Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
We are busy Michigan DUI lawyers who handle a lot of cases. While each and every one is unique in some way or other, one thing they all have in common is that our firm was hired after having done an initial consultation with the client. A consultation is really a prerequisite to the beginning of an attorney-client relationship, and is an opportunity for each party to “size up” the other. In this article, I want to dig a bit into the meaning and scope of a “consultation,” and explore both what it is, and what it is not.
I close out every one of my blog articles with this language: “All of our consultations are free, confidential, and done over the phone, right when you call. My team and I are very friendly people who will be glad to answer your questions, explain things, and even compare notes with anything some other lawyer has told you.” As noted above, the real purpose of a consultation is for the potential client to screen the lawyer, and for the attorney to evaluate whether he or she is interested in taking the case and representing that person.
Some people (although not anyone who is any kind of real “potential client”) clearly misunderstand that. This can be frustrating, because every lawyer no doubt gets calls from people who say things like, “I want my free consultation,” thinking it’s an opportunity to ask questions or get a legal opinion on some matter entirely outside the scope of the attorney’s area(s) of practice. This is kind of like someone calling up a plastic surgeon for a consultation about back pain and seeking advice about the kind of exercises he or she should do.
A fairly common, real-world example of this occurs in the area of landlord-tenant cases. People who are being evicted for non-payment of rent will call every lawyer they can find, from Michigan DUI lawyers like us, to personal injury firms, as well attorneys from every field in-between, and ask for their “free consultation,” thinking they can get some free legal advice to fight back against a pending eviction.
As a side note, almost every one of those eviction cases starts out because the person hasn’t paid the rent, but then looks to find something the landlord did, or hasn’t done, that can be used as a defense to getting put out. I know this, because like every lawyer out there, I too wound up taking loads of those calls early in my career.
Anyway, even among those who understand that a consultation should concern legal issues within the lawyer’s specific practice area(s), there are some people who are intent on asking every conceivable and possible “what if” and “what about” question they can think of, and would stretch the idea of consultation into a day-long seminar.
To any experienced lawyer, this is a huge red flag.
These people will not only exhaust even the most patient attorney, they will call around to every other lawyer, and then call the same offices back, over and over again, without consciously realizing that what they’re trying to do is narrow down the field to find the lawyer with the narrative they like best.
In other words, they are fixated on finding the lawyer who tells them what they want to hear far more than finding the one who will tell them what they need to hear.
To a certain, but limited extent, this is understandable. Unless someone works as a DUI lawyer themselves, and even if he or she is a licensed Michigan attorney practicing in another area of law, they simply won’t know how Operating While Intoxicated (OWI, the technical term for what everyone calls “DUI”) cases really work, or have any concept of all the nuances involved in properly handling them.
Accordingly, most people begin their “legal research” after a DUI arrest just hoping to find a lawyer who can get them out of the charge.
I have my own real-life example of that helps illustrate my point: When my parents passed away, I inherited their home (I’m an only child). The fireplace in the family room (that part of the house was on a slab) had “tilted” a bit over the years, and I discovered, while on my hands and knees, that one could actually see daylight coming in!
That wasn’t good.
I was hoping the cost to fix this would be in the hundreds of dollars – or at least not more than a couple of thousand.
Accordingly, I first contacted and spoke with our old builder to see about a repair, but he explained that this went beyond simple construction, and that I should consult with a company that leveled concrete.
I was still hopeful that the job wouldn’t involve a lot more than concrete leveling and some interior and exterior repair. By the time I began looking at concrete leveling and interior repair, however, I knew the cost was way beyond the hundreds of dollars, and well into the thousands.
The concrete leveling guy explained that the foundation beneath the house needed to be repaired, and that he couldn’t help, either.
Instead, he told me to contact a foundation repair company (and I have no reason to plug them here other than that they did an incredibly good job, were timely, and when our builder came back and looked over their work, he was really impressed by it, so if the reader ever does need any kind of foundation work, I can honestly say I had a great experience with Foundation Systems of Michigan).
By the time the foundation guys got involved, though, the cost of everything, including interior repairs, was around $20,000.
Of course, I was disappointed, because I began my inquiries hoping the fireplace fix could be done a lot sooner, and for a lot less, but I accepted the reality that I had been poking around in a field where I had no expertise.
Even though nobody had told me what I’d wanted to hear, I was at least smart enough to listen to those who told me what I needed to hear.
Had I been like one of those “red flag” DUI callers, though, I would have keep looking around until I found some cheaper outfit who would have sold me a bill of goods, and would have done some patch job that would have amounted to putting a band-aid over the problem, instead of fully resolving it.
To be sure, nobody starts looking for a DUI lawyer wanting to hear that it’s going to cost a lot, nor do they want to learn that what they had hoped was the “way out” of their case probably isn’t going to work.
No matter what, it is always true that success in a DUI case is best measured by what does NOT happen to you. My team and I will always make sure our clients get out of his or her case with the fewest penalties possible.
Often enough, people will say they didn’t think they were “that bad” (meaning not that drunk) when they were arrested for their DUI, and/or will indicate that they don’t think that the police officer really had a reason to pull them over, other than it was early a.m., or something like that. Some think that these things might “help” their case.
Fortunately, in our office, it’s standard practice to obtain and watch the police car dash-cam video. Over the years, we’ve had plenty of clients raise their eyebrows and express surprise as they see how they were driving, how they sounded when talking to the officer, and how drunk they obviously were when trying to perform the field sobriety tests.
My point is that it’s easy for some hungry lawyer to simply agree with a caller when he or she indicates they don’t think the police had any reason to pull them over, and then prattle on about how that can be used to get the case dismissed.
Imagine such a “consultation” going like this:
Lawyer: So what happened that you got pulled over?
Caller: I’m not sure. Like I told you, I wasn’t drinking that much: I had maybe like 3 drinks over about 5 or 6 hours, but it was around 2:30 in the morning when I was driving home. The cop said I was swerving, but I don’t think I was, except that my phone fell off the passenger seat and maybe I swerved for a second as I leaned over to grab it.
Lawyer: That sounds promising, and we can potentially use all that to show that the officer didn’t have a good enough reason to pull you over, and then keep out all the evidence so we can get the case dismissed.
Sounds great, doesn’t it? Although there are more, here are the 3 biggest problems with any exchange like the one above:
1. Statistically, less than 1 out of every 10 people arrested for a Michigan OWI (Operating While Intoxicated, or “DUI”) charge manage to get their case dismissed outright. This number is consistent from year-to-year.
2. The lawyer has no idea what any of the independent evidence shows until he or she reviews it, so to comment on it, or otherwise lead the caller on without making that clear is ill-informed, at best, and just plain wrong, no matter what.
3. It is normal for people to underestimate how much they drank and the level of their intoxication afterwards. Every DUI lawyer knows this from experience. Under no circumstances would 2 or 3 drinks over 6 hours put someone over the legal limit to drive.
If a lawyer was going to be honest, and provide accurate information, then the exchange above would look more like this:
Lawyer: So what happened that you got pulled over?
Caller: I’m not sure. Like I told you, I wasn’t drinking that much: I had maybe like 3 drinks over about 5 or 6 hours, but it was around 2:30 in the morning when I was driving home. The cop said I was swerving, but I don’t think I was, except that my phone fell off the passenger seat and maybe I swerved for a second as I leaned over to grab it.
Lawyer: Okay. Look, even if all the officer saw was you swerving to pick up your phone, that may have been enough to justify the stop. We’ll have to get the video and watch it to see what he saw. It’s the same with the field sobriety tests; we’ll want to see what tests you were asked to perform, and look at all of the circumstances surrounding your performance on them, and then see if there is anything concrete that calls into question the reliability of your BAC results. If there’s something we can use to challenge the evidence, then we’ll find it, but if not, then at least you’ll know everything was carefully examined.
In terms of selling legal services, being honest doesn’t have the kind of appealing and “sexy” marketing allure that simply telling someone what they want to hear does, but what’s the point of a consultation if a person comes away misinformed, or otherwise mislead?
In our office, a normal consultation begins with us asking some questions, and in a criminal or DUI case, that always starts with “where?”
The location of a DUI is critical; the importance of “where” cannot be overstated.
Beyond that, we need to develop a picture of what actually happened and get to know who the potential client is, as a person. Only then can we provide any cogent (if even just preliminary) answers to someone’s questions.
At the end of the day, and as I noted above, the consultation provides an opportunity for a potential client to gauge a lawyer’s attitude and general knowledge, and to ask questions, both about his or her case, and about the attorney’s experience in the field, and in the court where the matter will be decided.
On the flip side, the lawyer gets an opportunity to evaluate a potential client, as well. For example, if someone with a “know-it-all” attitude calls our office and tells us what the evidence shows (without even having seen it) and how the case should play out in court, then we know it would be better for us to pass on taking him or her as a client.
If each thinks they can work well with the other, then that’s a start.
If either party has reservations, then that’s a signal that they may not be a good fit.
Before closing out, I would be remiss to not point out that our office is different from every other in 2 important ways:
First, nobody has to ask what we’ll charge; we are the ONLY firm to list our prices online, and,
Second, although nobody else says this, we always make it clear – because we really believe it – that anyone looking for a lawyer should be a savvy consumer and call around. There is NEVER any good reason to not explore your options and do some comparison shopping.
If you are facing a DUI and looking for a lawyer, be that good consumer, do your homework, and read around. Read how lawyers explain the DUI process, and how they explain their various approaches to it.
When you’ve done enough of that, start calling around. You can learn a lot by actually speaking to a live person. If your case is pending anywhere in the Greater-Detroit area, meaning anywhere in Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Lapeer, Livingston, St. Clair or Washtenaw Counties, give us a ring, as well.
As I noted above, and as I say in the closing of every blog article, my team and I are very friendly people who will be glad to answer your questions, explain things, and even compare notes with anything some other lawyer has told you.
All of our consultations are free, confidential, and done over the phone, right when you call. We can be reached Monday through Friday, from 8:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., at either 248-986-9700, or 586-465-1980.