Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
As Michigan criminal, driver’s license restoration and DUI lawyers, we answer a lot of questions. Interestingly, when someone begins a question by saying something like “this is probably a dumb question, but…”, it usually isn’t. However, as much my team and I are helpful, polite, and respectful, there is one really dumb question we get asked from time-to-time – “Do I need a lawyer for this?” The answer is yes, but this question deserves a thorough answer. In this 2-part article, I want to take a serious look at why a person should have a lawyer for a criminal, driver’s license restoration, or DUI case.
Let me clear up the easy stuff first: you may be able to do an okay job handling your own speeding ticket, or some other kind of civil infraction. However, if you’re thinking about dealing with any kind of misdemeanor (or felony) charge on your own, you could be making a serious mistake. Notice that I’m not saying you will ruin your life or wind up in jail. Those things probably won’t happen. But what if, down the road, you run into problems because of your record, or find out some consequence(s) from your case could have been avoided with a legal maneuver you didn’t even know about because you decided to “play lawyer.”
The universal maxim “you don’t know what you don’t know” really applies to everyone who tries to “play” lawyer (or doctor, electrician, etc.). There’s an old saying that, “The lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.” It holds even more true for non-lawyers who try to represent themselves. You’ll notice that anytime a lawyer gets in trouble, the first thing he or she will do is hire a good lawyer. Even the best courtroom attorneys will hire an outsider lawyer if they find themselves facing criminal charges (or being sued).
It’s a given that it was a hassle to have gone through all the court stuff from a DUI, including probation and testing and having had to paid fines and costs and whatever else. The problem, however, is that the frustration most people feel about having, as they say, “to jump through hoops” to win their license back, while very real, also misses the fact that after racking up multiple DUI’s, the license revocation process is every bit as much about protecting the public as it is about punishing the offender.
This really is something of a problem in a license appeal case. Every substance abuse counselor can look at the official substance use evaluation (SUE) form and figure he or she could complete it without any difficulty. In one sense, they’d be right, but not in the sense of winning a license appeal, and that’s what really matters here. Let me explain what I mean:
The first thing we should do is to clarify the name, “substance use evaluation,” because many, if not most people, call it a “substance abuse evaluation.” I’m as guilty of that as anyone, both terms are used to mean the same thing. To keep things simple, we’ll often refer to the evaluation by using the abbreviation “SUE” in this discussion.
My team and I deal with the problems caused by the state’s use of this indecisive language (‘advisable”) all the time, in real hearings. One of the first things most hearing officers will ask if a person has a failed or missed rolling retest is whether or not he or she got a PBT or EtG test. If a person says “no,” then they’ll be asked, “why not?” Most often, the person will try and explain that they weren’t clear on the need to do that right away, or just had forgotten. Then they’re asked the most dreaded question of all: “didn’t you read your entire order?”
The instructions in each winning order lists the things that should be done if a person has a power loss (listed as “tamper/circumvent”), misses a test, or provides a positive breath sample. Even if it’s too late for those recommended PBT or EtG tests (see below), there may be enough time left to take other remedial action in order to challenge a violation. Whatever else, any problems are going to have to be satisfactorily explained to a hearing officer, whether at a violation hearing, or when a person files for full, unrestricted driving privileges. Much of this could be made better if the state fixed the language and placement of the interlock use directions.
In this article, I want to do a brief overview of what “clear and convincing” means in the real world, because it’s not only the very key to success, but is also dreadfully overlooked by just about everyone except the hearing officers who decide this cases, and anyone who finds him or herself reading an order denying their appeal. “Clear and convincing evidence” is the legal standard of proof required to win a license appeal, and it is specifically required by the rules that govern all such cases. You either meet this standard, or you lose.
The most important part of a license appeal, whether you’re seeking a clearance or the restoration of your Michigan driving privileges, is proving that you have quit drinking for good. Beyond proving your sobriety one key difference is that a restoration appeal requires a person to show up for an actual appeal hearing, while a clearance can be requested by just filing the documents alone and waiving the hearing. This is called an “administrative review,” and is essentially an appeal by mail. It may sound like a good idea, but in practice, it’s not.
Although a bit off-topic for this piece, it’s worth pointing out that there are things that can be done, at least sometimes, to prove you weren’t drinking, even up to 90 days after providing a positive breath sample. There is always some analysis required to determine whether any such test is worth trying, but the larger point is that if you’re violated for or have false positive test results, and even if it’s up to 12 weeks later, you’re not necessarily dead in the water in terms of being able to get some exculpatory evidence.
The inspiration for this article came from a client of mine for whom I won a driver’s license restoration case, and who just hired me for a new, 3rd offense DUI charge. Although I won’t use his name, I’m quite sure he is the kind of person who would want me to use the details of his story as a warning to help anyone who has supposedly quit drinking to NOT pick up again. My client had been alcohol-free for 10 years after his last DUI, had won back his restricted, and then full driver’s license, and, in the blink of an eye, picked up a single drink that quickly led him down the slippery slope until he got arrested for driving drunk – again.