DUI Help and Advice

Making the DUI process easier

Transport

Is A DUI / DWI A Traffic Violation?

A DUI or DWI is a very serious driving offense, one that is the cause of more than one-third of all fatal traffic accidents. Not surprisingly, DUI and DWI convictions carry harsh penalties, and there is always a trend toward even harsher legislation to cut down on drunk driving.

Although driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol is a very serious crime that can result in a felony conviction in extreme cases, there is some confusion as to whether it is technically considered to be a traffic violation. Technically, a DUI or DWI is not a traffic violation; it is a federal crime that can range from a petty misdemeanor to a felony. It does carry many of the same penalties associated with a severe traffic violation, however. A DUI or DWI conviction can result in a suspended or even a canceled license along with a severe fine. If the driver has been convicted of over three or four DWIs or DWIs or if their actions have resulted in a fatal traffic accident, they may face felony charges. The number of DUI convictions that you can have before a felony charge, depends on the state.

In short, a DUI or DWI usually isn’t considered a traffic violation, but it is a serious federal crime that almost always carries a much harsher sentence. Being accused of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol is a serious matter that should never be taken lightly no matter where a person lives. If someone has been charged with a DUI or DWI, speaking to a trusted attorney as soon as possible to learn more about the laws in one’s state may be a smart move. Beating a DUI or DWI conviction can be a challenge, but it is not impossible. Asking an attorney about the options that may be available may be an important first step.

I Got A DUI, Now What?

As you see the blue lights in your rear-view mirror, you probably suspect that you will not be walking away from the scene without some type of citation or ticket. After you drink and drive, you may receive a DUI/DWI, especially if the officer decides to perform a field test. If you have not been drinking heavily, then the officer could write a ticket and let you leave the scene by calling a friend or family member to come get you and the car. If there is someone else in the car who has not been drinking, then there is a possibility that the officer will let that person take the car home. However, in the unfortunate event, you are driving alone, your car could be impounded, and you will need to find another way to get home after being taken into custody and processed at the police station.

If you fail field sobriety tests, then chances are the officer will take you to jail and then issue the ticket. You will probably only be in jail for a night so that the alcohol has a chance to get out of your system. One of the first people you should call when you get out of jail is an attorney. You will be given a court date, and if you don’t go to court, a warrant for your arrest will likely be issued. When you go to court, there are a few things that could happen. If you have not been in trouble with the law before, the judge might make you pay fines or place you on probation. You could have to take some type of drug and alcohol class. As your encounters with law enforcement increase, the leniency from the judge will decrease. It is possible to lose your license or be sentenced to a jail term if you are convicted of DUI/DWI charges.

The best thing to do may be to contact an attorney so that he or she can tell you what to do in the event you have received multiple tickets. The attorney can talk to the prosecutor to see if there is any type of plea bargain available. This could get your sentence reduced so that you are not in jail.

Can You Refuse A DUI Checkpoint?

DUI checkpoints, which are also known as roadside safety checks or sobriety checkpoints, are designed to allow law enforcement to check for intoxicated motorists. They are generally set up around holidays, such as the Fourth of July and Memorial Day, which are known for increasing the number of intoxicated drivers on the road.

In spite of a number of challenges to their legality, DUI checkpoints were ruled both reasonable and legal by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1990. They have been deemed legal even in states that require officers to have reasonable suspicion of a driver’s intoxication before pulling them over. Currently, there are only 12 states that do not use DUI checkpoints due to a restriction in the state’s constitution or state statutes.

If someone is pulled over or stopped at a checkpoint, they may refuse to submit to a blood alcohol concentration test, but if they choose to do so, they will run into legal problems due to implied consent laws. Implied consent laws are present in all 50 states, and they state that individuals who apply for a driver’s license have given consent to being tested for impairment. Therefore, if someone does refuse to submit to a test, they are likely to face penalties that might include license suspension and fines. In cases where someone has a past DUI conviction, penalties for refusing a test may be increased.

If someone has been stopped at a DUI checkpoint and refused to submit to a BAC test or is charged with a DUI, they may be facing a variety of penalties if they are convicted. These sanctions might include heavy fines and prison sentences, depending on the circumstances. Those who have been charged should contact a criminal defense attorney who might be able to review the situation and build a case that protects a client’s rights.

 

Too Drunk for Your Driveway

In Michigan, the risk of being ticketed for drunk driving does not end when you pull up in your driveway. In fact, it doesn’t end even if you haven’t pulled out of your driveway. Contrary to what some might think, drunk driving in Michigan doesn’t even require the use of a publicly available road. No sir.

The Michigan Supreme Court reversed two lower court rulings that a man couldn’t be prosecuted for driving drunk in his own driveway. The Michigan Supreme Court says a driveway is no refuge for a drunken driver. The state Supreme Court has expanded the definition of “driving” to include moving operating your vehicle in your own private driveway.

Gino Rea of Northville, Michigan was arrested in 2014 after police went to his home in response to a neighbor’s complaints about loud music. According to court documents, while there, the arresting officer watched Rea back his vehicle out of, and then back into his garage, bumping into some loose items inside the garage in the process. Police said he smelled of alcohol and his speech was slurred.

Rea refused a field sobriety test and was taken into custody. At that point, he probably should have spent more time reading DUIwise.com. He didn’t, and when his blood alcohol level came in at three times the legal limit, he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol without ever leaving his driveway.

He was clearly drunk. But was he guilty of drunk driving? In court, police acknowledged that the car never traveled beyond the front of the house.

Michigan’s law against drunken driving states: “A person, whether licensed or not, shall not operate a vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, within this state if the person is operating while intoxicated.”

During his original trial, an Oakland County Circuit judge dismissed the case, troubled by prosecutor’s assertion that a private driveway was “open to the general public.” The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal in 2016, reiterating the lower court’s ruling that Rea “was not operating his vehicle in an area generally accessible to motor vehicles.”

In a 5-2 ruling, the state Supreme Court, however, disagreed with the lower courts’ definition of “generally accessible.” In issuing its ruling, the court said a driveway is “generally accessible to motor vehicles” under state law, even if it’s on private property.

Writing for the majority Justice Richard Bernstein said, “In light of the dictionary definitions of these words, ‘generally accessible’ means usually or ordinarily capable of being reached,” He noted that the phrase “generally assessable” did not mean the same thing as open to the general public. It pertains only to who may have access to the driveway. Absent something on the defendant’s driveway that would have prevented motor vehicles on the public street from turning into it, the driveway was, in effect “generally accessible to motor vehicles.”

There are many who believe the Oakland Circuit and state Appeals courts, rightly concerned about a violation of civil, property rights, balked when hearing their private property was generally available to the public.

In dissent, justices Bridget McCormack and David Viviano said the court should be “hesitant to assume” that lawmakers wanted to extend their reach to the private property of homeowners.

“Private property rights are, of course, central to our legal system—every person has ‘exclusive dominion over his own soil,’” McCormick wrote. “If a private citizen chooses to have a few beers while washing his car (or to wash his car while having a few beers), on a patch of his own land covered by a driveway, that is his right.”

Michigan Supreme Court Justices are nominated to run by political parties. The composition of the current court is four justices who were nominated by the Republicans and three who were nominated by the Democrats. As a rule, it tends to lean right in its rulings. This decision came as a surprise to many on the right who advocate for personal property rights.

Nolan Finley of the Detroit News opined most of us think our driveways are private property, and not accessible to the public, at least not unless they’re trespassing. But the Supreme Court majority disagreed, and in doing so “did a bit of trampling on the state’s respect for private property.”

In Michigan, if you’ve had one too many beers while washing your car in your driveway, and you get behind the wheel of your car to drive into your garage, you might find yourself under arrest. Finley says “this is yet one more intrusion into space the constitution carves out for individuals to stand free of government meddling, and another example of the law being twisted to control rather than to protect.”

Perhaps DUIwise.com might have provided a different path had the defendant had it been contacted quickly after his arrest. It’s still not too late for Rea to get the expert advice he needs. The Supreme Court sent the case back to Oakland County for prosecution, where it is currently pending.