Articles Posted in Revoked and Suspended Driver’s License

In Michigan, while the charges of driving while license suspended (DWLS) and driving while license revoked (DWLR) violate the same rule of law and are subject to the same criminal punishment, there is a huge difference in what will actually happen to your future ability to legally get back on the road. If you’re facing a DWLR (revoked) license charge, what at first sounds like a great plea bargain can wind up having terrible long-term consequences for you. To put it simply, a “revoked” license charge needs to be carefully – and skillfully – handled.

One of the more ironic aspects of my practice as a Michigan driver’s license restoration lawyer is the number of calls and emails I receive from people after they’ve thought they had gotten some great plea deal dismissing a driving while license revoked (DWLR) charge (the usual “bargain” here is a plea to the lesser charge of failure to display a valid license, often called a “no ops”), only to receive notice from the Michigan Secretary of State (SOS) informing them that their has been revoked for another 1 or 5 years.

Risker 1.2.jpgA big problem is that too many lawyers do not understand the critical difference between administrative and legal penalties. I cannot count how many times I’ve heard a story that begins something like this: “My lawyer told me….” Here, I can supply the ending that the lawyer didn’t tell, because he or she didn’t know: If you plead guilty to ANY moving violation or reportable (meaning the court sends an abstract to the Secretary of State) offense while your license is revoked, the SOS must slap on what’s called a “mandatory additional” revocation for the same length of time for which your license was revoked in the first place. This means that, despite their being no criminal license penalty listed for the reduced charge that is presented as a “plea bargain,” the Secretary of State must and will another term of either 1 or 5 years’ revocation to your license. This is the real hidden cost to what, at first, sounds like a deal. Remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch…

If your license is revoked, it’s almost always due to multiple DUI convictions. By contrast things like too many points, or failure to pay traffic tickets results in your license being suspended, not revoked. Revoked means you don’t get it back, ever, until you file a driver’s license restoration appeal before the Michigan Secretary of State’s Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (DAAD) and win after a full hearing.

It makes no difference that you may have been legally eligible to apply for restoration (some people mistakenly say “reinstatement”) of his or her license. If your license has been revoked, and even if you were eligible to have it restored years ago, until it actually is restored (and that can only happen after a successful license appeal hearing in front of a Michigan Secretary of State Driver Assessment and Appeal Division hearing officer), it is still revoked. In other words, you either have an actual, valid license, or not. If you haven’t won a license appeal hearing, then your license is still revoked, and it couldn’t matter less that you are or have been “eligible” to get it back.

In fact, being or having been “eligible” literally means nothing, and confers no different legal status beyond still being “revoked.” Lots of people, for example, are “eligible” to apply for and ultimately obtain a concealed pistol license (CCW), but that doesn’t mean that such a person can carry a gun. If you don’t have a valid CCW in your wallet, it’s a crime to conceal a pistol on your person. Being eligible for a license, as opposed to actually having it, are two very different things.

So what should you do?
Continue reading

Part and parcel of being a Michigan DUI and driver’s license restoration lawyer is being, almost by definition a suspended and revoked license lawyer, as well. In Michigan, driving while license suspended (DWLS) violates the very same law as driving while license revoked (DWLR), but the two offenses are very different, particularly because the long range consequences of driving while license revoked are so much more severe. In this article, we will focus on the Michigan Secretary of State administrative sanctions for a conviction of driving while license revoked, differentiating them from those that are spelled out in the criminal law.

To begin, I should point out that the consequences to be examined are the same no matter where in Michigan a person lives. While the range of court-imposed (meaning criminal) consequences of a driving while license revoked case are spelled out in the law, and can differ based solely upon the location of the court or the temperament of the Judge, our focus is going to be upon the mandatory (and therefore non-negotiable) sanctions that the Michigan Secretary of State must hand out when someone with a revoked license is caught driving.

Consequences 1.2.jpgIf you’re license has been revoked, it almost always means you’ve had multiple DUI convictions. Anyone in this predicament knows that you never just “get” a revoked license back. Unlike a suspended license, where you will eventually become eligible for reinstatement after a certain period of time, or if you pay a certain amount of money, a person with a revoked license only ever becomes eligible to file a formal license appeal and have his or her case decided after a hearing in front of the Michigan Secretary of State’s DAAD, or Driver Assessment and Appeal Division. Only when you’ve been approved (and that means proving, by “clear and convincing evidence,” that your alcohol problem is both “under control” and “likely to remain under control“) do you ever win back the privilege to drive, and even then you’re placed on a restricted license and required to drive with an ignition interlock device for at least the first year.

This pretty much means that having lost your license for multiple DUI’s automatically puts you at a disadvantage. Since my purpose here is to be informative, then I’d ask the reader to indulge me a bit and let me speak plainly, rather than try and tiptoe politely around the real issues. If your license has been revoked, the court sees you as dangerous. While no one has his or her license suspended for singing too loud in the church choir, you certainly don’t get your license revoked because all you did was forget to pay a ticket. When you’re license is revoked, it means that you’ve practically been on a mission to screw things up. That part of your life may be over, but not the consequences.

This is important because, as I have noted many times before, there are really two classes of people who wind up in court with a suspended/revoked license charge:

1. Those whose suspension/revocation results from one or more alcohol-related prior offense(s), and,
2. Everybody else.

When you go to court, it’s about a million times better to be part of the “everybody else” group. In the previous article entitled “The Problem with Michigan DUI Cases,” I tried to explain the trend that accounts for almost everyone facing a DUI being seen and treated as if they have a drinking problem. Here, in the context of revoked licenses, we’re dealing with folks that have multiple convictions for DUI. Dragged back into court for driving when they are clearly not supposed to, there is a natural tendency on the part of any Judge to see such a driver as out of control and determined to do what he or she wants, regardless of laws or rules or anything like that. By contrast, if you’re part of the “everyone else” category, that means you’re license has merely been suspended, and often for something like not paying a ticket or getting too many points. Whatever else, that kind of person is seen as negligent, more than any kind of threat on the road.
Continue reading

It costs a lot of money to advertise and a lot of time to become well known as a Michigan criminal lawyer, or a Macomb DUI lawyer, or even a Michigan driver’s license restoration attorney. In fact, to become “known” through advertising, in any of these capacities, at least by the general public, would cost a fortune. As a result, when a case comes along and a lawyer is contacted by the media about his or her client, the opportunity for what amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars of “free” publicity presents itself. Without thinking, many lawyers will jump at the chance, often with a vague recollection of the notion that “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.” This is selfish and shortsighted thinking, at best.

If a lawyer’s primary concern is getting his or her name “out there,” then this is like winning the lottery. If, however, the lawyer’s primary concern is the well being of his or her client (as it darn well should be), then deflecting, rather than basking in the spotlight is very often the better, if not the more expensive choice. The inspiration for this article is the result of a recent case that came into my office. As I discussed the matter with my senior assistant, Ann, we realized that by doing the right thing for the client, I would literally be turning away an incalculable amount of free publicity. Yet it is precisely in my client’s best interests for this case to disappear, as much as possible, from the public radar.

Headline News 1.2.jpgImagine that you are arrested for some kind of criminal charge, or even a DUI, and somehow or other, it winds up in the paper, or on TV. It doesn’t have to be a feature or huge, front-page story, but for some reason word of your arrest gets out. Immediately, people who know you start talking. Your employer may find out. At that point, what’s the best thing that could happen? When you really think about it, the best thing that could happen is for the whole thing to just go away. There is no way to undo the publicity that has already been given to the story, so what you really want is that no one else hears about it, and that everyone who already has just forgets about it.

That won’t happen with some self-serving lawyer yapping away about your case. No matter what he or she says, or how much he or she insists that you’re innocent, all the attention is just that – attention, and it focuses right on you. If you want a situation to go away, you need to make it go away, and the first way to achieve that is to NOT talk about it. Over the years, I have quietly been involved in many cases that have started out being watched by various media outlets. You wouldn’t know about any of them, and that’s precisely the point.

Beyond just deflecting attention away from a client, I believe in deflecting it away from the officials involved in it, as well. It is far better to handle a case when neither the prosecutor nor the Judge feel the weight and scrutiny of the public gaze. To be sure, there are some cases that will always hold the public’s attention. When a public figure (think Kwame Kilpatrick or O.J. Simpson) is in trouble, the media will follow the case no matter who says what. There are also certain kinds of cases that capture the media’s attention just because of the facts. Most often, these are serious cases. A particular murder, kidnapping, or even case of the church secretary embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars will sometimes be “interesting” enough to follow independent of anything any of the parties say about it.

It’s sometimes easy to forget that Judges are elected officials. So is the county prosecutor. As much as any politician wants “good” press, he or she certainly wants, more than anything, to avoid any “bad” press. Being seen as soft on crime is not a political asset. Imagine, for a moment, that you’re a Judge. When election time rolls around, do you think it could ever hurt you to be known as the Judge who is really tough on drunk drivers? Yet if your opponent were challenging you by claiming that you had been too soft on drunk drivers, you’d be stuck defending yourself. Looking at it from an electability standpoint, being seen as tough on drunk drivers is an asset, while being seen as too soft is a political liability.
Continue reading

Almost everything I do in my role as a Michigan driver’s license restoration attorney and a Detroit-area (meaning Metropolitan Detroit, Tri-County) DUI and suspended license lawyer has something to do with automobiles and traffic stops. Everyday, I represent either someone trying to win back a Michigan driver’s license (or at least obtain a clearance of the Michigan hold on their driving record), someone facing a DUI, someone charged with driving on a suspended license in the Detroit area, or even a person charged with possession of marijuana (or other drugs or weapons) found as a result of a traffic stop. In short, virtually everything I do involves motor vehicles. Many of my clients are trying to get back on the road, some face being taken of the road, and others just got in trouble while on the road. Still, there’s a theme here…

When a person has had his or her Michigan driver’s license suspended or revoked, and then gets caught driving, they are often unaware the potential long-term dangers that lie ahead. This has nothing to do with going to jail; I keep my clients out of jail as a matter of my day-to-day work. Instead, the real danger of a suspended or revoked license charge involves additional suspensions and added costs and financial penalties that can go on forever, and continue to multiply. There’s an old saying to the effect that once a person gets caught in the system, they seem to be stuck in it forever, and while I don’t completely agree with that, the cold truth is that once a person gets caught driving with a suspended or revoked license, unless things are made better and fixed right away, he or she can get become ensnared in a tangle that never seems to let go. As some people put it, once you’re on the roller coaster, you can’t get off.

Suspended 1.2.jpgIf there’s a brutal lesson to be learned here, it’s that the best time to hire a suspended license lawyer like me is the first time you face such a charge. Too many people, acting on the mistaken belief that a first offense for driving on a suspended license isn’t that big a deal, will just go with a public defender, or, worse yet, will handle things on their own. Meanwhile, while their first concern is staying out of jail, they’ll lose sight of the long range consequences that the wrong kind of plea deal can bring, and will accept a plea bargain that simply avoids jail, and/or even avoids points on their driving record, not realizing that such a disposition will, in many cases, cause their license to be suspended or revoked further.

At the time, this often doesn’t seem so serious, and the person thinks he or she can either get rides of the next year or years, or will be careful (and lucky) enough to not get caught driving, if they must. But this doesn’t usually work out. As far as luck goes, anyone having to think about these things in the first place will require a drastic change in luck right out of the gate. To put it another way, if luck had anything to do with it, you wouldn’t be in this boat to begin with.

The reality of life is that you need to drive. With only the rarest of exceptions, not being able to drive limits everything you can and/or will do. The longer you’re without a valid license, the more you won’t be able to do, like look for or accept a better job, or the more chance you’ll have to take to get and hold on to those things. While there are lots of exceptions, it does seem that once a person gets caught driving without a license, things begin to pile up, and those things almost always involve more suspended and revoked license charges. Everyone to whom this happens was rather sure that it wouldn’t, but then it did. It’s just better to do things right the first time so that you can keep your license, or, if you don’t have one, get it back sooner, rather than later.
Continue reading

If you are facing a Suspended License for having refused to take the Breathalyzer test as part of a DUI Arrest, I can get you back on the road. Beyond all the considerations involved in how and why a person receives an “Officers Report of Refusal to Submit to a Chemical Test,” the bottom line is that some people wind up facing some form of a “breathalyzer refusal.” This is the more serious refusal to take a breath test at the Police Station. Unlike the refusal to take a Preliminary Breath Test (PBT), which can only result in a Civil Infraction, a real Breathalyzer Refusal is written up on a person’s Michigan Temporary Driving Permit as “Officer’s Report of Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test.”

If you have received this, you have 14 days to request a Hearing before the Secretary of State’ Driver Assessment and Appeal Division (instructions are on the back side of your Temporary Driving Permit) or else your License will be Suspended for a year. If the 14 days have passed, your License will be (or may have already been) Suspended for a year. In the real world, this generally only matters in 1st Offense cases. If a person is facing a 2nd Offense within 7 years, or a 3rd within 10 years, unless they beat the whole DUI charge, their License will be Revoked, anyway, so “fighting” this really amounts to little more than a short delay of the inevitable.

Coprbeath 2.1.jpgIt goes without saying that, in cases where the 14 days haven’t yet passed, I look these over rather carefully to make sure the refusal can “stick.” Sometimes, it is worthwhile for me to be retained to show up and contest a refusal. Most of the time, however, it’s a waste of money, and unless there is information to be gained through the cross examination of the Police Officer that may prove useful in the underlying DUI case, this can serve as a textbook example of throwing good money after bad.

If the DUI case appears solid and there is really no basis to challenge the refusal, I’ll simply tell my Client to show up for the Hearing at the Secretary of State Branch Office on the off chance that the Officer does not, in which case the whole thing is dismissed and the person’s License is secure. If the Officer does show, and unless I have determined that there is a real problem in the case, the outcome is pretty much predetermined.

Remember, the vast majority of refusals are upheld because, in the vast majority of cases, there is no adequate legal excuse for failing to take the test, as required by law. This is part of Michigan’s implied consent law, and the requirement that a person submit to a chemical breath test is set in stone. The ONLY way to win one of these cases is to prevail on one of the 4 issues set forth on the reverse side of the Officer’s Report form. Not to be funny about it, but in answer to a question I’m asked often enough, being drunk doesn’t count as an excuse.

Let’s skip forward – unless you win at the Secretary of State (and really, good luck with that), you’re going to need to get your License back, and I can do that. I can take the matter to Court and have a Judge override your Suspension and get you back on the road. This is true whether you did nothing, and just let the state Suspend your License, or you went to a Secretary of State Hearing and lost. Either way, I can undo the Suspension of your License…
Continue reading

As a Criminal Defense Lawyer whose Practice concentrates rather heavily on Driving-related matters, including DUI’s, Driver’s License Restorations and Suspended License Offenses, I have seen firsthand how an unfortunate choice or two can impact a person’s life. This article will focus on the impact, both immediate and long-term, when a person winds up getting caught Driving on a Suspended License (DWLS), or Driving with a Revoked License (DWLR). It will be based upon my experience in those localities to which I limited Practice, meaning all of Macomb and Oakland Counties, and parts of Wayne County.

At first glance, Driving While License Suspended seems like a less serious charge than Driving While License Revoked. After all, a person’s License can be Suspended for all kinds of reasons: Chief amongst them are unpaid Tickets, failure to show up in Court, and a DUI or a Drug case. A person’s License is usually Revoked, however, for multiple DUI’s, or really serious things. It often surprises people to learn that Driving on a Suspended License and Driving While License Revoked violate the very same rule of Law. As a result, the potential punishment for each is identical. Legally speaking, DWLS and DWLR are identical. In fact, in many jurisdictions, the Police will quite correctly write up the Offense as DWLS/DWLR.

DLGreen copy2.1.jpgBeyond all this legal finery, however, lies a subject that turns out to be a little deeper than it at first seems.

Of course, it’s pretty safe to say that no one who gets Arrested on a Suspended or Revoked License charge ever really thought it would really happen, or, in the case of those with prior such Offenses, happen again. Everyone who gets behind the wheel and knows their License is not valid knows they’re taking a risk, but figures that they’ll be extra careful and will get by unnoticed. Then something happens, a Police car gets behind them with lights flashing, and they immediately get that sinking feeling in their stomach.

Over the span of my career, I have heard every reason you can imagine for why a person was driving. Most often, it centers around work. Obviously, if a person is caught driving without a License, a better reason seems to make it more “excusable.” No one would say something like “I didn’t have a ride to the bar, so I figured I’d drive myself.” Instead, “I didn’t have a ride to work, and I couldn’t find one” seems to make a lot more sense.

And to a large extent, it does.

I have noted in many of my various DUI articles that how well or poorly any case turns out that won’t otherwise get dismissed or “knocked out” due to some technical has a lot to do with geography. In other words, a DWLS case in the Macomb County cities of Roseville, New Baltimore or Shelby Township, or the Wayne County cities of Canton, Livonia or Westland will result in a much more lenient Sentence than one in the Oakland County cities of Rochester Hills, Bloomfield Hills or Troy.
Continue reading

Within my Practice as a Criminal and DUI Lawyer, I handle Driving While License Suspended (DWLS) charges quite frequently. DWLS is perhaps one of, if not the single most common “Criminal” charges to go through the Court system. This article will be about the run-of-the-mill, Joe-basic DWLS charge.

In previous blog articles, I have explained the various categories of DWLS charges, from 1st to 2nd (or subsequent) Offense. I have also examined how DWLS is different from Driving While License Revoked (DWLR), even though the two Offenses carry essentially the same penalties, and are part of the very same provision of the Law.

MSP1.jpgHere, we’re going to concentrate on the everyday, garden-variety DWLS charge. This is the kind of case that shows up regularly in my Office, and in Lawyer’s Offices everywhere. To be clear, much of what we’re going to examine applies to 2nd Offenses and to DWLR charges, but to keep this article down to manageable size, we’ll restrict our focus to those cases in which the charge is DWLS.

Note that I did not use the term “DWLS 1st Offense.” A person may have had a prior DWLS charge, or even a few. That, however, does not mean that they are always subsequently charged with a 2nd Offense. In fact, in many cases, a person with 1 or more prior cases winds up simply charged with “Driving While License Suspended (DWLS).”

And that’s as good a place as any to jump off and ask why that’s the case? Why are there so many DWLS cases in the first place, and why do so many people with prior Offenses NOT get charged with a 2nd or subsequent Offense?

Not surprisingly, the answer boils down to one word: Money. DWLS charges are money-makers for municipalities. In fact, if you want to be a bit cynical about it, they’re pure money. While some have (not incorrectly) called DUI cases “cash cows,” DWLS cases might comparatively be called “pure profit pigs.”
Continue reading

There is a consequence to all Drug Possession cases that is often overlooked, if not unknown, by many people facing such a Charge. This is the mandatory Driver’s License Suspension that MUST be imposed in any case where a person has been convicted of a Drug Crime. Strangely enough, this mandatory Suspension is the same, whether or not the person was charged with Possession of Marijuana, or Possession of Heroin, or any substance in-between, either Felony or Misdemeanor.

The reason this mandatory Suspension ever came into existence is another fine example of what happens when Lansing acts. As I have said in previous articles, I try to keep politics out of this blog, but I cannot escape the truth that pretty much EVERY LAW that is enacted in our state either makes life more difficult, or expensive.

SmokeJail.jpgHonestly, when is the last time a Law was passed that made your life any better? The smoking ban is, in my view, the only exception to this proposition, but that really depends on whether you smoke, or not. I don’t, so I like the change.

Thus, a number of years ago, our state legislature decided that it didn’t like the idea that most people who faced a Drug Possession charge didn’t go to jail. The feeling was that simply being placed on Probation wasn’t enough consequence, so it was decided that a provision would be written into the Law that anyone convicted of any Drug Possession charge who WAS NOT Sentenced to Jail would thereby have his or her Driver’s License Suspended for 6 months, in any 1st Offense case, and for 1 year if the person had a prior Drug Possession conviction. The Court in which such a conviction took place became legally obligated to impose the Suspension, and would, of Course, have to report the matter to the Secretary of State as a “Drug Crime.”

Although there is a corresponding License Sanction in Drug Delivery cases, we’ll keep our focus on the far more common Possession charges.

To soften the “sting” of leaving so many people without a way to get to work, the Legislature added a provision to the Law that allows the Judge handling the Possession case to grant the person a Restricted License. In 1st Offense cases, this can be done after the person has suffered through 30 days of the Suspension. In 2nd Offense cases, the Judge can grant that Restricted License after the person has gone 60 days with a fully Suspended License. This has not worked out so well, however.
Continue reading

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.

Garbage3.jpgThen 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

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

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

Stop3.pngThis meant that a person with 3 DUI’s within 10 years, whose License was Revoked for a minimum of 5 years, and who got caught driving during that period would have another 5 years of Revocation imposed upon them.

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

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

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

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