Articles Posted in Driving Under the Influence (Alcohol, Drugs, OWI, High BAC)

|

Westland District.jpgThe intention of this post is to give you a brief overview of what to expect if you are being charged with Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) arising out of the 18th District Court in the City of Westland. The 18th District Court is presided over by the Honorable Judges Sandra Ference Cicirelli and Mark A. McConnell. Based on our firm’s experience, the 18th District Court will treat you fairly and your case will be handled efficiently. By treated “fairly”, we mean that if you are a first offender whose OWI is reduced to the lower offense of Operating While Visibly Impaired (OWVI), the Court’s sentence will be reasonable as I will explain. When I say that a first offense will be handled “efficiently”, we mean that your case can be handled in 1 court appearance if it is resolved by way of plea bargaining under certain circumstances. However, if motions are filed or your case is scheduled for trial, there will be other necessary proceedings. This blog will focus on the vast majority of cases which are resolved by way of a plea bargain.

When charged with a crime, our firm will consider all of the evidence and make recommendations to our clients as to the best course of action. In reality, the vast majority of criminal offenses and drunk driving cases are resolved by means of plea bargaining. When representing a client charged with an OWI who does not have a good case for trial, our law firm typically has three goals;

-Get the charge reduced, typically to an “Operating While Visibly Impaired” (colloquially referred to as an “OWVI” or simply an “Impaired”);

-Avoid jail time; and
-Minimize the length, terms and conditions of probation.

Discussed in other blog posts, most drunk driving cases do not make great cases for trial. Presumptive evidence of intoxication is established by a valid traffic stop, failed roadside sobriety tests, and Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) results of .08% or greater. For that reason, we usually fight to secure the lesser charge of Impaired Driving and seek recommendations from the prosecuting authority for sentence leniency. The merits of the Impaired Driving charge have also been discussed at length in our previous blog posts. Generally, an OWI which is reduced to OWVI is less points, saves our clients $1,000.00 in driver responsibility fees, involves a shorter period of action against one’s license and does not involve any mandatory period of license suspension before issuance of a restricted license.

In most other courts, the process to resolve a drinking and driving offense requires at least 3 court appearances which include pretrial conference, substance abuse assessment and sentencing. However, the 18th District Court will endeavor to handle the entire case on the same date. It is our experience that getting to the 18th District Court by 8:00 a.m., knowing our Client’s case and being prepared to advocate with the prosecutor are essential for a case to be resolved in the efficient manner which I have described compared to cases which languish for several months and require multiple stressful Court appearances.

At the time of sentencing, the Court will determine the extent and terms of probation along with fines and costs. The maximum term of probation for a first offense Impaired Driving is 2 years. In our experience, first time offenders for Impaired Driving should expect 12 months probation in the 18th District Court. Probation may be reporting (to a probation officer) or non-reporting. Non-reporting probation is preferred and is less intrusive upon one’s daily routine. The 18th District Court will normally allow time to pay fines and costs. However, in a recent case handled by our firm, the Court said that our client’s reporting probation will be converted to non-reporting probation after payment of fines and costs.
Continue reading ›

|

10d476ab150908e1a8f30400f28fdec6Well, December has never been a month where business is slow at the shopping malls or at our law firm. December is the month when people get out of their routine. What I mean is that many tend to drink more, spend more money, drive more frequently and have greater periods of time with family members. Existing drinking problems, substance abuse, depression, strained relationships and financial troubles are put to the test during the holiday season. All of these situations can lead to criminal problems such as drunk driving, retail fraud and domestic violence.

As a Macomb County criminal defense lawyer, I consider myself sensitive to the needs of our clients during the holidays. What can you say when someone gets charged with retail fraud (shoplifting) who suffers from depression or a substance abuse problem? I am just saying that people are just people and I do not sit in judgment of those who are less fortunate or troubled. I have found that the Judges in Macomb County to be reasonable with those who have no criminal record but find themselves charged with retail fraud under various circumstances including financial hardship or other stessors. In these cases, our attorneys are able to negotiate a plea bargain to have the case dismissed after a period of probation and conditions which may mean attending an economic crime class. This is true for clients that we have represented in every Macomb County District Court.

The holiday season is also a time of parties and gatherings which invariably involve alcohol. I have represented my share of teatotallers and social drinkers who have one too many at a holiday house party and wind up being charged with drunk driving. This can happen to anyone who has a few drinks and gets stopped by the police a few blocks from home. I cannot count the number of clients that I have represented for drunk driving who are pulled over in their own subdivision or even while pulling up in their own driveway. In Michigan, a person is considered legally drunk if his blood alcohol content (BAC) is .08% or greater regardless as to whether or not the person was actually intoxicated. To make matters worse, Michigan has passed a super drunk law making it a more serious crime if the blood alcohol content is .17% or greater. Sobriety is not a defense to a charge of Operating While Intoxicated (OWI or DUI) or Super Drunk. Various drink/weight index charts provide an approximate blood alcohol content (BAC) which can be helpful for anyone considering a few drinks before driving. The best advice that I can give is to have NONE FOR THE ROAD since the BAC charts are only an approximation and do not take individual tolerances into consideration; Even one drink can create misunderstandings in the eyes of the law if an accident occurs and someone is injured or dies.

Continue reading ›

|

imagesCAA4TL1H.jpg

Driving under the influence of alcohol can be ascertained by measuring a person’s blood alcohol content (BAC). If a person’s BAC is .08% or greater, he or she is considered to be “per se” or legally intoxicated. If the BAC is .17% or greater, the person may be charged as a “super drunk” pursuant to Michigan law making it a more severe crime for having a high blood alcohol content.

On the other hand, driving under the influence of prescribed drugs is not a per se or strict liability offense and must be proven by the testimony of the police officer regarding the conduct of the accused. In this regard, the police will obtain a blood sample to determine the presence and level of analogue(s) and/or other substances. In many cases, the person may have mixed the prescribed analogue drugs with one or more alcoholic beverages or marijuana. In addition, the police will assess a driver’s ability to perform field sobriety tests (FST) which are designed to test a driver’s balance and motor skills. Police may ask a driver to perform tasks such as walking heel-to-toe in a straight line, standing on one leg, or reciting the alphabet backwards.

A valid prescription is not a defense for someone who operates a vehicle while impaired or under the influence of analogue drugs (OUID). However, a prescription coupled with evidence of a person’s sober conduct and driving ability can be presented as a defense.

A person convicted of operating a vehicle while intoxicated due to analogues (OUID) or alcohol (OWI) faces the same penalties under Michigan laws. For a first offense of OUID, the maximum penalties are:

  • 6 Points
  • License suspense for 180 days with restrictions after 30 days
  • Driver Responsibility Fee of $1,000.00 per year for 2 years
  • Maximum Fine of $500.00, plus court costs
  • Probation for up to 2 years
  • Up to 360 hours of community service
  • Vehicle Immobilization for up to 180 days
  • Up to 93 days in Jail
  • Mandatory Substance Abuse Evaluation
  • Possible Substance Abuse Counseling and Random Testing

Defending Operating While Intoxicated – Analogues, Prescribed Medications

There may be legal grounds for a dismissal or reduction to careless driving on the basis that the medications were taken as prescribed and did not cause the individual to be impaired or under the influence. A person who has taken medications as prescribed may defend the charge on the basis that the medications did not diminish his or her ability to operate a motor vehicle. In such cases, an aggressive defense attorney will obtain the police reports, video of the traffic stop and gather witness statements of those that could testify as to the behavior and sobriety of the accused during the time frame prior to the traffic stop. In addition, A charge for operating under the influence of drugs (OUID) may be plea bargained to the lower charge of operating while impaired which involves lesser penalties.
Continue reading ›

|

bus.jpgAlmost every week a very familiar scenario plays out in our office. A client will come in, sit down for a consultation, and discuss with us the facts of his or her license revocation history. Many times it will be the instinct of one of our Firm’s attorneys that the client had a winnable case. However, the catch is that they didn’t win, and in many instances have created a mess for themselves that will take years, literally years, to unravel. Why didn’t this client win?

Oftentimes it is because they appealed their license revocation unrepresented, assuming that it was a simple and straightforward procedure. Further, it is often assumed that the hearing officers will summarily rubber stamp petitioners with a license after they wait their year. This is very much not the case. License appeals are substantively and administratively complex, and oftentimes become unmanageable for people who do not retain the assistance of an attorney. The stakes are high, losing an appeal typically results in an additional year revocation. Moreover, any inconsistencies stated in an initial hearing will come back to haunt the petitioner in future hearings. Losing a DLAD appeal means that the petitioner will have to continue asking friends and family for rides, or risk breaking the law and driving without a license. Beneath are some common mistakes that petitioners make when appealing their revocations without the assistance of counsel.

Procedural Mistakes

The DLAD has strict procedural guidelines for filing these appeals. Often unrepresented petitioners will miss deadlines, file the wrong documents, or fill out documents/background letters incorrectly. When you have a case with strong facts (IE over one year of demonstrated sobriety) it is a waste to wait an additional year because of a procedural mistake.

Substantive Mistakes

Without counsel, petitioners will often make substantive mistakes. Most commonly, petitioners who have not met the one year of mandatory sobriety will disclose that they have consumed alcohol in the last 12 months. We always counsel clients to wait that year, and will assist them in finding programs and counselors to assist them with their sobriety. Further, unrepresented petitioners tend to get nervous, and put inconsistencies on the record because they buckle under the pressure. A first hearing is intimidating, and that pressure can often cause a petitioner to lose his or her cool, become mentally unorganized, and forget vital dates – thus making a winnable case a loser.

Our Program for Getting You Back On the Road

Our law firm has a comprehensive program for getting petitioners back on the road. From our initial consultation we look at all the facts and organize them to avoid both procedural and substantive mistakes. Our firm has appeared on hundreds of license appeals and has a streamlined process for gathering and filing the documents, thus eliminating confusion on behalf of the client. Further, in our representation we include a mock hearing where you and one of the Abdo Law attorneys will go through the questions that will be asked at the hearing. The goal is to reduce anxiety and eliminate as much as possible the element of surprise in the hearing room.
Continue reading ›

|

cop car.jpgMYTH #1: Underage drivers cannot be charged with a DUI unless they are above the legal limit.

FACT: False! Underage drivers on the road with ANY presence of alcohol may be charged with a drinking and driving crime. This type of charge is known as a zero tolerance. Repercussions can be severe, including;

– 30 day driver’s license suspension,
– $125.00 reinstatement fee,
– 4 points on master driving record,
– Community service,
– Court fines,
– Probation,
– And state fees of $500.00 for 2 years.

Repeat offenders typically face stiffer penalties. This includes a longer license suspension, additional fees, and additional points. Further, when underage drivers are above the legal limit they can be charged with an OWI. OWI’s, as we have explained in detail, can be onerous in terms of the subsequent fines, punishment, and probation.

If you find yourself as a minor being charged with a drinking and driving offense seek legal representation. Our office has specialized in drinking and driving crimes for over 40 years. With each of these cases we always seek a sentence that is most favorable for our clients. Our office will always fight to eliminate jail time and advocates terms of probation that will be manageable for our clients. Do not let these cases linger, retain aggressive legal assistance and fight the charges.

MYTH #2: You can only get charged with an MIP for drinking alcohol.

FACT: False! Mere possession alcohol is sufficient to be charged with an MIP. Further, you can be charged with an MIP for transporting alcohol in your car (even if it’s the passenger’s). The meager act of holding a beer without taking a sip is sufficient for someone to be charged with a MIP. Further, we would like to remind you that the following is illegal;

– Allowing an intoxicated person to use your vehicle,
– Purchasing alcohol for anyone under 21,
– Providing a fake identification to anybody under the age of 21,
– Allowing minors to use alcohol in your home,
– And providing alcohol to minors.

Once again, we recommend anyone being charged with an MIP retain the help of an attorney. Especially when it is a first offense, our office usually can procure an arrangement where the charge will come off the client’s record. With these cases we aim to preserve the records of our young clients, keep them out of jail, and minimize any terms of probation.
Continue reading ›

|

Photo+of+woman+arrested+in+need+of+a+DUI+attorney+in+Seattle$2C+WA.[1].jpgThis blog will focus on first offense drunk driving (DUI) cases which our firm handles extensively in all of the district courts in Macomb County, Michigan including the 38th District (Eastpointe), the 39th District (Roseville, Fraser), the 40th District (St. Clair Shores), the 41-A District (Sterling Heights, Shelby Township, Macomb Township, Utica), the 41-B District (Clinton Township, Mt. Clemens, Harrison Township), the 42-1 District (Romeo, Washington Township) and the 42-2 District (New Baltimore and Chesterfield Township).

A life can spin out of control the moment a police officer says, “you are under arrest for drunk driving.” For most of our clients that are charged with drunk driving (OWI or DUI), it will be the first time that they have seen the inside of a jail cell. This experience alone will be traumatic and stressful. Upon being released from jail, the person will be given certain documents which include: ticket, temporary license, bond receipt and data-master printout with breath test result (usually a pink form). A person may need to get his or her vehicle out of impound unless there is a hold on the vehicle because of an accident or subject to forfeiture. A person charged with drunk driving should contact an attorney after taking care of immediate needs such as going home, getting some rest and having something to eat.

Our attorneys are involved with drunk driving cases in Macomb County just about every day. This means that we are either attending a court hearing in one or more district courts, talking to someone on the phone or meeting with a new client at our office. We are often able to make predictions about the outcome of drunk driving cases in Macomb County as well as other jurisdictions where we actively practice including Oakland County, Wayne County and the Grosse Pointe Courts.

Continue reading ›

|

41B%20District%20Court[1].jpgMost drunk driving (DUI or OWI) cases in Macomb County are resolved without trial. The vast majority of first offense drunk driving (DUI or OWI) cases can be negotiated to the lower offense, such as operating while impaired, unless there are policy reasons which prohibit the prosecuting attorney from plea bargaining.

Our attorneys will be able to review the police reports and discuss various options with our clients such as trial and deviation requests for charge reductions. When a client is charged with a high blood alcohol drunk driving for obtaining a chemical test result of .17% or more (High BAC or Super Drunk), is involved in an accident or has a prior record involving substance abuse, there are legal maneauvers which we will explore to get the case under control.

Court Process and Possible Sentence Conditions for First Offense Drunk Driving (DUI or OWI)

Continue reading ›

|

Mexico[1].jpg

According to Wikipedia, on September 10, 1897, George Smith, a London taxi driver, was the first person to be convicted of drunk driving.

DUIL, DUI, OUIL, OUI, OWI, OWVI, OWPD, UBAL: What do they all mean? Whenever we meet with a new client that is charged with drunk driving, we invariably engage in explaining the numerous abbreviations which are commonly used on the streets, in the courts and by lawyers. Whenever the words drunk or intoxicated are used, we are referring to the offense of drunk driving. The offense of impaired driving is a lower offense but still goes on the record as a drinking and driving offense for all licensing and insurance purposes. The penalties for these offenses vary depending upon the circumstances and prior record of the offender. The Michigan Department of State website has more information regarding the offenses and penalties for these offenses.

Drunk Driving Abbreviations Commonly Used In Michigan

DUIL: Driving Under the Influence of Liquor DUI: Driving Under the Influence OUIL: Operating Under the Influence of Liquor OUI: Operating Under the Influence OWI: Operating While Intoxicated (Current Law)
OWVI: Operating While Visibly Impaired (Current Law)
OWPD: Operating With the Presence of Drugs (Current Law)
UBAL: Unlawful Blood Alcohol Content
DRUNK DRIVING: One can be charged with drunk driving if his ability to operate a vehicle is substantially and materially impacted by the consumption of alcohol or drugs. In this scenario, the prosecutor would have to prove that the person charged was intoxicated or had .08% or greater blood alcohol content or the presence of certain drugs. Under prior drunk driving laws in Michigan, a person had to caught “driving” a motor vehicle. The “D” in DUIL or DUI is the abbreviation for driving under old Michigan drunk driving laws. More recent laws were passed which made it unnecessary for the person to be caught driving a motor vehicle. Courts and lawmakers amended the law to only require that the person charged with drunk driving be caught “operating” the vehicle. Thus, a person who is not driving but merely in a parked vehicle with the keys in the ignition while playing the radio can be said to be “operating” a vehicle. The abbreviations were changed to OUIL and OUI with the “O” signifying operation.

IMPAIRED DRIVING: Impaired driving means that your ability to operate a vehicle was visibly impaired. Under prior laws, the abbreviation of DWI was used which meant Driving While Impaired. Under current law, the offense is called Operating While Visibly Impaired or OWVI.

UNLAWFUL BLOOD ALCOHOL CONTENT, OPERATE WITH PRESENCE OF DRUGS: The offenses of OWPD and UBAL are statutory offenses which do not require that the offender is intoxicated but only that the offender has a blood alcohol content of .08% or greater or the presence of certain illegal drugs.
Continue reading ›

|

supreme+court+will+not+bypass+lower+courts+to+review+obamacare_1961_800491933_0_0_7053533_300[1].jpg

You should read the series in the Detroit Free which began on July 24, 2011 pertaining to drunk driving laws and sentencing in Michigan especially if you are someone that has a few drinks before operating a motor vehicle in the Metro Detroit area. In Michigan, a conviction for drunk driving can occur if the offender’s blood alcohol content is .08% or greater, regardless of intoxication. The prosecutor is only required to prove that the offender had operated a vehicle with an illegal blood alcohol content. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. In addition, it is not a defense to a drunk driving case that the offender was sober or able to operate his vehicle safely.

I can say the articles are long overdue which warn offenders that jail is a possible consequence in some jurisdictions for a first offense involving drunk driving (DUI). The articles also cover the financial side of drinking and driving which can run up to $10,000.00 after factoring in attorney fees, fines, court costs, financial responsibility fees, substance abuse counseling and motor vehicle insurance.

On July 24, 2011, the Detroit Free Press reported that “Arrest location could determine the outcome for a drunken-driving penalty.” As a criminal defense attorney with representative cases in Macomb and Oakland Counties, I can say that this article touches a nerve with the criminal defense bar. The article fairly depicts Judge Kim Small (48th District Court, Oakland County) as a Judge that will invariably impose at least 2 weeks in jail for a first offender convicted of drinking and driving. In contrast, Judges in Clinton Township (Macomb County) and Clarkston (Oakland County) agree that jail is not always the answer and will use substance abuse counseling extensively when someone is convicted of drinking and driving. In my experience, the imposition of jail is reserved by most Judges for offenders who violate probation or commit repeat offenses. Judge Small is not in this camp.

There is really no way to say if Judge Small is motivated by politics or really believes that she is doing the right thing when she gives a first time offender jail for impaired driving. (See Detroit Free Press article on July 25, 2011, “Oakland County judge among toughest in nation on 1st-time drunken driving offenders.” On the political side, she presides in one of the highest net worth jurisdictions in the United States. Her voters may believe that she is keeping them safe and preserving their property values by taking a tough stance on drinking and driving. On the other hand, many of the individuals sentenced in her Court are residents in the community where she presides. Clearly, she gains no votes or political advantage by incarcerating her own constituents.

You would be hard pressed to find any criminal defense attorney that is in favor of strict uniform sentencing that fails to consider the unique case facts and circumstances of the individual who is convicted of a criminal or drinking and driving offense. At least one attorney is quoted in the Detroit Free Press article who will not represent clients who are charged with drunk driving in Judge Small’s court.

The real question is whether Michigan should adopt uniform sentencing for offenders convicted of drunk driving. While Michigan has adopted Sentencing Guidelines for felony cases, there are no such guidelines for misdemeanors. The Sentence Guidelines take an offenders prior criminal record along with aggravating/mitigating offense variables into consideration. In addition, the Michigan Sentence Guidelines provide that a Judge may depart from the guidelines sentence range only where there are substantial and compelling reasons to do so. The Michigan Sentence Guidelines favor individualized sentencing with some limitations and confines.

The very nature of the legal system in the United States depends upon fairness and due process, not strict liability, uniform sentencing or mandatory jail for drinking and driving convictions. A private criminal defense lawyer remains the only advocate for the rights of the accused versus the vast financial resources and manpower of the government to prosecute an individual. The very idea of uniform sentencing puts more power in the hands of the government and lawmakers and removes power from individuals and their private attorneys.
Continue reading ›

|

New-Baltimore-42nd-District-Div-2

The 42-2 District Court located at 35071 23 Mile Road, New Baltimore, MI  48065.  Judge William H. Hackel III is the presiding Judge for the Court.

The Court’s physical jurisdiction encompasses the City of New Baltimore, Chesterfield Township, New Haven and Lenox Township. The water-front City of New Baltimore is located in the heart of Anchor Bay.

The Police Agencies of the 42-2 District Court

There are several police agencies within the 42-2 District Court jurisdiction: Chesterfield Township Police, New Baltimore Police, Michigan State Police (I-94) and the Macomb County Sheriff’s Department. Because of its coastline, the presence of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and United States Coast Guard is also necessitated in this region.

Chesterfield Township Gets More DUI Cases, Retail Fraud and Traffic Tickets 

chesterfield-township

Chesterfield Township generates the most activity for the 42-2 District Court based upon its geographic size, density, major retail centers (see image above) and vehicular traffic. This is true for all matters heard in the 42-2 District Court such as drunk driving cases, criminal cases and traffic tickets. In 2016, Chesterfield Township administered 166 breath or blood tests in connection with operating while intoxicated arrests compared to 43 tests administered in the City of New Baltimore.

Criminal Cases in the 42-2 District Courts: Provisions of Law to Get Dismissals Available!

Our firm has represented clients charged with just about every imaginable misdemeanor and  felony crime in the 42-2  District Court. The following is list of some of the most prevalent cases that we regularly see on the 42-2 District Court’s docket:

 Judge William Hackel III has been on the bench at the 42-2 District Court since 2009. The 42-2 District is a conservative district.  Judge Hackel runs a tight ship and his Court is run very efficiently.  Judge Hackel does have certain preferences for his Courtroom. One of his preferences is appropriate attire and he will compliment an individual that wears a shirt and tie when appearing before him. He also likes to see the presence of family members in the courtroom. Individuals that are placed on probation are expected to abide by ‘house rules’ and Judge Hackel will advise family members to contact him if there is incorrigibility at home.

Getting out on bond, bond conditions: If you are arrested or arraigned on a criminal matter in the 42-2 District Court, you will appear either before a magistrate or judge.  Insofar as possible, it is always advisable to have an attorney present for arraignment purposes. An attorney can make a considerable difference at an arraignment hearing by advocating for a personal bond (where no money needs to be posted) or a for a low cash/10% bond arrangement. Judge Hackel and his magistrate will listen to an attorney’s remarks regarding bond which can save potentially thousands of dollars that a bondsman would otherwise take.  In addition to the cash component of bond, the Court can also impose bond conditions upon a person’s release from jail. Drug and alcohol testing are common bond conditions for those charged with any crime involving drugs or alcohol. A ‘no-contact order‘ is assured in assault cases, domestic violence, sex crimes and all other crimes involving a victim. In retail fraud cases, the accused party may be instructed to refrain from entering the establishment where the alleged shoplifting occurred. A motion for a hearing can always be filed to modify bond conditions, remove a no-contact order or eliminate travel restrictions.

Misdemeanor or Felony Classification: In Michigan, the district courts have full jurisdiction to dispose of misdemeanors through sentencing. A misdemeanor is classified as an offense that carries up to 1 year in jail.  Felony cases are another matter. A felony is classified as a crime that can carry more than 1 year in jail. A felony case is initiated in the district court for the arraignment, probable cause conference and preliminary examination. A felony that is not resolved in the district court will be moved to the circuit court for further proceedings. In certain cases, a felony can be reduced to a misdemeanor and can remain in the district court. Accomplishing reduction of a felony to a misdemeanor, thus avoiding a felony conviction, is considered a huge victory.

The outcome of a criminal case in the 42-2 District Courts, as well as other Macomb County District Courts, is dependent upon many components.  The most significant factors that can have a bearing on the disposition of a case are:

  • Prior criminal history of the accused party.
  • Cooperation with the police.
  • Whether another party was injured, or property was damaged.
  • The ability of the accused party to provide restitution for damages to the injured party.
  • Whether the offense is a ‘policy case’ (crimes against senior citizens, children).

The 42-2 District Court presides over a diverse range of criminal cases which can be attributed to its distinct, shopping, suburban, rural and waterfront areas. In our experience, criminal cases can be resolved favorably at the 42-2 District Court. All of these special provisions of law are possible in the 42-2 District Court which can result in a dismissal of a criminal matter:

  • HYTA for youthful offenders (age 17 to 23)
  •  MCL 333.7411 for first time drug offenders
  • MCL 769.a for domestic violence.
  • Delayed Sentence or Deferral

Even individuals that have a prior criminal record will be given respect and consideration for plea deals to get a dismissal under certain circumstances.

Drunk Driving Cases in the 42-2 District Court

As I previously mentioned, Chesterfield Township nets more DUI cases than any other municipality within the 42-2 District Court. The City of New Baltimore comes in second place.

For most first time drinking and driving offenders, jail is not likely absent aggravating circumstances. A person without any prior drinking and driving offenses can expect to get an OWI reduced to ‘operating while impaired’ in the 42-2 District. It is extremely difficult and rare, but not impossible, to get a drinking and driving offense reduced to a non-criminal offense. If a person is charged with Super DUI (BAC .17 or greater) a deviation may need to be filed to get a plea bargain to a lower offense.

1st offense drinking and driving: Judge Hackel will consider non-reporting probation for a period of less than 1 year for first time offenders. In addition to probation, a person convicted for a first drinking and driving offense (operating while impaired) is looking at:

  • Probation for 1 year or less
  • Fines and costs approximately $1,200.00
  • Restricted license for 90 days
  • Attend an alcohol or substance abuse program
  • Possible drug testing, alcohol testing, AA meetings
  • 4 points on driving record

There are other mandatory and discretionary sanctions associated with a drinking and driving conviction including: driver responsibility fees, probation oversight expenses and vehicle immobilization. The Court can also order installation of an ignition interlock system on any vehicle driven by a person convicted of a drinking and driving offense.

A repeat drinking and driving offender may be looking at a longer period of probation, up to 2 years, with the possibility of some jail time.  There are many steps that we can recommend to those charged with a repeat drinking and offense offense to reduce the likelihood of incarceration in almost every Macomb County District Court.

The 42-2 District Court Probation Department: 35071 23 Mile Road, New Baltimore, MI  48065

The 42-2 District Court has its own probation department located in the courthouse.

It is within the judge’s discretion whether to place an individual on probation after being convicted of a criminal or drunk driving offense. In many cases that qualify as isolated incidents, we may be able to convince the judge that probation, also known as community supervision, is not necessary. When probation is imposed, the judge may require reporting or non-reporting probation.  The maximum period of probation that can be imposed in the district courts is 2 years. However, our experience is that probation is rarely imposed for more than 1 year for most first-time offenders and Judge Hackel will often consider less than 1 year for most first offenders.

Traffic Violations in the 42-2 District Court: Reduced to Avoid Points and Record of any Conviction!

Several police agencies have an active presence monitoring the activity of vehicular traffic within the jurisdiction of the 42-2 District Court.  Like other district courts in Macomb County, I would say that traffic tickets are on the top of the list of types of cases that are litigated at the 42-2 District Court. When resolving a traffic matter in the 42-2 District Court, we are often able to negotiate a reduction or avoid points. A substantial reduction in a traffic ticket occurs when it is reduced to an offense such as impeding traffic or double parking. A traffic ticket that is reduced to impeding traffic or double parking does not carry any points and will never appear on a person’s driving record! We are also able to get favorable results for individuals charged with misdemeanor traffic offenses such as driving while suspended, reckless driving and leaving the scene of an accident. Unfortunately, most individuals that receive a traffic ticket do not hire a lawyer and wind up with a record and points that will have an impact on insurance premiums for several years. The path of least resistance, paying the ticket, can be much costlier in the long run.

Continue reading ›

Contact Information
42550 Garfield Rd #104-A
Charter Twp of Clinton, MI 48038
Phone: (586) 412-5555Fax: (586) 412-5888

We accept the following credit cards

MasterCard, Visa, AMEX, Discover

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2024, Abdo Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design