Articles Posted in DUI

One of the more frustrating parts of any professional’s job is explaining something to a person, only to have him or her largely ignore it, and respond with something that’s completely wrong, but that he or she likes better. As Michigan DUI lawyers, we encounter this somewhat regularly. For example, people often wind up hearing (and then believing) all kinds of incorrect things about DUI law (like the legalities of breath testing, or Michigan’s Implied Consent law,) either from someone who is not a lawyer, or from some lawyer who doesn’t concentrate in the DUI field.

This inevitably devolves into a variation on a theme I examine regularly: People are much more attracted to what they want to hear rather, than what they need to hear. While understandable, that’s a huge vulnerability that makes an otherwise rational person susceptible to getting fleeced into paying some lawyer for a result that sounds too good to resist, but just isn’t going to happen. This kind of misinformation is what drives so many weight loss programs, house-flipping schemes, and fitness crazes du jour.

Have you ever met anyone who went from flab to fab using a gizmo they saw on TV? Yet for all the laughs to be had about such gimmicks, there are still loads of people who want to be in shape so much that the idea of getting a beach body by twisting away on some $20 board for a few minutes a day while watching TV sounds awesome, and who gladly pay up. Moreover, the sellers of these products work hard at making such results seem plausible. Remember, though, and as the old saying goes, “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is,” especially when it comes to DUI cases.

As Michigan DUI lawyers, my team and I consider ourselves to be rather good at what we do. I have no doubt that in every DUI case we handle, we manage to bring about the very best result possible. We have more than enough experience and skill to do just that, but there is also a 3rd element to being a good DUI attorney that often gets overlooked: a strong conscience. When we accept a retainer from someone, we feel a moral obligation to do everything possible to make sure we produce the best outcome for him or her.

For everything I can and will say on this subject, it really comes back to the simple principle of treating others as you would wish to be treated. There are certain times in life when you have no choice but to put your trust and well-being into someone else’s hands, and when that happens, you can only hope that person will put his or her heart and soul into the job and look out for you like they’d look out for their own family. We always feel that responsibility when someone puts their trust in us, and we absolutely pour our hearts and souls into the work we do.

If there’s a point to be made here, it’s that all 3 of these ingredients – experience, integrity, and skill – must be present for a lawyer to really be “good.” Who wants a really smart, sharp lawyer that can’t be trusted? On the flip side, what good is the most honest attorney on the planet, if he or she isn’t sharp? In certain fields, like law and medicine, brighter is better, but raw intelligence always needs to be guided by a strong moral compass, as well. This goes a lot deeper than merely not being a crook, and extends to making sure to look out for interests that people don’t even know they have.

As Michigan DUI lawyers, we interact with people facing DUI charges all day, everyday. While statements like “we get to know our clients” are good marketing lines, they really don’t mean anything specific. In the context of a DUI case, the idea of who you are is important on 2 levels: first, so your lawyer can address the specific concerns or issues that you have (ability to drive, professional license, etc.), and second, so that your lawyer can use your “social capital” (meaning trade on the value of what you’ve done in life) to produce a better outcome in your case.

Admittedly, a lot of how things work out in any DUI is a direct consequence of a lawyer’s experience and skill. To a certain extent, a really good lawyer can, especially in terms of presenting the case, make up for some of what the client is missing. It’s worth noting that even when lawyers or well-liked celebrities get in trouble, they always hire a well-spoken lawyer and let him or her do the talking. I know that if I needed an attorney, I’d want want one who was well-groomed and who could talk the leaves off the trees. In this article, however, we’re going to focus on the other side of that equation; the client.

In part 3 of this article, we continued examining how, in all Michigan DUI cases, the courts are going to focus on a person’s drinking because, as simplistic as it may sound, the fact that a person already has a DUI makes him or her an identified, increased risk to do it again. I reiterated that multiple studies have shown that, as a group, people who previously had a DUI (or multiple DUI’s) test out with a higher incidence of alcohol problems than everyone else who hasn’t had one. We then concluded by noting that, despite everything else, sometimes, a DUI just happens.

Yet for as much as a DUI can “just happen” to just about anyone, the reality is that the overwhelming majority of people never get one. There are about 30,000 DUI arrests in Michigan each year, representing around 0.3% of the state’s nearly 10,000,000 person population. This means that more than 99.7% of people don’t get arrested for a DUI in any given year. Moreover, out of those 30,000-some cases, more than 9 out of 10 are NOT dismissed for any legal (or other) reason. While it’s understandable that everyone wants to get completely out of their DUI, the simple truth is that such results are the exception, and not the rule.

In part 2 of this article, we continued our examination of the court system’s focus on a person’s drinking in Michigan DUI cases. We noted that multiple studies have confirmed that there is a statistically increased rate of drinking problems among people who’ve had a DUI when compared to those who have never had one. For this reason, more than any other, the courts order everyone on bond and probation for a DUI to not consume alcohol, and also requires them to “test,” to ensure their compliance.

Because of the court system’s intense focus on a person’s drinking, one of the problems we encounter, as Michigan DUI lawyers, is that Judges are seriously inclined to “overdo” the whole education/counseling/treatment thing. No matter what, all courts take a “better safe than sorry” approach. It is generally accepted that it is always better to have sent someone to counseling or treatment than he or she did not need than to have NOT sent him or her for any kind help they really did need.

This is perhaps easier to understand by taking a look at a 2nd offense DUI: Under Michigan law, anyone convicted of a 2nd (or 3rd) offense DUI is categorized as a “habitual alcohol offender,” and is presumed to have a drinking problem. Consequently, the person’s driver’s license will be revoked, because he or she is seen as risky, and a danger to the public. Getting it back requires proving, to the Michigan Secretary of State, that he or she has completely quit drinking alcohol, and is a safe bet to never drink again.

In part 1 of this article, we began looking at where the courts directs their attention in all Michigan DUI cases – to the person’s drinking. I pointed out that each year in Michigan, there about 30,000 DUI arrests, and then noted that our senior assistant often (correctly) points out to people who call us that “a DUI is about your drinking, not your driving.” Although it’s normal for anyone facing an OWI charge to hope his or her case can be “knocked out” somehow, the fact is that, on average, more than 9 out of 10 (>93%) of all DUI cases brought in this state do NOT get dismissed.

The upshot of all this is that in order to produce the best results in those cases – the more than 9 out of 10 that don’t get tossed out our of court – it is imperative to know why the court system focuses on a person’s drinking, and what it’s looking at, as well as what it’s looking for. As also mentioned in part 1, it has been consistently demonstrated that DUI drivers, as a group, have a notably higher rate of drinking problems than the population at large, meaning everyone else who has not been arrested for a DUI.

The fact that people with a DUI have a higher rate of drinking problems than people without a prior DUI is very significant. Unfortunately, it is also completely ignored by most DUI legal websites. While many lawyers love to talk about getting cases dismissed, few of them want to talk about the fact that such outcomes do NOT occur in more than 9 out of 10 cases, and that’s a disservice. The reality is that, with very few exceptions, almost everyone arrested for a DUI is going to wind up on probation for it, so making that probation as easy and lenient as possible is crucial.

One of the more difficult things for anyone going through a Michigan DUI to grasp is why the court system focuses so much on his or her drinking. People often mistakenly believe that the court will be most concerned about the exercise of poor judgment that led to them driving drunk, but, as it turns out, that’s not the case. Instead, as our senior assistant puts it, “A DUI is about your drinking, not your driving.” This is key to understanding how and why OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) cases are handled as they are.

For purposes of this article, we’ll skip analyzing all the legal concerns about the admissibility of the evidence and the like, especially because those issues only come up in a small minority of cases, anyway. In Michigan, on average, more than 93% of DUI arrests DO NOT get dismissed or knocked out of court for evidentiary or other problems. Thus, our inquiry here will focus on how things work for the vast majority of people (more than 9 out of 10) here in the Metropolitan-Detroit area (meaning Wayne, Oakland, Macomb and the surrounding counties).

To be sure, the fact that a person drove while intoxicated IS the central issue of any DUI case, Accordingly, the main goals of the law is to impose enough consequences and penalties to deter him or her from ever doing it again. However, this is balanced by another (and often overlooked) goal: to make that point without ruining a person’s life. While people are often initially freaked out over the potential consequences of a DUI charge, the reality is that the court system has no interest in costing a person his or her job, destroying their future, or otherwise coming down too hard.

Although we are “Michigan” DUI attorneys, my team and I concentrate our drinking and driving practice to the local courts of Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, and the surrounding Counties. Unlike our driver’s license restoration practice, which is state-wide (and country-wide, really), we limit the DUI cases we take to those pending in the Greater-Detroit area. This concentrates our experience in the same circle of courts, working with the same Judges and prosecutors, day-in and day-out, and enables us to really know how to best handle a DUI case in each of them.

The bottom line is that a person hires a DUI lawyer to make his or her situation better. The expectation is that a lawyer is selling relevant and specific experience that can be used to help the client, and not just accepting payment, like some kind of “tuition,” in order learn how things are done in a court where he or she doesn’t regularly appear. I think that it’s better for a lawyer to accept a DUI case when he or she can genuinely help someone, based upon having actual experience in the court where the case is pending, rather than just seizing an opportunity to take in another retainer.

Location is critically important, especially in DUI cases, because every court is different and those differences can sometimes be profound. I recently explained to someone that facing a DUI in one local court would be like going to the dentist for a regular dental cleaning, while facing a DUI in the neighboring court, one district over, would be like going in for a root canal. The likely outcome of the same garden-variety DUI case can range from “not so bad” to very tough, simply because of the court in which it arises.

In part 1 of this article, we saw that, of the 30,896 regular DUI arrests that took place in Michigan in 2019, only 30 people managed to “beat” their case at trial. That’s a mere 0.097% (zero POINT zero-nine-seven percent). While everyone who gets a DUI understandably wants to get out of it, the reality is that the overwhelming majority of people (more than 9 out of 10) charged with an OWI offense DO NOT. Unfortunately, too much legal marketing ignores this reality, and instead, tries to cash in by telling people what they want to hear, rather than what they need to hear.

Here, in part 2, we’re going to continue looking at the real numbers, and the real-world implications of the Annual Drunk Driving Audit conducted by the Michigan State Police (MSP). As I pointed out, this audit is legally required, and takes into account every OWI and substance abuse-related driving arrest that takes place in the state. There is no such thing as a case that isn’t counted. As such, we can absolutely rely on these figures for accuracy, and the story they tell is critically important to anyone facing a DUI and looking to hire a lawyer.

For all the things that could, in theory, be “wrong” with a DUI case, the simple reality is that they don’t occur very often. As the numbers show, a total of 2067 cases out of the 30,896 DUI arrests in 2019 were dismissed based upon “merit.” This means that only 6.69% of people charged with a DUI were able to successfully challenge the evidence and get their charge(s) dismissed. Therefore, a person should hire a lawyer who will try everything to beat the charge, but who also knows how to produce the best outcome in those more than 9 out of 10 cases that do go all the way through the court system.