about DUI cases in local, Macomb County District Courts, we'll turn our attention to the cities of Roseville and Fraser. All DUI cases brought in either Roseville or Fraser are heard and handled in the 39th District Court on Gratiot, in Roseville.

Getting a DUI is no fun. Anyone facing one should take the time to at least read my other articles about Drunk Driving. Winding up in a hard-line, unsympathetic Court only feels like having insult added to injury. And while there is no way to turn back the hands of time and undo a DUI Arrest, at least having the case land in the 39th District Court is the first light at the end of the tunnel. This is about as pleasant and decent a Court as you'll find anywhere.

There are 3 Judges presiding in the 39th District Court. They are far from being clones of each other, but despite their differences, there is really no reason to prefer any one Judge over another. In other words, their Sentences in DUI cases are pretty well consistent, and pretty fair, all things considered.

Judge Cathy Steenland has been on the Bench for about 8 years. In that time, she has proven to be one of the most capable Judges when it comes to relating to and speaking candidly with those that appear before her. Her temperament is always favorable. Sure, there is always some moron who can test a Judge's patience to the limit, but once that person has been dealt with, Judge Steenland has an unmatched ability to clear her head and smile at the next person up. And in that regard, you'll never meet anyone who claims to have been treated harshly, or unfairly by her.

Part of that ability to speak candidly, however, is the ability to call someone when they are shoveling the B.S. her way. Judge Steenland's pleasant disposition is not a product of naivete. Instead, she converses with those in front of her, and usually passes down a Sentence that seems more the product of an agreement between her and the Defendant rather than some Royal Decree read to some poor subject.

For all of that though, as with most Judges, any breaks handed out need to be appreciated, and "earned" in the sense that the Defendant stays out of trouble while on Probation. Pick up a new case while on Probation, or start testing positive for Alcohol or Drugs, and you'll get a kind smile along with a Jail Sentence.

It is possible, if things are done right, to avoid Reporting Probation, or even any kind of Probation at all, in a 1st Offense DUI. That's not to say that such a deal is out there for everyone, but it can be worked out in the right cases.

Continue reading "Facing a DUI in Roseville or Fraser - the 39th District Court" »

In this installment of my series about DUI in local, Macomb County District Courts, we'll turn to the 42nd District Court 1st Division in Romeo. Handling DUI cases from Armada, Armada Township, Bruce Township, Memphis, Ray Township, Richmond, Richmond Township, Romeo and Washington Township, this Court is most often simply referred to as "Romeo." Given the laundry list of Municipalities that in covers, we'll adopt that abbreviation. Thus, when we talk about the "Romeo" Court, we mean the 42-1 District Court in Romeo, but can be referring to a case arising in any of the Cities or Townships mentioned above.

Depending on where you live, this Court can either be really local, or really far. Located on 33 Mile Rd., it represents the northern-most reaches of geographic Macomb County. The Court itself is rather modern. The Court Staff is friendly, and really brings to mind a less big-city, and a more helpful, small-town type of character.

The Presiding Judge, Denis LeDuc, came to the Bench as a long-time veteran Macomb County Lawyer. Smart and hardworking, Judge LeDuc's intelligence and work ethic is only exceeded by his actual concern about those who appear before him. This man really wants to help people.

For anyone facing a DUI, that can represent either side of the coin, and be either a good thing, or a bit of a pain.

If a person is properly prepared and represented in a DUI case, it is possible to emerge from this Court, at least in a 1st Offense Case, with only the payment of Fines and Costs, and no Probation or any other kind of follow-up. On the other hand, a person not well represented or prepared, or whose case presents difficult circumstances (like being a DUI 2nd Offense), may wind up on some rather intense Probation, and be subject to Classes, Treatment, and Alcohol and/or Drug Testing ranging from infrequently to almost daily.

Like most Judges, Judge LeDuc tends to follow the written Recommendation of the Probation Department. In other blog articles, I have explained the DUI process in detail, so here it will have to suffice to simply observe that anyone facing a DUI must, prior to being Sentenced by the Judge, undergo a mandatory Alcohol Assessment Test. This is required by Michigan Law, and is administered by the Probation Department for whatever Court is Hearing the case. As part of this process, the Probation Department schedules an interview with the person, and collects some rather detailed biographical information about them. At some point there is both an in-person interview, as well as the taking of the actual Alcohol Assessment Test. This is a written test, which is "graded" by a numerical score. The higher a person scores, the worse they've done, whereas the lower they score, the better for them.

Continue reading "DUI in Armada, Armada Township, Bruce Township, Memphis, Ray Township, Richmond, Richmond Township, Romeo or Washington Township - The 42-1 District Court in Romeo" »

The 41A District Court in Shelby Township will be the subject of this third article in my series about DUI cases in local, Macomb County District Courts. There are two 41A District Courts: The subject of this article, in Shelby Township, and it's counterpart, in Sterling Heights. The Shelby Division Hears cases arising in Utica, Macomb, and, of course, Shelby Township.

As a Lawyer who handles DUI cases there on a regular, ongoing basis, I know this Court as well as anyone, and certainly count it amongst my favorite. To be clear about that, as a DUI Attorney, I have a greater liking for those Courts where the outcome is more favorable (meaning more lenient) for my Client. This is definitely one of those Courts.

Located in a building much too small for its needs, the Shelby Court has been the subject of a rumored new building for years. Overseeing this Court is Judge Douglas Shepherd. Judge Shepherd was elected to the bench a number of years ago, upon the retirement of longtime Judge Herman Campbell. Judge Shepherd probably takes the cake in terms of being a nice man. Having been in Private Practice before becoming a Judge, and having done essentially what I do, Judge Shepherd understands the basic expectation involved in hiring a DUI Lawyer: "I will pay your Fee, and you go and make things better for me." More quiet than boisterous, it isn't hard to imagine him having pursued a career in ministry. In DUI cases, however, his forgiveness is earned, not just granted.

Judge Shepherd, like most Macomb County District Court Judges, actually requires very little of a 1st time DUI Offender who gets Probation. In fact, he pretty much expects nothing more of a DUI 1st Offender than staying out of trouble. Don't get in any more trouble, and all will be well.

A DUI Defendant who Violates his Probation, however, especially by picking up another charge, particularly another DUI charge (and that happens more than you think), will absolutely get locked up.

Despite that, a 1st, and even a 2nd Offense DUI case can be resolved quite favorably in this Court, meaning no Jail. But there's more to any DUI case than just avoiding Jail. Getting slammed with an endless diet of Classes, Counseling, Community Service, Reporting, Testing, and the like can wear a person down rather quickly. In the 41A Shelby Court, very much like in the New Baltimore District Court, most of these annoying and inconvenient consequences can be avoided if the right steps are taken.

In terms of Fines and Costs, the 41A Shelby Court is close to the middle-of-the-road, perhaps even a bit more toward the less, rather than the more expensive side.

In a 1st Offense DUI, it is possible, with some good work, to avoid any kind of Classes, Counseling, and even Probation. In a 2nd Offense DUI, and again, with the case handled properly and the right steps taken, it's possible to limit the fallout to little more than a year's Reporting Probation.

Continue reading "DUI in Shelby Twp., Utica, or Macomb Twp. - The 41-A District Court Shelby Division" »

In this second article in my series about DUI in Macomb County District Courts, we'll be turning our attention to the 42-2 District Court in New Baltimore. Often referred to by Lawyers and those in the Legal community simply as "New Baltimore," the 42-2 District Court handles cases arising in New Baltimore, Chesterfield Township, Lenox Township, and New Haven.

Since this article is about the Court, anyone seeking more information about the DUI process should read those articles in the Drunk Driving section of my Blog which are relevant to their situation.

Located in another beautiful new building, this multi-jurisdiction Court is presided over by Judge William Hackel III. If the name sounds familiar, it should. His Father was longtime Macomb County Sheriff William Hackel, and was succeeded by his brother, Mark Hackel, who will become the County Executive on January 1, 2011.

Judge Hackel was appointed to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of former Judge Paul Cassidy. I have to admit that when I heard the name of the new Judge, I wondered if he might not be a bit too pro-law enforcement. Deciding to keep an open mind, I entered his Court that first time hoping for a fair shake.

I have left that Court every time since grateful for whatever alignment of the stars precipitated Judge Hackel's appointment. To be blunt, this guy is awesome. If he's pro-anything, it's pro-fairness. You'd have better luck finding Elvis alive and well rather than anyone who has a bad thing to say about this Judge. Beyond being kind, and fair, his approach from the Bench is that of a regular guy. He talks to people like people, not things, or merely "Defendants." While clearly a highly intelligent man, Judge Hackel feels no need to flex his intellectual muscle merely for show. He is truly a rare bird in combining such assets.

On top of that, this Court generally imposes the most reasonable Fines and Costs anywhere in Macomb County

That's not to say he's any kind of pushover. He'll give anyone a fair break. But if you wind up walking out of his Court on Probation, and come back in for a Violation, you'll be led out the back door, just as you'd expect.

In DUI cases, Judge Hackel embodies the general approach of most Macomb County Judges that a 1st Offense can be as much a lapse in Judgment as anything else. In 2nd Offense cases, he likewise adopts the position that such a situation is generally evidence of a drinking problem. Rather than just toss someone in Jail, however, if the Defendant and Lawyer take the right steps, Jail can be avoided.

In the right case, this Court can produce what a 1st time DUI Defendant would consider the very best outcome possible. I have handled cases where the final outcome was the imposition of ONLY fines and costs, with no Probation or anything else required. No one ever walks out of this Court feeling that they were (at least undeservedly) "hammered."

Final Verdict: The Very Best Detroit-area Court in which to face a DUI

If I was facing a DUI, and knowing what I know, here's how I'd rate the 42-2 District Court from 1 to 5, with 1 being the worst, and 5 being the best:

5.0 for a First Offense.

5.0 for a Second Offense.

This is the first in a series of DUI articles focusing on Macomb County District Courts. To begin, I think it's fitting for me to explore my "home" Court, the 41B District Court, which handles cases arising in Clinton Township, Harrison Township, and Mt. Clemens.

Housed in a beautiful new building and staffed by 3 Judges, Sebatian Lucido, Linda Davis, and as of Jauary 1, 2011, Carrie Fuca, the 41B District Court is a model of efficiency. For those facing a Drunk Driving (DUI), this is a solidly "middle of the road" Court, being neither especially lenient, nor overly harsh.

On the other hand, the 41B District Court tops them all in terms of being expensive. Fines and Costs here are always on the high end. No one gets out of this Court inexpensively. Given that it's not a particularly "harsh" Court, and given the admirable level of consistency in that regard, I think it's better to pay a little more and walk out the front door after a DUI, rather than get a great deal on the Fines and Costs, along with some time in Jail to savor that bargain.

As a DUI Attorney, I am lucky to have the 41B District Court as my "home" Court. I'm often in this Court 3 times a week, so my observations about it are based upon considerable experience. Frankly, if a person is unlucky enough to get a Drunk Driving, having the case land here is at least a decent break.

Judge Sebastian Lucido worked in Private Practice, like me, before being appointed to the Bench. Quick-witted and very intelligent, his natural disposition is overwhelmingly kind, and it is obvious to anyone paying attention that he tries very hard, and is uniformly successful at being fair. He is quick to give someone a break. This is a bonus for anyone facing a DUI. In 1st Offense DUI cases, he is always open to the possibility that a person has simply fallen victim to a lapse in good judgment. In Second Offense DUI Cases, he won't buy that excuse (nor will any Judge, for that matter), but he is similarly receptive to working with someone who is ready to address their problem and take care of getting themselves on the straight and narrow. This means that if the right steps are taken, Jail can be avoided.

Judge Linda Davis was a Macomb County Prosecutor before being appointed to the Bench. She was, in that role, always firm, but fair. Her appointment to the Bench was made at a time when the 41B District Court had been having problems. She came in to clean things up, and beyond doing that in short order, she was able to transform the Court into one of, if not the most efficient Courts in the County. Perhaps her biggest attribute is that solid sense of fairness. She is tough, and not in the sense that she is harsh, but rather that she will tell it like it is. She has the ability to assess a situation involving alcohol or drugs, quicker and more accurately than any other Judge around, She will accept no BS, and if presented with it, will call the person on it. Her raw intelligence would make her an ideal candidate for any important position at a national level. It takes some work, but even in 2nd Offense DUI cases, a person can walk out the front door of her Courtroom, and not be taken away through the back.

Continue reading "DUI Cases in Clinton Township, Harrison Township, and Mt. Clemens - 41B District Court" »

In the part 1 of this article, we began our examination of what a person facing a DUI will be experiencing form the point of being released from Jail right up through the point of going to Court. We'll pick up from there, covering what happens at Sentencing and the inevitable consequence any DUI Driver will face, as well as what can be done to get the least amount of consequences possible.

Obviously, the 1st goal is to stay out of Jail. That's usually not a problem, with the only exception being, in some cases, the 48th District Court in Bloomfield Hills. Beyond that however, there can be a million things a person is ordered to do, and not do, and limiting those things is the whole goal of preparing someone for the PSI and the legally required alcohol screening test. I have noted before that almost everyone facing any criminal Charge, DUI included, will say that they'll do anything to stay out of Jail. I have no doubt each and everyone one of them means that, at the time they say it. Then, later, as the case concludes, and once their Lawyer has worked it our where they don't go to Jail, they are left to deal with the Judge's order to do this and that, and not do other things.

It doesn't take long for a person placed on Probation to start NOT liking all the "do this and do that" stuff, and to resent the "don't do" these things part of the deal. It's about that time they'll utter the most famous words said in so many Criminal cases, yet never in the Courtroom itself: "This is bull$***!"

And I can understand that feeling. That's why doing so well BEFORE a person gets Sentenced by the Judge is so important. Thus, preparing for the PSI is what produces results in DUI cases that aren't dismissed on some technicality. The goal of all that time spent preparing the Client for the PSI and the alcohol assessment is to avoid as many of those "This is bull$***!" consequences as possible.

There are, however, certain consequences that occur in every 1st Offense DUI case. Almost everyone dealing with this charge, whether they ultimately Plead Guilty to OWI or the less severe Impaired Driving Charge, will attend something called a VIP, or Vicitm Impact Panel. This is put on my MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). Some people will also be required to attend something like an Alcohol Awareness Class. This is far less likely in Macomb County, and most of Wayne County than it is in Oakland County.

Continue reading "Dealing with a 1st Offense DUI (OWI) Case in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County - Part 2" »

This article will be about what really happens when a person gets a 1st Offense OWI (DUI). I have plenty of articles about the legal and strategic considerations involved in dealing with this charge in the Drunk Driving section of this Blog. Beyond that, there are plenty of other sites that tout the possibility of challenging every bit of evidence obtained and every step taken in a DUI case (for the price of a King's Ransom) in the hope that the whole case can be dismissed. Given the statistical unlikelihood of that, I thought it's time to talk about what the person facing the DUI can really expect to go through. Again, this article will focus much less on the legal implications, opting instead to examine the practicalities and realities that lie ahead.

The reader facing a DUI has undoubtedly dealt with a number of these realities so far: Being put in the Police car, being taken to Jail, taking the Breathalyzer test, undergoing the Booking and Printing, and finally being released. From there, most people have to go and get their car back.

Most of the time, unless there is a sober person in the car with a valid License who can drive it away, the Police will have the DUI Driver's car towed to an impound yard. In some cases, the County Prosecutor will put what can essentially be called a "hold" on the car, and sets a price for the Driver to get it back. When that happens in Macomb County, for example, the fee is usually $900 in a 1st Offense DUI, and $1800 in a 2nd Offense DUI. Even when there is no Prosecutor's "hold" to deal with, there will be a towing and storage charge that needs to be paid to get the car back.

Of course, those first few hours back at home are stressful. Your Driver's License has been taken, and instead you have this "paper License" called a Michigan Temporary Driving Permit. The car is in the driveway or garage with a paper plate instead of the old metal plate. If it isn't, it's sitting in some storage yard waiting to be picked up. When there's no Prosecutor's "hold" on the car, storage charges accumulate by the day. The location of the car is usually indicated in the papers the Driver receives from the Police upon their release.

There are plenty of those papers, too. Usually, but not always, a person is given a Ticket (Citation) for there DUI. Then there's this large, pink sheet that looks like a big store receipt called an "Evidence Ticket" that was generated by the Breathalyzer machine.

If a person refused to take a Breath Test, they most likely will have had their blood drawn. In those cases, they're sent home with a copy of the Warrant signed by a Judge or Magistrate allowing their blood to be taken, and another paper called an "Officers Report of Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test."

Continue reading "Dealing with a 1st Offense DUI (OWI) Case in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County - Part 1" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our general overview of 2nd Offense DUI's and some of the considerations involved in this type of case. In part 2, we continued that examination. Here, in part 3, we'll conclude with a discussion of Court costs and other, related fees, and take a look at how the emotional and psychological aspects of a 2nd Offense charge can be viewed either with optimism, or pessimism, and how being ready, willing and able to do some legwork can have such a significant impact on making the outcome of such a case much better.

It should come as no surprise that, beyond legal Fees, this will cost a lot. And here's where I have to be honest about my feeling on the matter: Oh well. We all have money issues. If I had more than enough to need to work, I'd be somewhere warm, managing investment accounts under a palm garden, sipping Sweet Tea and listening to the gentle crash of the ocean waves. But I'm here, and not there, and neither is the person facing a 2nd Offense. We all have to do what we have to do, and if you're facing a 2nd Offense DUI, paying a lot of money is part of that.

Some people take a bit of stress off themselves and just accept this, while others will rant on about how it's a great big conspiracy on the part of the Court and the Government to make money. In the end, it really doesn't matter what it is, because a person has no choice, anyway.

Those costs are significant. If a 1st Offense seemed expensive, wait and see how this goes. Fines and costs can easily be double that of a 1st Offense. The Driver Responsibility Fees WILL be double, racking in at $1000 per year, for 2 years. Probation will likely be longer, and will almost certainly be Reporting, which will also cost a nice chunk of cash, unless the person lives, or moves out-of-state. There will be Counseling and/or Treatment. Guess who pays for that?

Now I'm not suggesting anyone can "buy" their way out of a 2nd Offense DUI, but NOT being able to pay fines and costs, and otherwise coming to Court with empty pockets will only complicate things. Here's where another bit of honesty, as opposed to salesman's diplomacy, is needed on the part of the Lawyer: If YOU were the Judge, and you sat on that Bench and saw DUI after DUI, with lots of them being 2nd Offenses, how interested would you be in dealing with all the excuses why a person cannot pay? Part of that Judge's mentality becomes, at least with time, the whole notion that "If you're going to play, you've got to pay." It's really that "oh well" sentiment all over again.

Now, I do understand that not everyone can satisfy the financial obligations caused by a 2nd Offense quite so easily. But a Lawyer has to do more than just go in and ask the Judge "can my Client have some time to pay?" After all, the Client can do that on their own. Instead, I have a rather simple approach; if you pay me, I'll help you get time to pay them. We might need to sit down and actually sketch out a budget to hand the Judge, but if that's what it takes, then that's what it takes.

This pretty much wraps up the "Legal" considerations involved in a 2nd Offense DUI case. There are also a few very important emotional and psychological aspects to these cases that are just as important.

Continue reading "OWI 2nd Offense in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 3" »

In part 1 of this article, we began our general overview of 2nd Offense DUI's. We looked at staying out of Jail, evaluating the evidence, and Legal Fees. In part 2, we'll pick up with an examination of the concept of a legal "Consultation," finding the right Lawyer, License Consequences (meaning mostly License Revocations) and Counseling and Treatment options.

Like every Lawyer out there, I do consultations. Mine, however, are done on the phone. I can spend 15 or 20 minutes with someone on the phone and get a good feel for them, their case, and what issues it presents. Likewise, they can get a feel for me, and my approach. What I like best about a phone consultation is the somewhat anonymous ability for either party to not feel any obligation or pressure beyond that phone conversation. In other words, if I don't like you, or I think you're a kook, or if you don't like me, or think I'm whatever, then we need not go any further. We can say "goodbye" and hang up. I have been told, many times, by Lawyers who do the "in person" consultation that it has a good "closing rate," and that I should change my approach to do it that way. In other words, the idea is that once you get them in the office, you should be able to get them to sign up.

I don't work that way. I could explain that all day, but in the end, that's just not me. Instead, after speaking with someone, if they feel I'm the Lawyer for them, and I think I can help them, then they can either let me transfer them to one of my Staff members to schedule an appointment, or, if I'm not in the Office and am returning the call (which is the usual scenario), then I'll tell them to call my Office and schedule an appointment.

I have written several articles about finding the right Lawyer, and I urge the reader to review them. One thing I'm sure about is that, as much as I might spark some curiosity about me with all these articles, I will also convince some people that I'm not the Lawyer for them, which is also a good thing. I have no illusions that I'm the Lawyer for everyone. I speak frankly and often use the more pedestrian voice of my upbringing. That's me. In fact, the whole point of this is that finding the right Lawyer for you takes some time, and is a process. Even if the first Lawyer with whom you speak turns out to be the one for you, that should become clear only after you've weeded through a number of others with whom you've spoke, or whose articles you've read. More than anything else, you have to like the person you're going to hire.

Finding the right Lawyer, then, really involves a number of considerations.

Lets' assume the reader has already found the right Lawyer. The reader is well aware that the maximum possible Jail penalty for their 2nd Offense DUI is 1 year n the County Jail, and that, unless their case is being heard in the 48th District Court, with some good legal work, they can usually avoid dong any of that Jail time.

Continue reading "OWI 2nd Offense in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 2" »

In previous articles, I have examined many different aspects of DUI cases, including some specific issues relative to 2nd Offense cases. In looking over those articles, however, I noticed that we have yet to conduct a more general overview of the whole 2nd Offense Drunk Driving subject. That's what we'll be doing in this article. We'll look at consequences, defenses, Fees, Lawyers, Counseling and Treatment, and the whole gamut of things a person will have to deal with if they are charged with a DUI.

This article will be broken into 3 parts, with part 2 being the longest because I prefer to break off at a logical stopping point.

My Practice not only involves a lot of 2nd Offense DUI cases, but also, because of my specialty as a License Restoration Lawyer, deals with the after-effects and consequences of those DUI's. As often as not, a person who hires me to help with their Driver's License Restoration is someone whom I did not represent in their 2nd DUI case.

Likewise, I am often called upon to represent a former Client in their 2nd DUI. Usually, that first conversation involves some mention, on their part, of the words "embarrassed" or "stupid." The next thing that comes up is an anxious, yet understandable concern about "what's going to happen to me?" Underlying all of that, of course, is the ultimate question: Am I going to Jail?

And the good news is that, with some focused, good work, the answer to that can question can almost always be "no." Things are different in the 48th District Court in Bloomfield Hills, where a 2nd Offense DUI, unless it is dismissed on some technicality or "beaten" at Trial, will ALWAYS result in a Jail Sentence. Not to make light of the situation, but if you're facing a 2nd offense in that Court, unless you have a plan to beat the case somehow, you'd better bring a toothbrush.

This does not mean, however, that a person facing a 2nd Offense charge is automatically not going to go to Jail. Instead, as I noted, it means that with the proper work from BOTH the Client and their Lawyer, Jail can be avoided. In other words, a 2nd Offense DUI is kind of like a heart attack; prompt and proper attention to the situation can make all the difference in the world. Doing nothing, or just waiting to see what happens will always mean things turn out worse.

Let's talk specifics: A 2nd Offense DUI is a Misdemeanor Criminal Offense. By Law, it carries a maximum Jail penalty of up to 1 year in the County Jail.

Continue reading "OWI 2nd Offense in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 1" »

In part 3 of this article, we continued our examination of coming to grips with, or Denying the existence of an alcohol problem in a 2nd Offense DUI.

In this 4th and final installment, we'll recap and summarize our prior analysis, and attempt to put this whole subject in perspective, focusing on, more than anything else, how this process plays out in Court.

At the outset, we observed that, with only RARE exception, anyone facing a 2nd Offense DUI falls squarely into 1 or 3 categories:

1. Those in Denial, or who just don't see a problem (yet),
2. Those who know something is wrong, but think they can learn to control or fix it, and
3. Those who finally have the light switch flipped and really get it.

In my Practice, I can usually be of significant help to those in the third category, who have had the light switch flip. I can work with them to understand the various kinds of Counseling and Treatment options, and help guide them into one which will not wear them down, either emotionally or financially. Because that commitment to Sobriety is usually rather strong at first, we can capitalize on that as we handle their case.

Those in the second group can also be helped quite a bit, but they have to give up control. In fact, it's ironic that The Serenity Prayer, often read in AA, talks about just that; giving up control and accepting those things which a person cannot change:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

It's that passing of the controls to someone else, who knows a lot more about the whole process than does the person facing the Charge, that's necessary in order to produce the best outcome in a 2nd (or any) DUI case. Not to be too cynical, but a person must see and understand that their best thinking got them where they are.

The hope of the Court, and really that of everyone affected by a person's 2nd DUI, is that they will eventually see the light and come to accept that their drinking needs to be put in the past. Simply NOT being adamant that they don't have a problem, while not really a "first step," is at least not a step in the wrong direction, either. We can work with that.

Continue reading "Michigan OWI 2nd Offense and the Issue of a Drinking Problem in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 4" »

In part 1 and part 2 of this article, we examined how a person facing a 2nd Offense DUI can almost always be placed into 1 of 3 categories: Those who "get it," and begin a life of Recovery, those who are starting to "get it" and begin the difficult process of self-examination, and those who just don't "get it," and are in Denial.

In other blog articles, and on my website, I have noted that, whatever happens to anyone, in any DUI case, it is almost always EXACTLY what is recommended by the Court's Probation Department as a result of the Legally required Alcohol Evaluation.

If you're facing a 2nd Offense, then you'll surely remember this. By Law, before a Judge can Sentence someone for a DUI, they must undergo that Mandatory Alcohol Evaluation. This is a written test which is given a numerical grade, or score. The higher the score, the more likely it is that a person has, or will develop an alcohol problem. The lower the score, the lower that likelihood.

The Probation Department, which administers this test and then writes the Sentencing Recommendation to the Judge, bases that Recommendation upon the person's test score, more than any other factor.

Whatever kind of Counseling, Rehab or Treatment is given is usually exactly what was Recommended by the Probation Department.

Interestingly, it has always been important for a person to score as low as possible on this test, no matter what the other circumstances of their case. In other words, even though the Law presumes an alcohol problem in a 2nd or 3rd Offense case, there is simply no benefit to going in and racking up a bunch of points that make that problem look all the worse.

Thus, both the Client and I have to walk on both sides of the fence: Treating the case as the moment of epiphany and the prime catalyst for addressing their alcohol problem, or at least beginning to recognize that problem, and making sure that problem is NOT seen as any more severe, or deep seated, than it can otherwise be made to look.

Fast-forwarding a bit, when the person is finally standing in front of the Judge to be Sentenced, who do you think is in line to get the best break? Remember, we're talking about 3 kinds of people:

1. Those in Denial, or who just don't see a problem (yet),
2. Those who know something is wrong, but think they can learn to control or fix it, and
3. Those who finally have the light switch flipped and really get it.

Continue reading "Michigan OWI 2nd Offense and the Issue of a Drinking Problem in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 3" »

In part 1 of this article, we began examining how those facing a 2nd Offense DUI either outright recognize they have an alcohol problem, are beginning to sense something is amiss with their drinking, or are just plain in denial regarding their use of alcohol and the problems it creates.

What's all this got to do with a 2nd Offense DUI? More than you might imagine.

Earlier, I noted that except for those very few 2nd Offenders who really do not have an alcohol problem, all the rest fall into 1 of 3 categories: Those who get it, those who are starting to get it, and those who simply don't get it. We began by examining those who seemed to have the light switch flipped, and who suddenly seemed to "get it." Next, we talked about those who seemed to be starting to get it. Whatever their level of discomfort about their drinking, these individuals are struggling with the consequences created by their drinking behavior. Whether they make accommodations, or just plain cover their tracks, there is at least a restless sense that something's not right.

It's those who simply don't get it that help put things in perspective. In the local Detroit area, there isn't a Judge on the Bench who isn't keenly aware of the fact that, statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of DUI 2nd Offenders have a drinking problem. Some Judges will go so far as to outright tell anyone with a 2nd Offense that it is a fact that they have a problem, citing the statistical improbability that they DON'T have a problem as about the same as alien abductions. They say, in short, that "if you're in front of me for a 2nd Offense, you've got a problem. If you think not, then you're about the only one who believes that."

Those who don't get it, and who insist that they're just unlucky, have the almost impossible task of convincing the Judge that they really don't have a problem. It's not a strategy I would use, at least if I wanted to make things better, and not worse.

In essence, this means that getting popped for a 2nd DUI puts a person in the position of being presumed to have a drinking problem. To put it another way, at least as far as standing in front of a Judge is concerned (and nothing else matters nearly as much in a DUI case), it's a foregone conclusion that picking up a 2nd Offense DUI means you have a drinking problem. To argue otherwise is not only an exercise in futility, but quite likely to make things worse.

So who do you think is likely to have it easier? The person who comes to Court, already in the appropriate Counseling or Treatment, and who say's "I'm addressing my problem," the person who says "I think I might have a problem here," or, the one who maintains "I don't have any kind of problem, I'm just unlucky, and used poor judgment in driving that day?"

Continue reading "Michigan OWI 2nd Offense and the Issue of a Drinking Problem in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 2" »

There is nothing good about picking up a 2nd Offense DUI charge anywhere. In fact, depending on where the charge arises, it's fair to say things simply go from bad to worse. This article will focus on those individuals who use that 2nd Offense charge as a life-changing wake up call and start dealing with a drinking problem, and how that can positively affect the outcome of their case. This article will be based upon my 20 years' experience as a DUI Lawyer who has made a nearly lifelong study of Alcoholism and Recovery, and how those concepts are so fundamental to handling DUI cases. It's a long, involved subject, so our discussion of it will be broken into 4 installments.

The exact statistics are debatable, but it is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of people who pick up a 2nd Offense Drunk Driving charge have an alcohol problem. Under Michigan Law, a 2nd Offense DUI within 7 years makes a person a "habitual offender," resulting in additional penalties and mandated alcohol treatment. In other words, the State basically concludes that a person who gets a 2nd OWI within 7 years has an alcohol problem.

Except for the truly rare person facing a 2nd Offense DUI who DOES NOT have an alcohol problem, there are really 3 kinds of people in this situation:

1. Those in Denial, or who just don't see a problem (yet),
2. Those who sense something is wrong, but are struggling to control or fix it, and
3. Those who finally have the light switch flipped and really get it.

I think that most people fall into the 2nd group, those who can no longer deny that there is some kind problem, but who have not yet clearly defined it. These are the people who have had, to some extent or other, that "lingering feeling" I mentioned in discussing those who finally "get it."

At a minimum, most people sitting in jail waiting to be Bonded out on for a 2nd DUI know they "can't do that again." Exactly what that means will be the subject of an internal debate raging inside them. And this provides a convenient stopping off point to discuss what I see, time and time again, as one of the hallmarks of a drinking problem and one of the landmarks of Recovery.

Continue reading "Michigan OWI 2nd Offense and the Issue of a Drinking Problem in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties - Part 1" »

In almost every Drunk Driving case I handle as part of my DUI Practice, the Client will ask about the consequences to their Driver's License. The purpose of this article is to clarify that whatever the consequences in any given DUI case, it is the Michigan Secretary of State, and ONLY the Michigan Secretary of State, that imposes them. In other words, the Court has NOTHING to do with a person's License in a DUI case.

Often, in a DUI case, I am asked if the Judge will "at least" give the Client "some kind of restricted License." I then go on to explain that the Judge cannot Suspend, Revoke, Restrict or otherwise take any action against a person's License in a Drunk Driving case. Many people easily understand that all Licensing actions in a DUI case are exclusively handled by the Secretary of State.

Some people, however, don't quite get it, and very often, that's for a good reason. Prior to the "Habitual Offender" Drunk Driving legislation of 1999, Courts did have jurisdiction over a DUI Driver's License. Thus, a person facing a 1st Offense OUIL (the technical name for a DUI back then), would have their Driver's License Suspended, Restricted of Revoked by the Court in which the DUI charge was pending. The Habitual Offender legislation, which went into effect October 1, 1999, transferred ALL Licensing actions and authority from the Court to the Secretary of State.

Before the Habitual Offender Legislation took effect, when all Licensing consequences in a DUI case were imposed by the Courts, there were still certain, specific Mandatory minimum and maximum Driver's License penalties. Thus, the Law gave the Courts the power to Suspend, Revoke, and/or Restrict a person's License only within a specific, specified range. Even so, the results were all over the board.

In one local Macomb County Court, a certain Judge used to grant a Restricted License in a 1st Offense Impaired (OWVI) case for 6 days per week, 12 hours per day. It didn't matter whether the person worked 14 hours per day, or was on call. Most other Courts would ask a person to specify the earliest time they left in the morning, and the latest they would return home, and grant a Restricted License for that period. A few Courts, noting that someone worked on an "on call basis," would allow them to drive at any time, 24 hours per day, as long as such driving was work-related.

The Habitual Offender legislation of 1999 got rid of all that, and made things simple and uniform. The Law spells out certain specific consequences for each DUI offense. This eliminated any difference in results between two people facing the same charge, no matter which Court or Courts were involved.

Continue reading "OWI in Michigan - The Court and the Driver's License" »

In part 1 of this article we began discussing the concept of Alcohol Assessments, and how I came to realize how very important the results of any Alcohol Assessment test was in terms of the Sentence a person received, particularly in a DUI, where such a test is required by Law. In this second part, we'll pick up right where we left off and continue our examination of the role of the Alcohol Assessment test in DUI and other Criminal cases, and how a person can and should be prepared in order to do as well as possible at this most critical stage.

Now let's be clear about the role of these tests. In a DUI case, for example, the results of whatever test is given is, BY FAR, THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR in determining what kind of Classes, Counseling, Education, or Rehabilitation Services will be ordered for the Defendant. It doesn't matter who you are, where you work, or who you know, if your test score indicates that you have, or are at risk to develop an alcohol problem, you are going to be ordered by the Court into some kind of Counseling or Treatment. End of story.

This means that scoring as well (meaning as low) as possible on this kind of test will have the biggest and best impact on the outcome of a DUI case, short of having the whole thing dismissed. It also means that missing a beat here or there will send you to Classes, Counseling, or Treatment that you might have otherwise been able to avoid.

So that's really the bottom line to all this. After we strip away all the "politically correct" ways to discuss this, the unblemished truth is that if you know how to score as low as possible on one of these tests, then the outcome of your case will be better.

Makers of Radar Detectors will proudly tell you their products are not made for the purpose of defeating any legitimate law enforcement tool, nor are they sold to help people break the law (meaning speed). Instead, the sales pitch involves your right to know if you're being watched.

Ditto for preparing for any kind of Alcohol or Drug Evaluation Test. I'd never suggest anyone lie, or give an untrue answer on one of these tests, but I sure as heck think that you have the right to know how you're answers will be evaluated, and how any particular answer affects your test score. In that regard, you have every right to know what you'll be asked about, and every right to know how your answers will affect the outcome of your DUI (or other) case.

Continue reading " Michigan DUI and the Required Alcohol Assessment Test - Part 2" »

This article will deal exclusively with certain aspects of the Alcohol Assessment, which is required, by Michigan Law, in all DUI cases. Sometimes referred to as an Alcohol Evaluation, or a Substance Abuse Evaluation, this kind of test is often administered in many other kinds of Criminal cases, particularly those involving alcohol or drugs. Like many of my longer articles, it will be broken into 2 parts.

A huge part of my practice involves helping people who are facing a DUI charge. Under Michigan Law, before anyone can be sentenced in a DUI case, they must undergo a mandatory alcohol assessment. This means they take a written alcohol evaluation test. This may be one of many different tests, but whichever is given, the test is graded with a numerical score. Generally speaking, the higher a person scores, the more likely they are to develop, or have an alcohol problem. The lower they score, the less likely they are to develop of have an alcohol problem. If you're thinking "lower is better," then you you're right on track.

I have been hesitant to publish this article out of a concern, misplaced perhaps, that it would appear I'm helping my Clients "cheat." Further consideration led me to overcome that concern by realizing that any Client has a right to know exactly what they will be facing in any case, and as a Lawyer, I have an obligation to be as thorough and knowledgeable as possible about all aspects of a DUI, or any other kind of case I handle. Telling someone what they're going to be asked, and how any particular answer will affect the outcome of their case is better thought of as preparation as opposed to any kind of unfair advantage.

Many years ago, I began to examine and study these Alcohol Evaluation tests. Seeing how the results of any such test was almost always the single most important factor in determining what happened to my Client in a DUI case, I began to see that helping a Client avoid a higher score was a huge factor in producing a successful, or better outcome. This eventually led me to a far more comprehensive study of the whole concept of alcoholism, addiction, and recovery. To say this has been a nearly lifelong interest is an understatement.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI and the Required Alcohol Assessment Test - Part 1" »

In the first part of this article, we examined the steps in a DUI case from Arrest to Pre-Trial. In this installment, we'll pick up at the Trial stage. This assume that any prior Pre-Trials have been unsuccessful in bringing about an agreement to resolve the case.

If there are doubts as to the validity of the Traffic Stop, or the evidence collected, or method of collection, then an Evidentiary Hearing is set where the Defense Lawyer challenges the Stop and the collection of the Evidence, and seeks to have it excluded, or "thrown out." This type of Hearing takes place before any Trial is commenced.

A Trial is either conducted by Jury, or by a Judge sitting without a Jury. This latter proceeding is called a Bench Trial. Often, when it seems that the case will be resolved, one way or another, without the need for an actual Trial, the matter is scheduled for a Bench Trial so that the Arresting Officer, and any other necessary witnesses will be present along with the Prosecutor and Defense Lawyer.

If a case actually goes to Trial, the result of that Trial is called a Verdict. A Verdict in a DUI can either be Guilty, Guilty of a Lesser Charge, or Not Guilty. If a person goes to Trial and beats the case, then the matter is over, period.

Very few DUI cases actually go to Trial. Instead, and as mentioned above, the vast majority of DUI cases are worked out though the Plea Bargaining Process.

If the person enters a Plea, or is found guilty after a Trial, then 2 more dates are set. The first is for the legally required Alcohol Assessment. The second is for the actual Sentencing date.

By Michigan Law, prior to being Sentenced, a person must undergo a mandatory Alcohol Assessment. This is often called a PSI, which means "Pre-Sentence Investigation." The PSI is conducted by the Court's Probation Department in every Court except the 72nd District Court in Marine City, which farms it out to one of a few local Substance Abuse Counseling Programs. This is by far the most important part of any DUI case, because the end result of this process is a written recommendation to the Judge advising him or her what should be done with and to the person who got the DUI. And in almost every case, that recommendation can be considered a blueprint for what the Judge will do.

Continue reading "The Steps in a Michigan Drunk Driving (DUI) Case - Part 2" »

As a DUI Lawyer who also writes this Blog, I have tried to explain how a DUI case works in detail. I think my Drunk Driving section pretty much examines every aspect of a DUI case under a microscope. One thing I haven't done yet, however, is to really just lay out the steps in a typical DUI case without a lot of in-depth examination.

This article will cover the steps anyone facing a DUI will inevitably go through as the case goes from beginning to end. Because of the amount of material we'll be covering, even this somewhat topical review will require the article to be broken into 2 installments.

First, lets begin with what precedes a DUI case. Before a DUI "case" can be made, there must be an Arrest for Drunk Driving. And note that an Arrest for a DUI does not actually begin a "case." The "case" part of things only comes about when that Arrest results in a Court-authorized charge for DUI.

So an Arrest is a necessary prerequisite to a DUI case. Following the Arrest is the trip to the Police Station, and the Breathalyzer (or blood) test. Typically, a person is held in custody until their Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC) is low enough for them to be legally and safely released. If the Police let an intoxicated person post Bond and go home, they would be liable if the person was injured, or injured someone else because of their intoxication.

In most jurisdictions, a person will be released the next day, after either posting a small, interim Bond out of their own money, or having someone come up to the Police Station and post the Bond for them. While most often in the amount of $100 to $300, sometimes a person can be required to put up as much as $500 before the Police will release them.

In these jurisdictions, the Police let the person post a Bond with an understanding that they'll either be contacted by the Court, or have to contact the Court on their own within a specified number of days.

In a minority of jurisdictions, a person is brought before a Judge or a Magistrate the next day for an Arraignment. Arraignment is the very first step in what can be described as making a case "official." At an Arraignment, the Defendant is told exactly what charge or charges are being brought against them, informed of the maximum legal penalties that can be imposed upon them for each charge, advised of their Constitutional Rights, asked how they plead (to which everyone should respond "Not Guilty"), and then have their Bond amount set. This Arraignment can either be done in person, by bringing the person into an actual Courtroom, or by closed-circuit video, where the Jail has the person sit in a "video room." At the conclusion of the Arraignment, the person will either be given their next Court date, and/or will be told that a Notice of that date will be mailed to them.

Continue reading "The Steps in a Michigan Drunk Driving (DUI) Case - Part 1" »

In Part 1 of this article, we had an overview of what it means to get "the least amount of consequences possible" in a DUI case. As we ended that general discussion, I observed that "the least amount of consequences possible" really means "the least amount of consequences possible in your particular case."

In this second part of the article, we'll examine what that specifically means.

As an example, earlier today I handled a DUI for a fellow in an Oakland County District Court. This particular Court is FAR AND AWAY the toughest Court on DUI's in the Metro-Detroit area. It's easily twice as tough as the next toughest Court, at least where I go. The outcome of this case will invariably be different than the outcome of an identical case pending on the other side of Dequindre, in a Macomb County District Court. To put it mildly, a person who got "pounded" in a typical Macomb County District Court would still have far less "consequences" than a person who catches as good a break as possible in the Oakland County District Court where today's case was heard.

Oakland County is generally tougher on DUI's than Macomb, and Wayne County (at least those Courts in which I Practice) can be described as somewhere in the middle. Some Wayne County District Courts are as "lenient" in a DUI as many Macomb County Courts, while others are much more like their Oakland County counterparts. Those are essentially geographic factors.

In any Court with more than one Judge, each will have his or her own perspective on these cases. This means that a case assigned to one Judge may turn out differently than if it had been assigned to another Judge in the same Court.

There are other factors which affect a case, as well. In an earlier article, I examined how a person's Breathalyzer results can affect their case. A person caught with a .12 Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC) will be treated differently (meaning less harshly, which really means "less consequences") than a person caught with a .21 BAC, all other things being equal.

When someone is Arrested for a DUI and has a child under 16 in the car, they are usually charged with Child Endangerment. this ramps things up. If there was an accident involved, things likewise get ramped up a bit. It's the Lawyer's job to turn those lemons into lemonade, and help everyone cool down about the situation.

Can you see how a person with a really high Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC), who had a 12 year old in the car, was involved in an accident, and got popped in a tough Oakland County community will be looking at a very different picture than a person who got caught, driving alone, with a low BAC, in Macomb County?

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - The Least Amount of Consequences Possible in Your Case - Part 2" »

In my DUI Practice, I speak daily with people who have been Arrested and have to deal with Drunk Driving Charges. In most of the DUI articles on this Blog, I have tried to explain the DUI Process, and many of the things that are involved in such a case.

One phrase that comes up quite often is that the person facing the charges will tell me that they want to resolve the case with "the least amount of negative consequences possible." While I think a closer reading of the many articles on this Blog would clearly show that "damage control" is job number one for any Lawyer, I thought that, in this article, we'll discuss that issue alone, and not as an implied subject in a larger discussion.

From my point of view, that's what you hire a Lawyer for in the first place. A Lawyer has a very simple mission in a DUI (or any Criminal Case, for that matter) case: Either get the case thrown out, beat it at Trial, or work it out in the best way possible for the Client. Given that relatively few cases are simply "thrown out" or beaten at Trial, this means that the overwhelming majority of cases will involve some kind of a Plea Bargain, and/or a Sentence Agreement or Recommendation.

Let's be very clear here: Statistically speaking, if you're facing a DUI and you are hoping that some Lawyer can just get the case "thrown out," or that the Police screwed up the Arrest and the Evidence gathering so badly that the case can be easily beaten at trial, you're betting on an extreme long-shot.

In a previous article about How the Rich and Famous Beat DUI Charges, I pointed out that, in fact, they usually don't. The purpose of that article was to demonstrate that even for those with unlimited financial resources to "Lawyer up" and fight every facet of a DUI case, every celebrity that I've heard of who got popped for a DUI wound up cutting a deal. None of them gets the case "thrown out," and none of them winds up being acquitted of the charges after Trial, either. They step up, admit responsibility, and (hopefully) move forward while they put the whole episode behind them.

What does that mean to you, if you're facing a DUI? It means that (again, statistically speaking), absent some bizarre circumstances in your case, you'll be working out a deal to minimize the negative consequences of your case. And that means your Lawyer will be doing damage control.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - The Least Amount of Consequences Possible in Your Case - Part 1" »

At the outset, I'll admit that the tone of this article is sarcastic. My DUI Practice involves handling real-life cases for real-life people. From time to time, I hear about someone having spent a royal fortune in an attempt to "beat" a case, only to wind up "discovering" that the case against them was rock-solid. Then they cut a Plea deal, having spent thousands more than they otherwise would or should have if they had been told, up front, what the real chances were that some over-priced Lawyer could just get the whole thing "thrown out." That makes me mad.

I find it frustrating, at times, to accept that people are far more willing to shell out money for what they want to hear, rather than for what they need to, or ought to, hear. In other words, the appeal of having a DUI case dismissed outright is so strong, that any number of people will plunk down a ton of cash just for the chance to buy into that hope.

So that got me wondering about all those Hollywood Celebrities who seem to get popped every week for DUI. Why is it that for every one I hear about getting arrested, I hear about another being placed on Probation for an earlier arrest?

From what I can tell, they certainly have the money to hire some big-time Lawyer who can challenge the evidence every which way under the sun in an effort to get the case dismissed. And if getting the case dismissed costs only what can be called "pocket change" to them, why would they do anything else?

Because, for a very good reason, the overwhelming majority of DUI cases are resolved by a Plea bargain. Most cases are "solid." For almost every case where some aspect of the DUI process has been held to be unlawful, or legally unsound, there has been a corrective action on the part of the Police to eliminate the problem. The DUI process is designed to comply with the Law. When some aspect of that process is found to not be in compliance, and adjustment is made.

Why do you think we have Breatlayzer tests in the first place? To provide evidence of a person's Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC) at or near the time of their arrest. While there is a certain protocol that must be followed when administering these tests, and while there is a certain "margin of error" inherent in these tests (and every test I've ever heard of, for that matter), those cases which are so profoundly flawed in failing to follow that required protocol, or in which the margin of error, for some reason or another, renders the test results so unreliable, are the exception, and not the rule.

Otherwise, every single celebrity popped for a DUI would just "Lawyer up" and get the case dismissed. But that doesn't happen.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - How the Rich and Famous Beat the Charges" »

In Part 1 of this article, we examined the range of realistic outcomes in a DUI case, particularly a 1st Offense case. In this second part of the article, we'll focus on how and why those outcomes happen, and what can be done to help insure that the most lenient, as opposed to a more severe outcome, is produced.

By Law, prior to the Judge imposing Sentence on a person with a DUI conviction (meaning they've pled to some alcohol-related charge, or were found guilty of one), the person must undergo a mandatory Alcohol Evaluation. This means they take a written test. This test is scored. The score a person gets determines, in essence, what will happen to them. The higher the score, the worse things are, whereas the lower the score, the less likely the person is to have, or to develop, an alcohol problem.

Beyond the test, every Court in the Tri-County area requires that the person also be interviewed by its Probation Department. The whole of this interviewing and testing process is often called a "PSI," or Pre-Sentence Investigation.

The Probation Department then makes a written report to the Judge, to be reviewed for Sentencing, advising what they think, based upon their interview and the person's test score, needs to be or should be done to them. In other words, the Probation Department recommends what the Sentence should be.

As I have noted in numerous places in both my Blog, and on my Website, these "recommendations" are more accurately called "blueprints" for what will happen, because in pretty much every Court, and in every case, what the Judge orders is usually either exactly in line with the recommendation, or darn close to it.

Think of it this way: If the Probation Department said Jane Doe had the potential to develop an alcohol problem, and was currently at the stage where it appeared she is abusing alcohol, and therefore should complete some classes, what do you think the chances are that some Lawyer can come along and convince the Judge that that's baloney, and no classes should be ordered? Do I hear a "zero" anywhere?

Thus, at the point where the Probation Department has made its recommendation, the Lawyer's influence in the way the rest of the case will play out has been reduced to minimal, at best.

So beyond negotiating a Plea Bargain, or getting a Sentence agreement to "no Jail" in a 2nd Offense case, what more can the Lawyer to do? Lots. Let's look at specifics:

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - What Really Happens in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County - Part 2" »

A substantial part of my Practice involves handling DUI cases. In that regard, I have noticed that much of what's said or written about Drunk Driving involves the legal particulars of the Stop, the Arrest, and the Evidence. Beyond that, the next most common topic seems to be staying out of Jail.

I think those two subjects appeal to most people's hopes and fears, more than anything else. What I mean is that suggesting to someone that there is a chance of having the whole case thrown out because of some technicality with the evidence appeals to their hopes. Telling someone they can be kept our of Jail appeals to their fears.

The point of this article is to explain that, at least in the Detroit-area, the vast majority of DUI cases result in neither outcome, and that perhaps a better, more realistic examination would focus on what's likely to happen in most cases. Rather than look at the rather unlikely outcomes that could happen when a person gets an OWI, we'll look at what really happens to the overwhelming majority of those facing such a charge.

Let's sharpen the focus even more: We're are pretty much saying that those who shout "get the case dismissed because of the Traffic Stop...!" and things like "the Breathalyzer machine isn't believable...we can beat this case...!" have an approach that seeks to capitalize on what may or may not exist in a small percentage of cases. Meanwhile, those who shout "I can keep you out of Jail...!" are promising a result that is already the likely outcome of a DUI (at least a 1st Offense, in pretty much every Court in the Detroit-area), even without their help.

What is it that a DUI Lawyer can really do, in most cases, to benefit his or her Client?

The answer, it turns out, is pretty simple: Make things better.

Let's talk about specifics: When a person gets a DUI, all sorts of things go through their mind. Obviously, we've covered 2 of the biggest: "Beating" the case, and staying out of Jail. Beyond that, however, are plenty of other, real life concerns: Will I lose my Driver's License? Will I be sent to Rehab? Will this cost me my job?

It's managing (meaning minimizing) those consequences, except in the unusual case that may be dismissed because of some fatal weakness, that is the honest business of a real-life DUI Lawyer.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - What Really Happens in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County - Part 1" »

As a DUI Lawyer, my focus is on extracting my Client from as much trouble as possible. While Legal Fees are an important issue to both me, and my Client, those fees are just one of several costs involved in a Drunk Driving case. In the same way that a physician generally cannot and does not concern themselves with the associated costs involved in properly treating an ailment, (meaning things like bandages, physical therapy, prescriptions, etc.), a Lawyer does not have a specific price figure available to tell someone how much a DUI will ultimately total once all associated fees and costs are calculated.

It can be generally observed that the better the consequences are managed, the less the whole debacle will cost.

There are a few things that are pretty much written in stone, however, when it comes to the cost of getting popped for a DUI. Here are 2 that top any list:

1. It's going to cost, and it's going to cost a lot. Even if you have been completely and totally wrongfully arrested for a DUI (which is, in itself, not a very common occurrence), just demonstrating that is going to require a substantial Legal Fee.

2. Unless the case is somehow dismissed, or "knocked out," there will be lots of additional costs and fees for about 2 to 3 years to come. They run into the thousands of dollars.

I was motivated to write this article precisely because, as a Drunk Driving Lawyer, my primary concern is to protect my Client from as many potential consequences of a DUI charge as possible. Some of those consequences are purely financial in nature, but others, like going to Jail or getting stuck in some Rehab, are not. Let's examine some of the money consequences of a DUI charge in the following paragraphs.

First, let's assume we're talking about a case that is not so weak that it will be "thrown out," or dismissed for some unlikely reason. Instead, we'll assume that we're talking about the garden variety, "got-pulled over for weaving at 2 a.m." kind of DUI.

The Arrest itself will cost money. Many cities and townships have "cost recovery statutes" that mandate that a person pay back the municipality for the police time, and supplies involved in their arrest, booking, and jailing. These costs can range from $150 to $350.

Getting out of jail the next day will often cost money. Sometimes, a person is let out after someone comes up and posts a $100 "Interim Bond," while in other cases, the person is held until they can be brought before a Judge or Magistrate and have a formal Bond set. These bonds can range from $100 to $750.

Continue reading "Getting a DUI in Michigan - It's Going to Cost a Lot!" »

As a DUI Lawyer, almost every case I handle involves the Client having performed some Field Sobriety Tests before being arrested and charged with the Misdemeanor Offense of DUI. Sometimes, the Client will tell me that they did well on them, but the Police Officer just kept giving them more and more to do, until they eventually failed.

Of course, what any DUI Lawyer hopes for is that the Police Car was equipped with a video camera, which was running, while the Client did, in fact successfully perform all the field sobriety tests. To say those cases are in the minority, however, would be a rash understatement.

In most cases where I have obtained the video, it either shows the Client clearly impaired by alcohol (even though her or she may not have thought so at the time), or fails to show anything one way or the other, leaving the Police Officer's report of the person's failure of one or more of those tests un-contradicted.

There is a whole science to Field Sobriety Tests. That's far outside the scope of this article, and in fact would require a rather long series of them to even scratch the surface. For our purposes, we're going to talk about the generally well-recognized reality that, at the point a Police Officer asks a Driver to perform Field Sobriety Tests, they have essentially made up their mind that the person is going to be arrested.

In fact, I have never even HEARD of a case where a person was given Field Sobriety Tests and then let go. Now, no one calls me when they HAVEN'T been Arrested for a Drunk Driving, so it's not like I'm in any position to hear both sides. Still, I doubt anyone of us has ever met, or heard of a case where a person was pulled over, given Field Sobriety Tests, and then told to be on their way.

Just as a preliminary matter, in every Police Report I have ever read in a DUI case (and as a matter of course, a DUI Lawyer MUST read the report before even thinking about what to do in any particular case), the Officer has noted that the Driver's eye's appeared "red," or "bloodshot," or "glassy," and that their speech was "slow,' or "slurred," and that they noticed a "strong odor of intoxicants" coming from the driver as he or she spoke.

Continue reading "Michigan DUI - Field Sobriety Tests in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties" »

As a DUI Lawyer, I have written extensively about this subject, and have frequently talked about "Impaired Driving," or "Impaired." In most articles I have seen, both my own and those written by others, the subject of Impaired arises in a discussion of DUI in general. This article will focus specifically on Impaired Driving, and attempt to explain why it's such a big deal, in so many ways.

If you have been searching for information about a Michigan DUI, or have spoken with anyone who works in the Court, Law Enforcement or Legal System, then you have no doubt heard the term "Impaired."

In Michigan, Drunk Driving, or DUI, is technically called Operating While Intoxicated, or OWI. Not that many years ago, the technical name for Drunk Driving was "Operating Under the Influence of Liquor," or OUIL. When Michigan adopted the national standard setting Bodily Alcohol Content for Drunk Driving at .08, it likewise change the name of the Offense from OUIL to OWI. Under the old OUIL Laws, Drunk Driving in Michigan was defined as having a Bodily Alcohol Content (BAC) of above .10.

Also, under the old OUIL Laws, a person with a BAC of between .10 and .07, was guilty of a less severe form of Drunk Driving, known as Impaired Driving. In essence, Impaired sort of meant driving with a "buzz," while OUIL meant driving while Drunk.

When OWI with it's .08 became Michigan Law, Impaired Driving was NOT abolished. Instead, the old .07 standard was dumped, leaving Impaired with no defined BAC.

This amounted to a HUGE break for anyone who makes a mistake by driving after having had a little too much to drink, especially for those who have had no prior DUI cases for more than 7 years from the date of any new charge. Just to be clear, any 3rd Offense in a person's LIFETIME is a Felony, so we're only talking about 1 prior, here.

The break and benefit of an Impaired is that it carries less severe penalties than does an OWI. Both the old OUIL and its successor, OWI, carry the same penalties. Let's compare the penalties of Impaired to those of OWI, so we can see why Impaired can be considered such a huge break:

Continue reading "DUI and OWI in Michigan - The Big Deal About and Meaning of "Impaired"" »

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" »

As a Lawyer who is in Court for DUI cases multiple times every week, I read more Breathalyzer results than you can imagine. This article will focus on a very important, but often-overlooked aspect of what's called the "BAC" in a DUI case. This is NOT an article which will discuss the theory of Breathalyzer accuracy and all that. Instead, this article will focus on how Breathalyzer results can and do affect every DUI case that makes it into Court.

Earlier this week, I handled a DUI for a fellow who had been stopped for swerving across the road. After his Arrest, he was taken to the Police Station and given a Breathalyzer test using the Datamaster machine. His test results were .21 and .22. We'll get back to his case, and the example it provides, later. If you are facing, or have had A DUI, then you have most likely met this machine. If not, you probably had your blood taken.

At the conclusion of the breath testing, the machine prints out a form and the person tested receives a copy. That copy is usually pink and looks like a big store receipt. It list details of the test, and the results are titled "BAC." This stands for Bodily Alcohol Content." Sometimes, people mistakenly refer to BAC as "Breath Alcohol Content," or "Blood Alcohol Content."

One of the questions any Lawyer who regularly handles DUI cases will quickly ask a prospective Client is something like "what was your BAC?" That BAC score is very important in determining the severity of a person's case. In fact, that score often provides loads of information about a DUI case, and what's likely to happen as a result.

For starters, the BAC is often used as a "wet thumb test" to make an on-the-spot determination if a person is a big drinker or not. Now I'm not saying that this is scientifically accurate, but I am saying that Cops, Prosecutors, and, most importantly, Judges, look at the BAC as a sort of barometer to determine if a person is a real lightweight, or a big drinker.

Let's look at a few examples: If a person is arrested on a Thursday night for a DUI, and their BAC is .23, then the Judge (or Magistrate) who handles their Arraignment is going to know that their Bodily Alcohol Content was about 3 times the legal limit of .08. That means they were very, very drunk. On the other hand, if they weren't very, very drunk then they are a hardcore drinker. A lightweight, newbie drinker could never get a BAC that high. In other words, a .23 BAC means a person is probably a big drinker, whether they were drunk out of their minds, or not.

Continue reading "DUI in the Detroit Area - How the BAC Breathalyzer Result Affects Your Case" »

As a Criminal Attorney, I generally find myself involved with people at one of the worst times of their life. Since I don't handle things like Rape and Murder cases, I usually represent good, decent people who have simply made a bad decision, or otherwise failed to exercise good judgment and wound up getting caught in a bad situation. Most of my Clients face things like DUI, Possession of Marijuana, or other "victimless" crimes. In that regard, they typically, (and correctly) feel that this instance of poor judgment does not present an accurate picture of the kind of person they are, or what they're all about.

Thus, it's not unusual for me to be asked by a Client facing a DUI, for example, "How long will this stay on my Record?" Then, when I have to tell them "forever..." they usually become a bit frustrated (not at me, thankfully) and respond with something like "So that's it? I'm screwed if I want to apply for a different job?"

You can insert pretty much anything, from getting a job, to getting a degree, or using that degree, or going into some occupation or other, or getting a promotion, or whatever, into that last sentence after the part where the Client says "I'm screwed..."

And although they do, at that moment, feel utterly and truly "screwed," the fact is, no matter how bad it might seem right then, it's almost never as bad as they fear.

An example from my own past is serves as a good example:

Years ago, when my wife and I were buying our first house, we had applied for a mortgage, and had been assured that we would be approved. Based on that, we found our home, and made an offer, which the seller accepted. As the days wound down, our mortgage was still not formally approved. Days came and went, and we found ourselves very near the closing date, with no mortgage approval. The closing day came, and had to be postponed. That next date came, and had to be put off, as well. The seller was freaking out, and we were freaking out. The seller told us that the deal would either have to be closed right away, or it would fall through.

I called my mortgage broker, and explained to his assistant that my deal was about to collapse unless we got that approval right away. In response, he told me that he hears that every day, and not to worry. In truth, I became angry, wondering who in the heck this guy was to tell me not to worry when I darn well knew that my deal was about to fall through! I didn't give a hoot about anybody else's situation; I just cared about mine.

Continue reading "How a Michigan Criminal Record will Ruin Your Career...or Not!" »

As part of my Drunk Driving Practice, I handle lots and lots of DUI cases. The first question any DUI Lawyer has for a potential Client is "Do you have any priors?"

Often, the Client will indicate that they don't have any prior DUI's, but will mention that they had an MIP (which stands for Minor in Possession of Alcohol) when they were younger. This article will look at how a prior MIP (or several prior MIP's) can complicate a DUI charge.

The biggest concern in any DUI case (besides Legal Fees, Court Costs and staying out of Jail) is determining if the person charged has either an alcohol problem, or at least the potential to develop one.

This is why, BY LAW, prior to being sentenced for a DUI (and it doesn't matter whether it's a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd offense), a person must undergo a mandatory alcohol evaluation, sometimes called a PSI, or a Screening, or and Assessment. The Court is supposed to order a DUI Driver into the appropriate counseling or treatment if it is determined that they either have a problem, or present a potential or risk of developing one. This facet of any Sentencing is part of a person's Order of Probation.

Beyond the increased statistical risk that anyone with a growing number of alcohol-related Criminal Offenses has, the simple fact of the matter is that anyone in the Judge's seat sees a prior MIP as evidence of more inappropriate drinking. I often tell my Clients that, in a very real way, the Judge can write the date of that first MIP on a board, and then put the date of the new DUI to the right of it, and connect them with a line, and say "this is how long we know you've had a problem." A person may not be an alcoholic, but having more than one Drinking Offense in your past sure kills any notion of the DUI being an "isolated incident."

It is, of Course, the job of the Lawyer to educate the Client about that mandatory alcohol assessment, to make sure the Client avoids tallying up a score that indicates a problem, or a problem more severe than could otherwise be the case. On these alcohol assessment tests, the higher a person's score, the more severe their alcohol problem, or the greater the likelihood or potential there is for them to develop one. The lower their test score, the better things are.

Continue reading "DUI in Michigan and why Having a Prior MIP Complicates Things" »

In the previous article, we dismissed the scam-notion about someone who knows someone who knows some Lawyer who can get a DUI "dropped" to the Civil Infraction of Careless Driving. In this article, we'll tackle another "urban legend" that has some people literally shaking in their boots when they contact me about their DUI charge. Again, I need to make clear that I only handle DUI cases in the Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, so although I suspect that what I'm about to say is true everywhere, I can only confirm that it's true in the Tri-County area.

Part of my job as a DUI Lawyer is to make sure my Clients are well-informed. In order to be able to fully explain what will and will not happen in any given case, I believe it's essential for me, at least, to limit my practice geographically so that I appear in the same Courts, in front of the same Judges, day-in and day-out. This allows me to learn how each Judge handles a DUI case, and in turn, I can prepare my Client for what to expect.

The "urban legend" that I hear often enough to warrant addressing is that the Judge who will be hearing my Client's case had a son or daughter killed by a Drunk Driver. In certain cases, it may be that the person has heard that one of the Judge's in a particular Court has suffered this loss, but the point is the same. So let's get rid of this rumor right now:

There is NO JUDGE in any of the Courts in the Tri-County area who has lost a child to a Drunk Driver. Not one.

If there was even a grain of truth to any of this, you would expect that either that Judge would recuse (disqualify) him or her self from hearing DUI cases, or at least have faced a rash of motions for recusal by Lawyers for those facing DUI charges.

But it never happened.

If you or someone you know is facing a DUI charge in the Tri-County area and have heard this rumor, you can take it to the bank that it's absolutely, 100% false.

DUI charges come loaded with enough problems, but this, at least, isn't one of them.

I handle a lot of DUI cases, and I speak with a lot of people facing this charge. Over the years, I have repeatedly heard a few things that could politely be called "urban legends," but that I think are more accurately described as bulls**t. To be clear, I am about to dismiss these notions completely, but once again I must repeat that since I only handle DUI cases in the Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, I cannot say for sure what happens in other places (although I strongly suspect that neither of these "fables" is true outside of the Tri-County area, either). In this article, we'll deal with the "deal of the century" scam involving the worlds greatest Plea Bargain. In the next article, we'll dismiss another often-mentioned, but never-true rumor.

The first "urban legend" I hear is that someone knows someone else who knows some lawyer who can have a DUI dropped to the civil infraction of Careless Driving. This "deal" is usually available for a hefty legal fee, all paid in advance. This deal does not happen. Ever. Alcohol-related Traffic Offenses are never, ever, ever "dropped" to civil infractions, or any other kind of non Alcohol-related Traffic Offense, except in the most unusual, exceptional and rare kind of case. This kind of case comes along once every few years, at most.

When someone runs this kind of hair-brained idea by me, I first tell them that such "deals" don't happen, and then I suggest that if it's such a sure thing, they should work out some kind of arrangement with the lawyer which provides a refund of some of that hefty fee if the deal doesn't go down as they've been made to believe.

Not surprisingly, that kind of deal doesn't happen, either.

Think about this for a moment; the internet is filled with all kinds of Legal websites dealing with DUI. Some, like mine, detail how DUI cases are usually handled. Others focus on (very expensive) ways to challenge the case, but absolutely none of them even hints at the "dropped to a careless" deal. Could it be that, different as the approaches of the various Legal websites may be, they are all at least above-board, whereas the phantom "deal" which always comes secondhand is a scam?

Listen, if you think a deal like that can be had, let me help you get rich. See, I got an e-mail from this Princess in some far away country who has a few hundred million dollars stuck in her bank account, and in order to get it out, she needs your help....

Read on to the next article to find out which other completely untrue rumor often freaks out someone facing a DUI in any particular Court.

Most Lawyers who write anything at all about DUI cases tend to focus on the Evidence and ways to beat the case. However optimistic those sales pitches may be, the plain truth is that the overwhelming majority of DUI charges result in some kind of conviction. In most cases, after the Arrest, and after a person has been Arraigned, their Lawyer will work out some kind of "Plea Deal" that either reduces the severity of the offense or results in a Sentencing agreement or bargain.

This article will focus on what I consider to be, by far, the most important (and least talked-about) aspect of a DUI case. If the case is not dismissed on some technicality, or unless a person has gone to Trial and been found "Not Guilty," some kind of Plea deal will have been worked out by the Lawyer. By law, after a Plea (or conviction, if a person has gone to Trial and lost), but before the Sentencing can be imposed by the Judge, a person must undergo a mandatory alcohol evaluation.

This consists of a written alcohol-use questionnaire, along with an interview by a Probation Officer. This whole process is called the PSI, or Pre-Sentence Investigation. The end product of this process is a PSI Report, or Sentencing Recommendation. Michigan law requires that this Report be provided to the Judge at or before the time of Sentencing to help him or her decide what to do. On the date of Sentencing, both the person being sentenced and their Lawyer are required to read this Report before going in front of the Judge.

It is accurate to say that, almost without exception, whatever is recommended by that Report is exactly what the Judge is going to order. In other words, it is less accurate to call that Report a Recommendation than it is to call it a "blueprint" for what's going to happen.

I know that anyone reading this who has ever been through the DUI process before, (whether for themselves of with someone else) knows this to be true. In fact, I can safely say to anyone who has been through the DUI process before that whatever was recommended in that Report was, likewise, ordered by the Judge.

This means that unless a person is charged with a DUI where the Evidence is weak enough to be dismissed by the Judge, or otherwise has a Defense to the charge strong enough to "beat" it at Trial, they will be undergoing this PSI. And it also means that when the test has been taken and the interview with the Probation Officer completed, the final outcome of their case will have pretty much been determined. The Probation Officer "scores" the person's alcohol test. All of these test are "graded" with a numerical score; generally, the higher a person's score, the more likely they are to have or to develop and alcohol problem. Conversely, the lower a person scores, the less likely it is that they have an alcohol problem, or have the potential to develop one.

Continue reading "Michigan Drunk Driving - What Happens in a DUI Case " »

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?" »

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

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

What about 2nd Offenses?

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

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

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

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

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 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.

Because a substantial part of my Practice as a Criminal Lawyer involves DUI (technically OWI) cases, I speak with a lot of people, and answer a lot of questions about these cases. One of the more common questions I am asked is something like "should I get into some kind of Counseling or Treatment Program?" Here's some good news: this is one question that has a pretty clear-cut answer.

Let me begin by first pointing out that my Practice is limited to Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties. On occasion, I'll take a case in St. Clair, Lapeer, or Livingston County, but I go no further, and thus I have no experience anywhere else. Let's also begin with the kind of cases where the answer to that question is always "YES."

In all Second Offense OWI (DUI) and Third Offense OWI (DUI) cases, the law requires that a person who is found guilty of, or pleads guilty to such a charge, to undergo some kind of Counseling or Treatment. In other words, if a person ends up with a 2nd or 3rd Offense DUI (All 3rd Offense Cases are Felonies, and there is nothing higher than a 3rd offense; even a person's 7th DUI is only charged as a 3rd) and they do not "beat" the case, they must be ordered, by the Judge, into some kind of Counseling or Treatment.

Now, given that a person is going to have to get into some kind of Program, it only makes sense to start that process early. No matter what the facts of a person's case, it can only help matters to have a Client who has already demonstrated the foresight to take action regarding a drinking issue. And make no mistake, because all 2nd and 3rd Offense DUI's fall under what in Michigan is known as the "Repeat Offender Law," it is generally assumed anyone with 2 DUI's within 7 years, and 3 or more within their lifetime, has a problem.

As a Lawyer who represents people facing DUI charges, I can, in cases where "winning" or "beating" the charge is not likely, very often negotiate a better outcome for my Client if I can show the Prosecutor that the person has already been proactive enough to get some kind of help.

Continue reading "DUI in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County - Is Counseling or Treatment a good idea?" »

In this article, we'll look at the most common DUI, or Drunk Driving charges in Michigan. This is the third in a series of "Short Version" articles taken from a longer, prior Blog post. We'll examine the most common terms used when discussing Drunk Driving in Michigan. As a DUI Lawyer, I am often asked about the "alphabet soup" of terms that surround this group of Charges. Let's get right to it:

OWI is the actual name for DUI or Drunk Driving in Michigan. It means Operating While Intoxicated. This offense carries 6 points, a mandatory 6-month suspension of the Driver's License (with a restricted license that is granted after the first 30 days of no driving), and carries fine of up to $500, plus Court Costs. This usually means a person will be paying somewhere between $700 to $1500 in total fines and costs, depending on which Court is handling the case.

OWVI, or Impaired Driving, is the term for the less-severe form of Drunk Driving or Operating Under the Influence of Drugs (OUID), which is discussed below. This charge carries 4 points, a 90 day restriction of the Driver's License, a fine of up to $300, plus Court Costs. As the Lawyer representing a person charged with OWI, I will, if the case against them is "solid," negotiate, a "Plea Bargain" from OWI (or OUID) to the less-severe charge of Impaired Driving. The total final amount a Driver will pay to the Court ranges from between $600 to $1100, again, depending on where the case is being heard.

OUID, or Operating Under the Influence of Drugs, is just like OWI, except that instead of being under the influence of Alcohol, the Driver is under the influence of Drugs. The less-severe form of this charge is the very same OWVI, or Impaired Driving that is examined above.

OWPD stands for Operating While In the Presence of Drugs. Cases brought under this law are, fortunately, not so common. What it means is that if a Driver tests positive for Drugs in their system, then they are "OWPD." There is no need to prove that they were under the influence of those drugs. For example, a person who tests positive for marijuana, and who used it 3 weeks before that test, although clearly no longer under its influence, can be charged with OWPD merely because of that positive test result.

Of course, the consequences for any of these Offenses ramps up dramatically if it is charged as a 2nd or 3rd Offense. Generally speaking, 3rd Offenses are Felonies.

OUIL, UBAL and UBAC are all terms that are no longer part of Michigan law (UBAC never was).

DUI is a general term used to describe Drunk Driving, even though there is no law entitled or addressing "DUI" in Michigan. The term is means "Driving under the Influence," although as you can see even from the brief description of Michigan's laws as outlined above, one might be tempted to ask "driving under the influence of what?" Michigan law makes very clear whether the Charge involves Alcohol, and if so, whether the Driver was "drunk" or merely "impaired," or if the charge instead refers to being under the influence of, or being impaired by the use of Drugs.

A more thorough review of the potential penalties a Driver faces in any of these charges is laid out in the "Common Charges and Penalties" page of my website.

In my role as Criminal Defense Lawyer with an office in Macomb County, I have contact with all kinds of people from the Metro-Detroit area. Some of these people are the Defendant's themselves, some family, and others interested friends. Sometimes, the facts of a given case are so completely beyond dispute that I will be asked by the Defendant or their family or friends "Do I (or does the Person charged with a crime) really need a Lawyer?"

Now, you can probably guess my answer to that question, but the reason for it may not be as obvious. Sure, there is always the possibility of some technicality coming to light which can be discovered by an astute Lawyer, but the focus of this article is more about what a Defense Lawyer can do in pretty much each and every case, no matter how bad things might appear, rather than on some once-in-a-blue-moon turn of luck.

First, and just as a general observation, try and recall anyone in the Public Spotlight who has ever been charged with a crime and didn't have a Lawyer. Even in the age of video, where some crimes are caught on tape and a person's guilt appears to be a foregone conclusion (like the Police Officers caught on tape in the Rodney King beating), anyone familiar with the Legal System will always have a lawyer as they maneuver through it.

There's an old saying, referring to Lawyers, that "The Lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client." Lawyers, perhaps more than anyone, recognize the importance of having Professional Representation. When Geoffrey Feiger faced (and was ultimately acquitted of) Federal charges related to Political Contributions, he hired a Lawyer (none other than the legendary Gerry Spence). And whether you like him or not (I do, and not just because I'm a Lawyer) you'll have to admit that Feiger is one good Lawyer. I'll bet most people would be hard-pressed to name any other Lawyer as good as Feiger, much less anyone even remotely in his league. Yet, despite being more than able to take on (and usually beat) anyone in a Courtroom, Fieger didn't do that; instead, he had Professional Representation.

So, what can a Lawyer do for someone who, for whatever reason (really bad prior record, crime caught on tape, solid confession, etc.) appears to be in a hopeless (and helpless) situation? What should a person look for in a Lawyer that will help them decide who to hire, and just as importantly, not to hire?

Continue reading "Criminal Cases in Michigan - Do I need a Lawyer?" »

As a Drunk Driving Lawyer who handles DUI Cases in all of the District and Circuit Courts of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties, I am often asked about the somewhat new Michigan Law that a provides that a person who has two prior Drunk Driving (also called DUI, DWI, OUIL and/or Impaired) convictions, and who is arrested for a third time for any Drunk Driving charge, no matter how long ago any of those two prior offenses occurred, faces a Felony Charge. In an earlier Blog post, I described the differences between these various charges and explained what they mean. It seems there is a lot of confusion regarding when and how a person can be charged with 3rd Offense Drunk Driving.

Many people are not aware of the change in the law (Known as Heidi's Law) that got rid of the provision that a person was subject to a Felony Charge only if they racked up 3 Drunk Driving charges in 10 years. This new law, which took effect on January 3, 2007, now allows Prosecutors to count any two prior Drunk Driving convictions, regardless of what they were (OUIL, UBAL, OWI or OWVI) or when they occurred within a person's lifetime, in order to make the Felony Charge.

In 1998 what was dubbed Michigan's "Repeat Offender Law" changed what had been a somewhat confusing landscape of Alcohol-related Driving Offenses. The law was streamlined and simplified, and at the same time, made tougher. After passage of the Repeat Offender Law, any combination of 2 Impaired, OUIL, UBAL, or OWVI (and now OWI) charges within 7 years was to be handled as a Second Offense, and any combination of 3 of those charges within 10 years was to be handled as a 3rd Offense Felony.

This new law now gets rid of that 10 year provision. This means, for example, that someone who had an impaired driving 25 years ago, and another 17 years ago, and who is now arrested for another Drunk Driving offense is to be charged with a 3rd Offense, which is a Felony punishable by up to 5 years in Prison.

It does not matter if any of the prior offenses resulted in convictions for Impaired, OUIL, OWI or UBAL or any combination of them; the only thing that matters is that it's the Driver's so-called "3rd Strike." Now, a person is essentially "at bat" for the rest of their life after their 2nd Drunk Driving conviction. Should you find yourself facing a 3rd Offense charge, remember to be a good consumer and check out all of your options. Speak with as many lawyers as you can (including me) until you find one in whom you have confidence, who you can afford, who does not make promises that seem too good to be true (they usually are) and with whom you are comfortable.

It seems there's an "alphabet soup" of terms (acronyms, actually) used to describe what we commonly know as "Drunk Driving." Some are accurate, some are obsolete, and some just plain wrong when used to describe "Drunk Driving" in the State of Michigan.

The purpose of this article is to define and explain these terms. A complete review of their consequences is laid out in the "Common Drunk Driving Charges and Penalties" section of my web site.

Let's begin with terms that Drivers in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County are likely to see:

OWI - Operating While Intoxicated. This is the actual term used in the law to describe a Drunk Driving charge in Michigan. OWI applies to Driver's whose Bodily Alcohol Level (BAC) is .08 or higher.

OWVI - Operating While Visibly Impaired. This is the term used to describe the less-severe type of Drunk Driving (and Impaired by Drugs) Charge. More commonly referred to a "Impaired Driving," this charge applies to Driver's whose BAC is below the level of .08, and Driver's whose abilities are impaired by Drugs or Controlled Substances.

OUID - Operating Under the Influence of Drugs. This charge is to Controlled Substances and Drugs what OWI is to Alcohol.

OWPD - Operating in the Presence of Drugs. This charge refers to a Driver who is found to have any amount of Drugs (for which they don't have a prescription) or Controlled Substances in their system. Fortunately, it's not a very common charge, but it means, for example, that a Driver who tests positive for Marijuana, even though they may not have used it all (second-hand smoke) or who used it weeks ago, is presumed to be in violation of the law.

Continue reading "DUI, OWI, OUIL - Michigan Drunk Driving Terms" »

Any lawyer who regularly handles Drunk Driving cases in Macomb, Oakland or Wayne County gets asked this question at least several times per week. I know that, as a Drunk Driving Attorney, I am asked all the time. I usually answer with a cautious "It depends...."

The truth is, there is no simple, or one-size-fits-all answer. There are several factors that must be looked at in order to come up with an answer.

First, and most important is in which Court (what city) is the case being heard? To illustrate, let's take a typical, real life example of a person with a First Offense OWI. Assume the lawyer gets the charge reduced to what's known as "Impaired Driving," or OWVI.

The question we have here, then, is how much will this first-offense "Impaired Driving" cost?

The short, and best answer, is that it depends, more than anything else, on which Court is hearing the case. For example, not too long ago, a First Offense Impaired Driving in the 42-2 (New Baltimore) Court usually netted a fine and costs of $450. That same offense, in the 41-B (Clinton Township) Court, usually resulted in a fine and costs of about $950. Most other courts in the Tri-County area charged somewhere between those amounts.

Second, the whole cost paid by a Defendant is not limited to a "fine." Going back to the Impaired Driving example above, the penalties for Impaired Driving allow a fine of "up to" $300, plus costs. It's usually the "costs" that are both difficult to accurately predict and which cause people the most problems. Thus, in that above example, the 42-2 Court charged $300 in fines, plus $150 in costs. The 41-B Court charged $300 in fines plus $650 in costs. Costs vary widely form Court to Court.

Third, a growing number of municipalities have enacted ordinances which allow them to charge, in addition to any court fines and costs, for the actual Police Officer/Emergency Responder time spent in handling the case, right up from the point of arrest, through booking, holding, releasing, cleaning the jail cell, preparing the Police Report, and any other action connected with the offense. These are sometimes called as "Emergency Responder" costs. For those municipalities that do seek reimbursement, the amount, while it varies from place to place and case by case, usually adds up to somewhere between $250 to $350.

Beyond the expense of the fine, the costs, and any Emergency Responder/Police Officer reimbursement, there are several other additional expenses involved in any Drunk Driving or Alcohol-Related Traffic Offense. Of course, there are the lawyer's fees, as well.

Continue reading "How Much Fines and Costs will be required in my Metro-Detroit Drunk Driving Case?" »

Michigan Drivers facing a Drunk Driving charge may face even stiffer penalties than ever, depending on the results of the alcohol breath test taken after their arrest. Under the new law, dubbed the "High-BAC Law," which takes effect on October 31, 2010, Michigan would join 45 other states in enacting what is also know as a "Super Drunk" Driving law. Under the new statute, drivers charged with OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) who have a BAC (Bodily Alcohol Content) of .17 or higher, face higher penalties than they otherwise would if their BAC is below .17 Currently, any Michigan driver with a BAC of .08 is presumed to be Driving Under the Influence (DUI).

The major impact of this new Legislation can be examined in this Michigan New Ignition Interlock Law. from the Michigan Secretary of State's web site.

Amongst the most significant changes made to Michigan's existing Drunk Driving Laws, the new law provides the following for First Offense Drunk Driving:

1. An increase in the maximum jail term from 93 days to 180 days

2. A mandatory 1 year suspension of the Driver's License; after 45 days, a Restricted License may be issued if the Driver installs an Ignition Interlock Device in their car. This breath-testing device prevents the car from starting if the Driver has a BAC of .25 or higher. The device likewise requires periodic tests while the vehicle is being driven.

3. A maximum fine of up to $700, as opposed to a maximum of $500 in a regular OWI.

4. Mandatory enrollment in and completion of an Alcohol Treatment Program or attendance at a Self-Help (AA or 12-step type) Program for at least one year

Driver's with prior DUI's face even stiffer penalties.

For all of the ink being spilled about what the effect of the new law will actually be, it remains to be seen how things play out. For example, in most First-Offense Drunk Driving (OWI) Cases, the driver is usually able to have his or her attorney negotiate a Plea Bargain which reduces the final charge to Impaired Driving (OWVI). These drivers, if allowed to plead to the reduced charge, would avoid the penalties associated with the new law.