Articles Posted in DUI

In my role as a Michigan DUI lawyer, I handle a lot of 2nd offense drinking and driving cases. On my website, 1st offenses, 2nd offenses, and 3rd (felony) offenses are examined in a more overview fashion, while on this blog, I have covered each of the OWI charges in rather painstaking detail within the DUI section. In this article, I want to circle back to 2nd offenses and look at how 2 things, in particular – your prior record and the location of the charge – can affect what happens to you. In many of my prior articles, I’ve made clear that in just about every 1st offense DUI case, you’re not going to jail. Things are different, however, in 2nd offense DUI cases, where jail is a very real possibility, although it’s seldom a certainty. In the real world, there are some courts that rarely, if ever send 2nd offenders to jail, a few that usually (or even always) do, and then there are the rest, in the middle, that may or may not play the jail card, depending on the circumstances.

round-two-221x300You don’t have to be a legal scholar to realize that you prior record matters, but it matters more than just because you have a prior DUI. By law, you can only be charged with OWI 2nd offense if, and only if, you have a prior conviction for another alcohol-related traffic offense within 7 years of the date of your arrest for the current case. By definition, then, every 2nd offender has a “prior record.” There is a lot more to this, however, than just that one previous DUI case, although the circumstances of that prior offense can play a greater (or lesser) role in how things turn out now in the new case For example, a person still on probation for a High BAC 1st offense ,who then goes out and picks up another DUI (and whose BAC in the new case is also really high) is going to be in a tough spot. Contrast that situation with one where an older guy who picked up his 1st DUI, with a really low BAC (just over the legal limit) nearly 7 years ago, after he staying late at his daughter’s wedding reception to help clean up. Now, assume the guy’s new case arose from him being arrested (with another really low BAC) on his way home from a surprise retirement party thrown for him after his last day at work. These are very different situations.

Beyond your previous DUI, however, any other prior record you have can matter. It was not any due to grammatical sloppiness that I wrote “can matter,” because not every prior offense really does matter, at least within the context of a 2nd offense DUI. For the most part, prior alcohol or drug-related offenses are considered more significant, as are any offenses that usually involve alcohol or drugs, like domestic violence and disorderly person charges. Thus, if Tipsy Tina, recently arrested for a 2nd offense DUI (with a prior that occurred 5 years ago) was also convicted of retail fraud about 12 years ago, back when she was a teenager, that offense will probably not have any effect on her now. However, if Tina has a marijuana charge, and even if it was 15 years ago, it will matter, at least a little. Of course, if Tina was convicted of having open intoxicants in a motor vehicle just a few years back, you can be sure that offense will have a fairly effect on what happens in her new case. When it comes to how much, if at all any prior record matters in a 2nd offense case, the only accurate answer is the dreaded, classic lawyer response – it depends.

This short article, like many others on this blog, was inspired by a conversation I had with Ann, my senior assistant. She was giving me the details of a conversation she had with someone regarding his DUI and suspended license charges, and noted that the caller had pointed out how he watched in court as one woman went before the Judge for a drinking and driving offense and didn’t get any jail time, and then tried to use that as a basis to predict what would happen in his case. Ann asked, of course, it he knew anything about her charge, prior record, or case history, and he responded that he didn’t. Ann then explained to the caller that no two cases are alike, and that you can’t ever compare your situation to anyone else’s, especially if you don’t know all of the details. That’s when the idea hit me, because I realized that just about everyone one of us looks around for comparisons in just about every situation we find ourselves. That may work, or at least work better, when it comes to fixing a jammed garbage disposal or something like that, but not within the context of a criminal or DUI charge, where there are just way too many variables.

compare-apples-and-oranges-IDIOM-300x253You most likely know this already, but that doesn’t stop you, or me, or really all of us from doing it anyway. That’s human nature. My hope is that this short article will help make clear how this not only doesn’t work in criminal and DUI cases, but can also be misleading. Let’s use an example: Imagine Drinking Dave picks up his 1st DUI in city “A.” On that same night, Tipsy Tina is also arrested for her 1st DUI in city “A,”, as well. Sounds kind of like they’re in the same boat, right? Well, there are about a million things (maybe even more) that could make their cases very different, and that, in turn, could make what happens to each of them very different, as well.

If Tina has had 2 prior MIP’s, even if they were quite a few years ago, her relationship to alcohol is going to be perceived by the court as risky, if not outright troublesome. This would be even more so if her BAC at the time of her arrest was high, like a .21. If Dave, by contrast, has never been in any kind of trouble before and his BAC was .12, he’s just automatically going to be seen as less risky than Tina. Generally speaking he’s likely to wind up with a less demanding term of probation, meaning he’s likely to have to test less frequently, and will probably not be found to need the level of rehabilitative or treatment services that seem almost certain for Tina.

As a local, Detroit-area criminal and DUI lawyer, I am in court just about every single workday, strategizing and speaking to make things better for my clients. however, lots of lawyers are in court everyday, so that alone doesn’t make any particular one better than all of the others, in the same way that the hot dog vendor is at the hockey arena almost everyday, but that doesn’t make him or her any kind of star player. It’s a matter of instinct and talent. If you’re facing a probation violation because you’ve messed up, you need to hire a real star, meaning the kind of lawyer who can talk the stripes off a tiger, talk you right out of trouble, and out of going to jail. In this setting, the ability to persuade is the most important trait you need on your side.

Helping-Hand-298x300If we’re going to be honest about probation violations, then we need to recognize that the majority of them occur because a person has either done something prohibited (like consume alcohol, use drugs, or pick up a new charge) or not done something required (like fail to complete some kind of classes or counseling). Less frequent, but still common, are those cases that involve things like a missed test (the courts basically conclude a test was missed because it would have been positive) or a false-positive test. For the most part, how and why ever it may have happened, if you’ve been violated, you’ve probably screwed something up, even if that wasn’t your intent. Judges, for their part, spend an enormous amount of time everyday listening to excuses about all this. For example, one of the most common (and least accepted) reasons given for a positive alcohol test is the use of cold medicine. It is so worn out that it is known as the “NyQuil defense” and so widely disbelieved that you can practically read the frustration on many Judges’ faces as someone tries to use it. Beyond the NyQuil defense, every Judge has heard every other excuse in the book, probably a thousand times over, so to get the best result in a PV, you can’t walk into court and sound like everyone else.

In a very real way, I think of probation violation cases as the true test of a lawyer’s ability to communicate effectively and speak persuasively. There are some really great attorneys who can make brilliant legal arguments about things like evidence and legal procedure, but that’s all dry stuff. When you’re standing in front of the Judge for violating probation, your lawyer needs to be the exact opposite of dry. As much as this requires a superb extemporaneous speaking ability, there has to be substance to what’s being said, as well. There’s an old saying that “if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$hit.” Neither of those things are particularly useful here, or, maybe, you need a little of both. Remember, your Judge, like every other Judge, has heard it all. As a lawyer, when I’m handling a probation violation, I have to explain my client’s situation, keep the Judge’s attention (by not sounding like everyone else), and then persuade him or her to not lock up my client. At the end of the day, it’s what doesn’t happen to you that matters most, so all of this stuff can sound real good, but it’s really only worth anything if it keeps you out of jail.

The location of your criminal or DUI case is one of the most important factors in determining how it will turn out, and what will (and will not) happen to you. As a local, greater Detroit-area criminal and DUI lawyer, the very first question I ask when presented with any new case is “Where?” For example, a simple possession of marijuana case in one city can be potentially wrapped up in one court date, the whole thing kept off the person’s record, and result in nothing more than the assessment of reasonable fines and costs, while, across town, that same case could easily cost more than twice as much and land the person on probation with required drug testing, community service, and maybe even a “marijuana awareness” class (or classes), as well. There is really nothing you can do to change this, other than make sure your lawyer is familiar with how things are done in the court where your case is pending.

1304655796181855921-282x300It is certainly better if your lawyer is familiar with both the local courts in the broader geographic area where your case is pending, as well as the specific court in which you’ll be appearing. For me, that means all the courts in Oakland, Macomb and Wayne Counties. Even within the Tri-County area, however, there are some lawyers who spend so much time in any one particular court that they kind of miss out on the big picture of how things are done elsewhere. While there may be some truth to the notion that a lawyer who is “always” in one specific court really knows how things work there, it is also true that he or she may be too entrenched in that system to be capable of really standing up for the client and push for a different outcome. Think of the stereotypical teacher’s pet; you don’t want that for your lawyer. On the other hand, you certainly don’t want to be stuck with an attorney who isn’t in your court often enough to know how things are done there and, therefore, doesn’t know how to properly guide you through it.

What I’m saying, on the one hand, is that where your case arises is so hugely important that location plays a primary role in the outcome, and the lawyer you hire should be familiar with that court. What good does it do to bring in some attorney who can’t tell you how things are done there? On the other hand, I’m also saying that while experience with the court where your case is pending is important, you don’t want your lawyer to seem like he or she is employed there, either. That only creates a kind of unhelpful tunnel vision. Instead, the right amount of familiarity should be part of a broader understanding of how things are done across the larger local area. I can’t count the number of times I’ve persuaded a Judge to do something different (as in better for my client) by explaining how it’s done in another court. If you’re sensing that there is a kind of balance here, then you’re getting the point.

In my role as a Michigan DUI lawyer who concentrates his drinking and driving practice in the Metro-Detroit area (meaning Macomb, Oakland and Wayne Counties), I have published hundreds of informational articles about every facet of the DUI process on this blog, as well as my site. This article will be about alcohol and drug testing in DUI cases, and will also mark a slight shift from my usual approach, because beyond just confining myself to a mostly objective examination of the topic at hand, I also want to make a few “editorial” points, as well. Testing, both as a condition of bond and as a requirement of probation, has essentially become universal in local DUI cases. The inspiration for what the reader may glean as my attitude in this article came, quite literally, as I was looking at my computer screen thinking about what to write, and received a phone call from Ann, my senior assistant, describing the difficulty a client of mine was having as he struggled to comply with his testing requirement. This client lives in Florida, and has a DUI charge pending in an Oakland County district court. As I write this article, hurricane Irma is pummeling Florida, and many people from the state are evacuating, and pretty much everyone else is bracing for disaster. Everyone there is worried about just surviving, rather than urine or breath testing.

follow-the-rules-1-219x300As Ann explained how my client wanted to do his best to comply with the court’s order, despite having to deal with an actual hurricane, I couldn’t help but remark what a HUGE pain in the a$$ all this testing stuff has become. In fact, the whole “testing” thing eats up a ton of court time, and has grown into a monster industry (in every sense of the word) in its own right. For a lawyer like me, who handles DUI issues every single day, not a week, or even part of a week, goes by without some problem arising due to alcohol and/or drug testing. What makes this such a pain is that much of the time, it’s not about my clients getting caught drinking. Instead, I see endless non-drinking issues, like missed tests, a miscommunications about testing, or false-positive results. And for those who do imbibe and get caught, it’s often like the angel of bad luck has made sure that the ONE TIME they did have anything to drink, they had to test right after.

For all the problems testing creates, and there sure are a lot of them, the simple fact is that, as a tool to ensure compliance with an order to not drink or use drugs, it is effective. Most people will resist any offers to drink or party when they know they’re going to be tested. Moreover, the majority of people who winding up testing positive do so because they did, in fact, drink or use. In that sense, testing works. However, from where I sit, dealing with the fallout of honest errors (like a missed test) and false positives, I have to wonder if the overall cost time, effort, and money just hasn’t grown too high. One cannot sit through a morning or afternoon’s session in any courtroom without at least several testing issues being heard. Of course, most of them involve someone testing positive because they ARE positive for alcohol or other substances, but plenty of others involve things like missed tests and other situations where the burden of testing just became one thing too many in a person’s life. Most people don’t miss a test because they decided to skip it, stay home, and watch cartoons, instead. Most often, there is either a miscommunication about the need to test, or, the person simply got caught up in life, with things like kids and work.

It is an established fact that DUI drivers, as a group, have a statistically higher incidence of drinking problems than the population at large. In this article, I want to take a kind of private look at how this may apply to you, the reader. I want to concentrate on how and why a person facing an OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) charge may look inward and question whether his or her relationship to alcohol has become risky or troublesome. In my role as Detroit-area (Wayne, Oakland and Macomb County) DUI lawyer, I have written a lot about how an important part of my job is to protect my clients from being perceived as having a drinking problem they don’t, or having one more serious than is actually the case. These are valid concerns because there is a very real built-in “alcohol bias” in the court system. None of this, however, is the least bit helpful to anyone who knows, suspects, or even just wonders if his or her drinking has become problematic. Because of my clinical background and training, I can help explore this subject far more thoroughly than if I was just another lawyer.

drinking-problem-orange-county-alcohol-treatment-center-a-mission-for-michael-300x247At its simplest, there are 3 kinds of drinkers in the world: 1.), those that don’t think they have a problem, 2.), those who wonder if they do, and, 3.), those who know they do. It goes without saying that most people who drink do NOT have a problem with it, so the vast majority of those who don’t think they have any kind of problem are correct. Denial, however, is an early marker in every case of troublesome drinking, so this means that some of the people who don’t think they have a problem actually do. How to unravel that denial can become the work of a lifetime, and to date, no one has found a way to help someone with their drinking who isn’t otherwise “ready,” so we’ll leave that topic behind and focus, instead, on those who wonder if, or already know, that their drinking has become a problem.

Because of my specific educational background (beyond law school, I completed a post-graduate program of addiction studies) and the DUI focus of my practice (I handle a ton of drunk driving cases), I work with plenty of clients who either know that they need help or are otherwise at least open to talking to someone about their drinking. You might think that would make my job easier, because it would seem like I could just skip the work involved in protecting them from being treated by the court as if they do have a problem, but that’s not the case. In fact, over-diagnosis, both in terms of finding problems that aren’t there, and assessing alcohol problems as having problems more serious than they really are, is widespread both within the clinical world, and even more a problem in the court system. Part of the problem within the court system is that the assessment of a person’s drinking (i.e., the diagnosing) is done by a probation officer, and not an actual clinician. Although it is more convenient for the courts to do it this way, having a probation officer (PO) screen a DUI driver for an alcohol problem is decidedly non-clinical. As crazy as it sounds, this isn’t much different than if the PO was expected to screen someone for depression or some other mental health disorder. In the context of any DUI case of mine, I am thankful that I have the clinical knowledge to make sure my client doesn’t get ordered into any unnecessary treatment, or otherwise forced into some kind of “help” that isn’t a good fit for him or her. That said, let’s circle back to looking at your relationship to alcohol.

Of all the things that make a lawyer truly exceptional in the courtroom, there is a kind of elusive something, kind of like a “magic sauce” that makes a certain dish stand out from all the rest. In this article, I want to look at some of the ingredients that go into making a DUI lawyer exceptional, and not just another member of the larger herd. As a Michigan DUI lawyer, I spend part of just about every workday in court dealing with OWI charges. I know that my abilities are top-shelf. I talk for a living, and what does and does not happen to my clients depends very much on the words I choose, and how I arrange and speak them. For a lawyer, this is a lot different than reading documents and drafting contracts. It goes without saying that a litigator should be well-spoken, but in any profession, no matter what kind of skill or talent may be required, there is a certain level of “average” within it that’s far above everyone else. The average professional baseball player catches and throws much better than the rest of us, but even in the major leagues, some players are just superior to others. Detroit Tiger’s pitcher Justin Verlander, for example, still manages to throw a ball better than just about every other player in the pro ranks, and that makes him exceptional.

3-218x300In the courtroom, most lawyers are pretty well-spoken, at least compared to the population at large. That should hardly be a surprise. While there are a few “mumblers” here and there, most lawyers who earn their living in court are drawn to litigation precisely because they have an aptitude for extemporaneous speaking and thinking on their feet. What elevates the best, however, is that they are just plain better. Within any profession, from carpenter, plumber, dentist to cardiac surgeon, the median level of skill is miles above that of the layperson, but the very best within any such profession always stand out from the rest. Being articulate, however, is not enough, by itself, for a DUI lawyer to be exceptional. Every exceptional courtroom lawyer is articulate, but not every articulate lawyer is exceptional in the courtroom. Being exceptional, at least as a litigation attorney, comes down to a mixture of things, kind of like a recipe (a pinch of this, a dash of that; hence the “magic sauce” reference) that defies precise measurement.

Beyond outstanding speaking abilities, the exceptional lawyer has to have an instinct to “read” a situation – particularly the Judge – and change direction seamlessly. I picked this up real early in my career. At first, I was surprised by how many lawyers didn’t know better, but I have since learned that most lack that instinct to “read the room,” so to speak, and then turn on a dime. No matter how good an argument, if the Judge isn’t buying it, the best and only thing you can do is cut your losses and try something else. When a Judge isn’t being persuaded, continuing to drone on and on isn’t going to change his or her mind. At best, you lose an opportunity to switch to a winning approach, while at worst, it’s going to push the Judge’s patience beyond its limits and you completely lose him or her, anyway. A lawyer may successfully argue to the Judge, but never with him or her. This is where that instinct comes in, and the exceptional lawyer just “knows” how its going. There are some lawyers who are great at making objections and arguing legal procedure, and those learned skills can be invaluable during a trial, but when you’re standing before the Judge to be sentenced for a DUI in the real world, you need a lawyer who can make things better for you, and a critical part of that is being able to intuit the situation and make adjustments on the fly.

Because I am both a DUI and driver’s license restoration lawyer, it is automatic for me to focus on the license consequences in every drunk driving case I handle. In truth, what can and will happen to someone’s ability to drive should be a primary consideration in every DUI case, but unfortunately, it’s not, and that’s often due to the limitations of the lawyer him or herself. A few days ago, a conversation with a potential new license restoration client reminded me that this important facet of drinking and driving cases is not really understood by lawyers who don’t also concentrate in license issues. Rather than turn this article into a never-ending list of examples, we’ll keep it brief by skipping the specifics and looking at why these considerations need to be front and center in every Michigan OWI case.

when-you-know-better-you-do-better-200x300A conviction for any Michigan DUI (Operating While Intoxicated) charge carries some kind of license penalty (technically referred to as a license sanction). One of the biggest misconceptions I encounter is the mistaken belief that the court or Judge has anything to do with this. License penalties are set by law, and they are imposed by the Secretary of State, not the court. This means that if a person is convicted of 1st offense OWI, his or her license will be suspended for 6 months, he or she will be unable to drive at all for the first 30 days (this is called a “hard suspension”) and will then be on a restricted license for the next 5 months. Fortunately, most first offenders can avoid the hard suspension through a good plea bargain and usually only wind up with a restricted license for 90 days. The larger point here, though, is that the court has nothing to do with what happens to the license, and the Judge cannot modify the sanction in any way. The only way to have an impact on the license sanction is through the plea bargain itself.

License sanctions are fixed, and, as the saying goes, set in stone: if you are convicted of offense “A,” then you MUST get sanction “B”; if you are convicted of offense “C,” then you MUST get sanction “D,” and so on. The sanction for any given offense cannot be negotiated or modified in any way. Most lawyers understand this much, but there is a lot more to protecting the client’s interests than just knowing the matrix of offenses and corresponding penalties. This, unfortunately, is where some lawyers wade into waters a bit ott deep without realizing it. There are things that can be done in handling the DUI case itself to either avoid a longer suspension or an outright revocation of one’s driver’s license beyond merely shooting for the best plea deal possible. On top of that – and this is really important – the lawyer must be able to look down the road and think in the long term, as well. The things that do and do not happen in the current case can and often do have a huge impact on getting your license back later. This is easy to overlook in the moment, but is one of those things that will most certainly come back to “bite” you in the you-know-what later. The problem is that unless your lawyer devotes a substantial portion of his or her practice to driver’s license restoration appeals, he or she won’t have a clue what these things are, much less what to do about them. This is one of the ways I can protect you better than anyone.

Looking for a DUI lawyer is like looking for a new smartphone: there are loads of choices and options, with most of them claiming to be the best.  I have been kind of “pushed” by my staff to write this article and explain why you should hire me for a Detroit-area DUI case.  Over the last number of years, I have put together this blog  and a website that provides more useful information than you can find just about everywhere else combined.  It has become a resource for the public, and a research tool for lawyers, as well.  After a recent call from some lawyer asking for clarification about the alcohol screening test (the written test that everyone is required to take as part of the DUI court process), my staff told me that while it’s nice that I’m so helpful, I need to make clear that I am the real expert about these things.  To be perfectly candid, they shook their heads at the idea that someone was paying some other lawyer (rather than me) to handle an OWI charge, and this attorney was researching the diagnostic process involved in substance abuse screening on my blog, and then asking me questions how the testing is done in a certain local court.  Given that I’m more inclined to explain something than brag about it, this article is a somewhat awkward departure from my usual approach.  Still, I want to make clear that if you are facing an drinking and driving charge in any Detroit-area (Oakland, Macomb or Wayne County) district or circuit court, I can help you in ways that no other lawyer can, and produce the very best (meaning most lenient) outcome possible in your case.

3dcd40d8900f2fc65e16bbd092043ff8-second-best-quotes-wise-quotes-300x300Some lawyers, like cell phones, are marketed based on low cost.  A cheap phone with actual pushbutton keys is severely limiting, and a cut-rate lawyer is just about as bad an idea, especially in the context of a DUI.  A smartphone with a virtual keyboard is a minimum requirement in today’s world, and will affect just about everything you do with that phone, every single day.  In that same way, understanding the screening processes used in the court system to look for evidence of an existing alcohol problem (and most often finding that there is at least an increased risk of that) is critical to avoiding unnecessary and negative consequences in your DUI case.  The simple reality here is that, as a group, people who are facing or have had a DUI in the past have a statistically much higher rate of alcohol problems than the population at large (meaning people who’ve never had a DUI).  If you’re dealing with an OWI charge, you can’t help but to walk right into this, and it is the reason for an ever-present “alcohol bias” in the court system.  Protecting the client from this trap requires a lot more than simple trial skills or understanding how a breathalyzer machine works.

This is my specialty, and it is important to every single DUI case that winds up in court.  I have completed a formal post-graduate (as opposed to undergraduate) program of addiction studies, and I fundamentally and comprehensively understand the development, diagnosis, and treatment of alcohol problems, and how people do (and don’t) recover from them.  In terms of actually making things better in a DUI case, I can help both those who do NOT and those who do have a problem with drinking.  This clinical knowledge provides a decisive advantage in every drinking and driving case because every person going through the court system must, by law, be assessed to determine whether he or she has, or is at risk to develop a drinking problem.  In the real world, very few people (at least those who aren’t my clients) emerge from this screening without a finding that at least some preventive alcohol education is warranted.  These are typically either multi-session evening, or, worse yet, overnight (3 or 4 day, often weekend) programs that you have to pay for and attend.  You won’t particularly be enjoying your stay at the Rehab Inn, and if you don’t have a drinking problem, you’ll like it even less if you discover it could have otherwise been avoided…

As a Michigan DUI lawyer, I spend a lot of time calming the fears of people who have been arrested for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI).  Unfortunately, some lawyers, not necessarily because they’re mean or otherwise trying to be intentionally deceptive, default to a strategy of selling their services through what is known as “fear-based marketing.”  After all, anyone with a product or service has to answer the question, “What can you do for me?”  You wouldn’t buy glue if the package said something like, “maybe it will hold, or maybe not.”  Most often, and especially right after the arrest, someone charged with a DUI is most afraid of going to jail.  Selling one’s self as the hero that can save someone from his or her biggest fear seems like a good way to get business, and, because of human nature, it does work well enough in the larger market.  In other words, when people are at their most vulnerable, they’ll buy into it for a sense of peace of mind.

AAA-219x300The simple truth, however, is that in a 1st offense DUI (at least in any local, Detroit-area court), you’re not going to jail.  It doesn’t matter if your lawyer isn’t any smarter or well-spoken than a braying donkey; jail simply is NOT on the menu.  The only possible exception to this comes from 1 out of the 3 Judges in Bloomfield Hills’ 48th district court, and even then, getting locked up not a guarantee.  If your case is pending anywhere else (or even in front of either of the other 2 Judges in that court), any talk of jail is a complete waste of breath, and paying some lawyer to “avoid” it is a waste of money, as well.  In fact, jail can be avoided in many, if not most 2nd offense DUI cases, and although somewhat off topic here, I’ve also kept countless clients originally charged with 3rd offense (felony) DUI from doing any time, as well.  Since you’re not going in the first place, paying legal fees to stay out of jail in a 1st offense DUI is senseless.

Keeping someone out of jail who is at genuine risk to go is one thing, and undoubtedly the most important thing for that person.  The point I’m making here, however, is that since you’re not at risk to get locked up for a 1st offense DUI (this includes High BAC cases, as well) anyway, why waste your time and money protecting yourself from something that’s not going to happen?  Instead, your focus should be on avoiding as many of the numerous other legal consequences that are possible, likely and even certain, like driver’s license restrictions or suspensions, and an easier, versus a more difficult term of probation.  In other words, you should pay your lawyer to provide you with the best and most lenient outcome possible in your case.