Category Archives: DUI Laws

Three Reasons Why You Should Hire a WA DUI Attorney for a First Offense

Comments

DUI arrests are no fun in The Evergreen State and they shouldn’t be taken lightly. If you have been arrested for a DUI in Washington State, you’ve got a serious issue that needs immediate attention.

A lot of people think that once they are arrested for a WA DUI, they will have a guilty conviction on their record. This is not the case. If you hire an experienced DUI attorney you can potentially get your WA DUI charges dropped.

Here are some other reasons why you should hire a Washington state DUI attorney for a first DUI offense.

Penalties for a first offense in Washington are extremely harsh.

According to WA DUI attorney Jonathan Dichter, the penalties for a first offense WA DUI include jail time, loss of driver’s license, probation, and even the installation of an ignition interlock. Dichter strongly states, “These harsh penalties make the need for a quality DUI defense attorney paramount.”

There could be flaws in the investigation.

One of the first pieces of advice attorney Jonathan Dichter gives to anyone arrested for a DUI is to not take the field sobriety test or any other voluntary tests. These are methods the police use to show you’re guilty. Even if you feel the odds are against you, an aggressive DUI defense attorney like Jonathan Dichter can prove there are flaws in the police investigation. Therefore, your charges could potentially be dropped.

There is a WA DUI attorney out there waiting for your call.

You may not know this if you’ve been arrested for the first time, but many lawyers like Jonathan Dichter devote their practice to DUI defense. If you’ve been arrested for a DUI in Washington, chances are that attorney Jonathan Dichter has fought and won cases very similar to yours. He has a passion for fighting for criminal defendants, ensuring that their rights and freedoms remain intact. This is definitely a quality you would want in a WA DUI attorney. Above all, help is out there.

If you have been arrested for a WA DUI in Island, Kitsap, or Whatcom counties, contact DUI attorney Jonathan Dichter today!

For more information on the Law Offices of Jonathan Dichter, please click here.

And… We're Back!

Posted on by
Comments

After some website maintenance, I am pleased to say that the 1 800 DUI Laws blog is back on the ‘net. Thanks so much for your patience.

Anyway, in researching an interesting topic to talk about today, I came across an article from AOL News about Montana legislator, Alan Hale. Representative Hale is arguing against creating tougher DUI laws in his state because they will “hurt small businesses”.

I’m not quite sure how tougher DUI laws would directly hurt small businesses. Obviously a lot of factors come into play when validating that idea.

That being said, I’m no legal expert, but I have been exposed to a lot of states’ DUI laws. I have to say that Montana has the most lenient DUI regulations in the country. For example, after a first conviction in Montana the maximum license suspension is usually around six months. However, in New Mexico, after a first conviction, you could lose your license up to a year. This is true for many other states as well.

Montana has a five year look-back period for people who have been arrested for a DUI. This means that if a person was arrested seven years after another arrest, he or she would be tried as first time offender. Most other states have a ten-year look-back period.

A DUI conviction sucks no matter what, but it is interesting to see Montana coming around to toughening their DUI laws years after other states have done so.

I don’t know whether Representative Hale hates change or enjoys joyrides. He argues that Montana’s bars and pubs “connect” people and since Montana is so rural, people need to drive to get to said bars and pubs. If DUI laws become tougher, people won’t be able to get to those bars and make those connections. So, I guess this means most people have stayed in contact with every single person they have ever met at a bar. Ever.

I don’t know about you, but it seems like Rep. Hale has never heard of the idea of a designated driver or a taxi. Furthermore, when it comes to people connecting, I’m starting to doubt he has ever heard of the internet or even a telephone.

A National DUI Database?

Posted on by
Comments

Would you want information about your DUI arrest to be available in a nationwide database? This is what Omaha City Prosecutor, Marty Conboy wants to see within the next year.

Conboy is heading an effort to create a database that consolidates all DUI arrests in all 50 states into one database. This system would be put into use to better prosecute repeat DUI offenders whose previous convictions were in another state. Many times, previous DUI convictions in different states go unnoticed when a person is currently being charged. There are many instances where a repeat offender is convicted of a misdemeanor, when, according to a specific state’s law, they should be convicted of a felony.

This does seem to be an effective way to crack down on repeat offenders. However, does this seem like a breach of privacy? How do you think this will affect a one-time offender who wants to put their DUI arrest behind them?

[Source: KETV Omaha]

DUI Law Update: Arizona

Posted on by
Comments Off

If you’re an Arizona resident, you may want to read this. This law is going to affect a lot of drivers and will make a difference in your DUI case.

On Monday, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that blood tests cannot be used as evidence in a DUI trial if the suspect does not consent to a blood test.

Arizona has an “implied consent” law, which means that a driver will consent to BAC test, unless the driver says otherwise. If a driver does not consent to a blood test, he or she will still receive a license suspension no matter what.

The police must obtain a search warrant from a judge in order to require a suspect to be tested. If the suspected driver is unconscious, consent is presumed to be given and the police are allowed to draw blood.

What does this mean for you? If you are pulled over, you are allowed to refuse a blood test, knowing fully well that you will have your license suspended. If the officer has a warrant, you are not allowed to refuse a blood test.

Above all, as important as it is to know your rights, it is equally important to hire a lawyer to help you navigate the legal system.

[Source: Arizona Daily Sun]

Many CA Residents Continue to Drive During License Suspension

Posted on by
Comments Off

In many DUI arrests, there are frequent cases of the driver operating a vehicle with a suspended license. We know that there are many repeat offenders, but in California the number of people who drive with a suspended license is quite immense.

According to the Ventura County Star, 180,000 Californians currently have their license suspended. An estimated 70,000 of those people continue to drive.

Why does this happen? Why do so many drivers believe they can slip through the cracks of the legal system?

According to California state law, driving on a suspended license is only a misdemeanor. Therefore, it takes a low priority in comparison to other crimes. Police do not do as many sweeps to monitor if people are driving illegally.

Above all, people (especially in California) need to drive to get to work and take care of other responsibilities. With California’s new ignition interlock law beginning its testing phase in July, we could see a decrease in those numbers. Time can only tell.

Checkpoints Update

Posted on by
Comments Off

I know a lot of you may be overwhelmed at the Heidi and Spencer break-up, but don’t let your emotions get the best of you to the point where you become irresponsible. Here’s a list of a few checkpoints happening this weekend.

- For those of you in Darien, Connecticut, the county is preparing for its first ever checkpoint. Here’s a recent post we have about ways to prevent getting pulled over.

Here’s a few more checkpoints:

- Sacramento, California
- Livingston and Buchanan Counties, Missouri
- Essex, Massachusetts

More to come soon!

College Students are Riskier Than We Think

Posted on by
Comments Off

This week, BusinessWeek published very harrowing statistics about the drinking and driving behaviors amongst college students. The article summed up the conclusions of Amelia M. Arria and her colleagues that will soon be published in the August issue of Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. Here is a summary of some of their findings:

- One in five college students have admitted to driving while drunk.
- 40 % of college students have admitted to riding in a car with a drunk driver.
- Male students are more likely to drive drunk, but both sexes are likely to drive drunk to some extent.
- The tendency to drive drunk amongst college students increases right when students turn 21 – the minimum legal age to drink.
- Studies have shown that freshmen students tend to drink more than upperclassmen. Amongst underage students, half of them admitted that they drove after drinking and 20 percent drove while drunk.

What do you think can be done to decrease these numbers? Do you think lowering the drinking age will help?

What To Do if You Get Pulled Over

Posted on by
Comments Off

Yesterday, we posted about what to do to avoid getting pulled over. With Memorial Day starting for some people already, DUI checkpoints will be in full-force this weekend all across the country. (Here’s a list of some Memorial Day Weekend DUI checkpoints.)

If you have taken plenty of precautions and still get pulled over, it is understandable that you would feel flustered and intimidated. It is important to stay calm and collected. I’ve been working in the DUI business for years and here is what I think you should do if you get pulled over. Please note that this is not official legal advice. The most important thing you can do is hire an attorney.

DO:

Have your paperwork handy. If you are rummaging through your car like a maniac looking for your license, registration, and proof of insurance, it could read to the officer that you are under the influence. Keep those documents in your wallet or safely organized in a glove compartment.

Be polite. The only information you are required to tell the officer is your name (along with handing him or her your paperwork.) You do not need to answer any of the officer’s questions. Be sure to respond politely. You can say, “I apologize, but I do not wish to respond to that question until my attorney is present.”

Take an evidentiary breath test or request a blood test. When an officer requests that you take a BAC test, first ask if it is a PAS test (a preliminary alcohol-screening test) or an evidentiary test. You are not required to take a PAS test, but you are required to take an evidentiary one. It is best for you to ask to be taken to the station for a blood test. If that is not possible, be sure the breathalyzer test is evidentiary.

DON’T:

Like I said, you do not have to answer any question. You also don’t have to take a field sobriety test. (In some cases, it might be better if you don’t take a test, especially if you feel flustered or have a physical hindrance from performing the test adequately.)

To summarize, the only requirements when getting pulled over is stating your name, handing over your paperwork, and taking an evidentiary BAC test. Above all, be cooperative and hire a lawyer as soon as you can.

Today's Notable DUIs

Posted on by
Comments Off

Not one, but two doctors have been arrested for DUIs recently. One doctor was even on his way to surgery! Was he intending on performing surgery while drunk? I suppose this DUI arrest saved more lives than we think…

Joyce DeWitt, Probation is Waiting for You. Joyce DeWitt, who played Janet on my favorite rerun (Three’s Company), received a three year probation for her DUI last year.

Another Person Added to the “Two-in-One-Day File”. A HI woman received two DUIs in one day, each DUI within five hours of each other. I bet she had a terrific day.

Memorial Day Checkpoints

Posted on by
Comments Off

I bet you’re as antsy as I am for this weekend, but just know that DUI officers are just as antsy.
There are DUI checkpoints all over the country this weekend. Be safe and responsible.

Here’s a comprehensive list of some checkpoints that will be happening this weekend.

Lake Tahoe

Vermont

Boulder, Colorado

Las Cruces, New Mexico

Columbus, Ohio

Lee County, Florida

Highland and Victorville in San Bernadino County

Cherokee County, Oklahoma

Southwest Ohio

Oregon – statewide

Idaho – statewide – There will also be seatbelt enforcement.

Nashville, Tennessee

San Francisco

Los Angeles, CA

Utah – statewide

Today's Notable DUI Stories

Posted on by
Comments Off

Lindsay Lohan Finally Goes to Court. You can breathe a sigh of relief now.

After participating in a court ordered treatment program, Rip Torn has been cleared of his Connecticut DUI charges. However, he’s also charged with breaking into a bank while intoxicated. Hasn’t he ever heard of the phrase, “Thieves don’t let thieves rob drunk”?

What’s the best way to keep teens from drinking and driving? Finding out Monday morning that their principal got a DUI.

Notable DUI Offenders of the Week

Posted on by
Comments Off

Kennedy Gets DUI – Ah, that headline feels familiar. Mary Richardson Kennedy, the wife of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., received a DUI this Saturday.

Jail Has Sunday Brunch and Polo, Right? –John Goodman (no, not the guy who played Walter in The Big Lebowski) has been charged with vehicular homicide and DUI manslaughter. Goodman is the founder of the International Polo Club in Palm Springs. He was held on $100,000 bail which was paid within hours of the arrest.

This has been a really tough week for me (and by “me”, I mean Lindsay Lohan) – First we’re all proud of her that she’s attending her DUI classes. Then, she personally disappoints the entire world for missing her court date. (That’s a BIG no-no.) We find out she is in Cannes and there is a warrant for her arrest. However, now, her legal team posted bail and everything will be okay. Oh boy, Lindsay. Thanks for providing this drama, now that Law and Order got canceled.

Girl Scout Leader Finally Gets her DUI Badge – I love Thin Mints. However, if you’re inebriated, I can wait until you’re sober to drive the troupe to sell cookies.

A 911 Call – Enough Evidence to Pull Someone Over

Posted on by
Comments Off

The Newspaper reported that Utah police can now pull a driver over if a third party calls 911 to report that a drunk driver is about to get on the road.

On August 8th, 2005, Annalee McCaine phoned the police to inform them that her drunk boyfriend at the time was behind the wheel. McCaine informed police that she and her boyfriend, Jose Baltarcar Roybal, had been drinking and had an argument.

Police Sergeant Chat Ledford stopped Roybal following the call. Ledford claimed that he did not pull Roybal over solely based on the phone call. Ledford claims he witnessed Roybal driving recklessly when he was dispatched.

The court argued whether or not Ledford’s action was a violation of the fourth amendment (the prohibition of unreasonable search and seizures.) The court discussed whether Ledford had enough reasonable evidence to stop Roybal. The state high court ended up deciding that Ledford acted in the right.

“Looking to the totality of the circumstances in the instant case, we believe the 911 call was sufficient to provide the dispatcher with reasonable suspicion that Roybal was driving under the influence,” states Justice Michael J. Wilkins.

The issue remains the source of the 911 call. Can the caller be a reliable piece of evidence to warrant an arrest – even if the caller had been drinking as well?

MI DUI Offenders Off the Hook

Posted on by
Comments Off

A judge’s ruling in DeSoto County, Mississippi caused much controversy as four DUI offenders got off the hook this past Monday.

The reasoning behind this decision was that the arresting offices were not using the correct ticketing form to properly arrest these drivers.

Bill Rasco, the DeSoto County Sheriff, was very upset over this ruling, as he assisted in one of the arrests. “It blows my mind that this is happening,” he states. “Our guys try to protect and serve. It’s unbelievable what’s happened.”

It seems to me that there was some type of communication failure within the police department. Why weren’t these officers aware of the updates to the ticketing system? It seems to me, that when lives are in danger, drunk driving enforcement needs to be as efficient as possible.

[Source: My Eye Witness News]

The Cost of Tougher DUI Laws

Posted on by
Comments Off

Most people in the United States are really pinching their pennies during this recession. We are budgeting more carefully and changing our spending habits and becoming more vocal on how the government spends our tax money.

In terms of driving safety, anyone with a soul would want drunk driving to never happen again. However, how the government spends our money in ways to prevent future drunk driving tragedies seems to be a source of dispute. How much money during these terrible economic times are taxpayers willing to spend to keep drunk drivers off the road? How do we know that the money we give the government is being effective in drunk driving prevention?

According to an article in the Statesmen Journal, Oregon seems to be having this exact issue. Many bills have been sent to the state legislature only to be turned down. These bills include a proposition to lower the state B.A.C. level and a proposal to increase the number of sobriety checkpoints in the state. The reason for these bills’ failure, in some way or another, has to do with financial matters and high costs.

This coming November, Oregon citizens will have a chance to vote on the Oregon Crimefighting Act. This bill, also known as Initiative 13, will require a 90 day minimum sentence for a third DUI offender and would eliminate the 10-year time frame mandate for offenders committing subsequent felonies. This act will cost taxpayers a lot of money, but will it be a smart investment for Oregon citizens? We shall see when November rolls around.

Student Suspended after Distributing DUI Cartoon

Posted on by
Comments Off

Program after program urges students to be aware of the dangers of drinking and driving. However, it seems that in Scranton, if you are a teen raising awareness of drinking and driving, it could lead to a suspension from school.

Rashel Shihinski of Dickson City was driving her car to her school, Mid Valley Secondary Center, on April 29th. She saw a Mid Valley bus traveling in her lane and it did not look like it was coming to a stop. Rashel swerved her car to avoid the bus and hit a telephone pole. Rashel and her passenger suffered no injuries, but it will be a financial burden to fix her vehicle.

The day after the accident, Scranton’s Times-Tribune published an editorial cartoon depicting an intoxicated bus driver with a student passenger on the bus, saying, “Has the Supreme Court ever ruled on school bus prayer?” This cartoon came as a result of more reports of a Mid Valley bus driver operating the school vehicle while intoxicated.

Upset over her car damage, Rashel saw the cartoon, made copies, and distributed it all over her school. School officials accused Rashel of degrading the school and she received a three-day suspension.

As a person who always resented any school administrator, I obviously feel there are many things wrong with giving Rashel a suspension. When a person claims that a bus driver was intoxicated, amid reports and actual arrest of an intoxicated bus driver, this is not the time to worry about the school’s reputation over one student distributing a cartoon. Instead, school administrators should worry about students’ safety. If anything, Rashel’s suspension gives students an education that perhaps most people and companies care more about their reputation than the safety of others.

DUID – Unfair to Potheads?

Posted on by
Comments Off

Russ Belville is the outreach coordinator of NORML – the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. He posted a very interesting editorial on the Huffington Post today about the unfairness of the Obama Administration’s plan to adopt Per Se Drug Impairment Laws.

Basically, the Obama administration is urging state laws to recognize the difference between driving while intoxicated and driving while impaired on drugs. They believe that charging a person with a DUI when they were really driving under the influence of drugs makes DUI laws seem unclear “thereby minimizing the possible preventive benefit of DUID statutes.”

Belville believes this is a direct assault on him and other cannabis users. Cannabis can be detected in a person’s urine sample up to 100 days after the person has taken the drug. Therefore, that person can be convicted for a DUID despite the fact that he or she may have used cannabis a while ago. This is unlike harsher drugs (PCP, prescription pills, etc.) which only stay within the body for a few days. Therefore, according to Belville’s argument, a meth addict has more of a chance of not getting a DUID than a marijuana user (post drug test results.)

Belville certainly has a point. However, he does not seem to recognize that there might be a reason these people are getting pulled over in the first place.

Department of Transportation Teams up with DADSS

Posted on by
Comments Off

Ray LaHood, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, announced on his blog today that the National Traffic Safety Association along with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety have created a partnership with an alcohol detection research program known as Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS.

According to their website, DADSS aims to “research, develop, and demonstrate non-invasive in-vehicle alcohol detection technologies that can very quickly and accurately measure a driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BACs).” DADSS wants to avoid the use of ignition interlocks and create a device that would be used by society as a whole – not just convicted drunk drivers.

LaHood considers DADSS’ research to be a huge undertaking. After all, this organization is trying to create technologies to prevent drunk driving without being obtrusive to a person’s daily life. As of now, three companies are developing prototypes to be tested at Harvard Medical School.

If DADSS does create a device that is used by most drivers in the future, what kind of changes will we see to DUI laws? Will they be more lenient? Or could they become harsher than ever?

Yes, You Can Be Convicted of a DUI Without Proof You Were Behind the Wheel

Posted on by
Comments Off

There has been a major change in DUI laws this week, as West Virginia ruled that a person can still be convicted of a DUI without requiring proof that he or she was driving under the influence.

This was a result of a case where Eric R. Cain was found by police passed out in front of his car. The police did not have any proof that this person was driving, but certainly had reason to believe he did. Cain was convicted of a DUI and, despite appealing to circuit court, the high court upheld Cain’s DUI conviction.

“All that is required to seek a license revocation under West Virginia Code Section 17C-5A-2 is that the arresting officer have ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ that the defendant committed the offense of a DUI,” states WV Supreme Court Justice Thomas E. McHugh. Nonetheless, the police must give specific facts to testify that a suspect was driving while intoxicated.

How fair do you think this ruling is?

[Source: The Truth About Cars]

Drunk Driving vs Distracted Driving Amongst Teens

Posted on by
Comments Off

I read in the Department of Transportation’s blog that 80% percent of teens are aware of the dangers of drinking and driving. This seems like a really positive statistic, but it became null when I found out about the amount of teen deaths due to distracted driving.

In fact, according to last Friday’s post on the Department of Transportation blog, there were no corresponding numbers of the jump in deaths of teen drivers due to drinking and driving. However, the numbers of fatalities in teen-driving-related accidents are due to distracted driving and many of these incidents happen during the nighttime.

3 % of teens are aware that nighttime driving is an added risk. Nighttime driving mixed with fatigue and using a cellphone drastically increases this risk.

Despite these rising numbers being unrelated to drinking and driving, it seems to me that the philosophy of these drivers remain the same: they think they will drive home safely. These people think accidents won’t happen to them.

I think it is important for the general driving public to know that you cannot trust that you will get home safely whenever you get behind the wheel with an added risk-factor. There is no way of relying on luck that you will get home safe when you are drunk or distracted on the road. “Risking it” should never be an option.