Do court appointed lawyers work for the police and prosecutor?

September 11, 2012,

COURTROOM SCENE.jpg

This blog is part of a series of blogs which explores some frequently asked criminal law questions.

I cannot believe how many times I have been asked this question: Do court appointed lawyers work for the police and prosecutor?

Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Pursuant to the 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution, a person who cannot afford an attorney may be entitled to an attorney appointed by the Court. The person requesting a Court appointed attorney may have to repay the cost for the attorney at a later date when he or she is able to do so.

Loyalty to the client is a vital element every attorney-client relationship. Therefore, criminal defense attorneys are prohibited by the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct from acting for anyone other than the "client" even though the fees may be paid by another person or entity!

The applicable Michigan Rule of Professional Conduct provides: A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests.

Links to some other frequently asked questions:

Can my case be dismissed if I wasn't advised of my Miranda rights?

Am I entitled to make a phone call if I am arrested?

Can I be charged with a crime if only one person says I did it and there are no other witnesses or evidence?

Frequently Asked Criminal Law Questions: Can my case be dismissed if I wasn't advised of my Miranda Rights? Am I entitled to make a phone call if I am arrested?

September 6, 2012,

interrogation room.jpg

There is a pattern of "frequently asked questions" in the field of criminal law. This blog is dedicated to answer a couple of those questions. This blog is not intended to provide a one-size-fits-all dissertation on the covered subjects but only a short synopsis with some other references linked-in for further research if you are interested. It is important to understand that entire law books have been published regarding the Bill of Rights (4th, 5th and 6th Amendments) and other particular legal issues such as "possession".

Remember: When the mistakes by the police add up, you may be entitled to a dismissal or suppression of evidence. Even minor mistakes may weaken the case to the extent that the charges are reduced.

Can my case be dismissed if I wasn't advised of my Miranda Rights?
The answer is usually NO with some exceptions.

This is probably the Number 1 question that we are asked when someone is charged with a crime. In 1966, the Supreme Court held that Miranda Warnings by the police are required to protect a person suspected of a crime pursuant to the Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination during police interrogation. When the police have other evidence to proceed against a person, the person's own statements may not be necessary. Therefore, should the person's own statements be excluded (based upon Miranda violations), the State may proceed against the person based upon other independent evidence and witnesses. We are often asked this question in the realm of drunk driving cases. Consider the following example:

Example: Assume that a person admits to drinking 4 beers after being stopped for a DUI. The accused may argue that the statements are not admissible because he wasn't given his Miranda warnings or because the statements were involuntary. Even if the attorney is able to have the statements suppressed (inadmissible at trial), the prosecutor may still proceed with other evidence such as the chemical test (BAC result from blood or breath), witnesses (police or civilians) who viewed the conduct of the accused, the accused's ability to perform Field Sobriety Tests (FST), etc.

Please be advised that when statements of the accused are suppressed, the Court may also suppress any other evidence derived from the inadmissible statements pursuant to the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine. When substantial evidence is suppressed (held inadmissible), the case may be dismissed or quashed.

Again, please remember that entire books and treatises have been written on the subject of Miranda Warnings (BOOK LINK).

Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for My_Miranda_Rights.jpg

Do I have the right to make a phone call if I am arrested?
The answer is NO.

I do not know of any law in Michigan that allows someone the right to make a phone call upon being arrested. However, some police agencies have adopted regulations which allow an arrested person to make a phone call in the furtherance of Miranda Warnings which provide that a person has a right to remain silent and a right to an attorney

The right to make a phone call is a misnomer since it is actually not a right at all. It is merely a formality which allows an arrested party to call family members or an attorney. Should the police deny a person the right to call an attorney, there may be a legally arguable Constitutional issue. At the very least, we would argue to suppress any statements or information gathered from a suspect who is questioned after being denied a phone call (to his attorney) on the 5th and 6th Amendment grounds (self-incrimination and denial of right to counsel).

Take another look at the image which is posted at the top of this blog.
This scenario raises at least 14 questions which our criminal defense attorneys would ask:

1. Is the person/suspect in custody (not free to leave)?
2. Was the person/suspect validly arrested or detained?
3. Is the person/suspect under the influence of drugs or alcohol?
4. How long has the person/suspect been detained?
5. Was the person/suspect intimidated by the officer (armed and in uniform)?
6. Is the person/suspect suffering any mental condition?
7. Was the person/suspect coerced, threatened or intimidated?
8. Was the person/suspect denied nutrition and rest room facilities?
9. Did the person/suspect ask for an attorney during questioning which was denied?
10. Does the person/suspect take any medications which could impair his judgment?
11. Was the person/accused deprived of sleep or rest?
12. What is the age, intelligence level (IQ) of the person/suspect?
13. WAS THE PERSON ADVISED OF HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS?
14. WAS THE PERSON ALLOWED TO MAKE A PHONE CALL?

Violation of Miranda Rights or the ability to make a phone call can provide a basis for a motion to quash (dismiss) or suppress evidence. For this reason, every detail and fact is important when you talk to your lawyer.

Some excellent video references:

Ten Rules When Dealing With Police (Video)
Don't Talk to the Police (Video)
The Proper Way to Handle a Police Stop (Video)

If you have a question, please visit our website and send the question which we will attempt to answer and may even consider making it the subject of a future blog.

Links to some other frequently asked questions:

Can I be charged with a crime if only one person says I did it and there are no other witnesses or evidence?

Do court appointed lawyers work for the police and prosecutor?


Continue reading "Frequently Asked Criminal Law Questions: Can my case be dismissed if I wasn't advised of my Miranda Rights? Am I entitled to make a phone call if I am arrested?" »

DUI THIRD OFFENSE IN MICHIGAN: Felony Drunk Driving; Third Lifetime Offense Involving Drinking and Driving

September 4, 2012,

driver-accused-of-drunk-driving.jpg


Since 2007, the law in Michigan is that a person with three (3) or more drinking and driving offenses in his or her lifetime may be charged with a felony! All states have now adopted this law. In Michigan, it is commonly referred to as Heidi's Law. Prior to the passage of this law, a person could only be charged with felony drunk driving (also referred to as OWI, DUI, Operating While Intoxicated) if the prior drinking and driving convictions occurred within 10 years of the new arrest. Now, any offenses for drinking and driving in a person's lifetime are scored to enhance the charge to a felony including out-of-state convictions and convictions for impaired driving. However, in Michigan, only one (1) prior offense under Michigan's Zero Tolerance law (OWI by person u/21 with any BAC) counts. This blog will explore the penalties which can be imposed upon conviction for a Drunk Driving Third (Felony) and various defense strategies which we utilize to fight the case, reduce the charge or minimize the sentence.

THIRD LIFETIME DUI OFFENSE - FELONY DRUNK DRIVING PENALTIES

Fines: $500.00 to $5,000.00 fine, plus costs

Jail/Community Service: Imprisonment for 1 to 5 years, or, Probation with imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 30 days or more than 1 year and community service for not less than 60 days or more than 180 days. Not less than 48 hours of this imprisonment shall be served consecutively.

License Sanctions: License revoked minimum of 1 year for 2 offenses within 7 years or 3 within 10 years. A second revocation is for 5 years. After minimum period of revocation, a person must appear before the Driver License Appeal Division satisfy several requirements before a license will be granted.

Other: Destruction of License, Plate confiscation, Vehicle immobilization from 1 to 3 years, Possible vehicle forfeiture

Driver Responsibility Fee
: $1,000.00 per year for 2 years

Points: 6

Mandatory jail is required upon conviction for a Drunk Driving Third Offense. As you will read further in this post, there is a safety net which our attorneys have advocated when jail is combined with community service or there is a house arrest release program in the applicable jurisdiction.

PROVING DRUNK DRIVING

You may be shocked to know that to be convicted of drunk driving:

-You do not have to be drunk. You can be charged with drunk driving if you are legally drunk (BAC .08% or more, with the presence of certain drugs, in the opinion of the arresting officer of impairment or even after taking prescribed medications such as pain pills.

-The police do not have to witness you driving. Only probable cause to believe that you were operating the vehicle is sufficient.

-You may be stopped or pulled over even though you haven't violated any traffic law! A police officer may pull you over upon the opinion of the officer that you are operating a vehicle while impaired or intoxicated.

The elements of a drunk driving which the prosecutor must prove are:

1. Intoxication or Impairment by alcohol, drugs or marijuana. In Michigan "Operating Under The Influence" (OWI) means operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs to a degree that renders one unable to safely drive a vehicle. It is not necessary for one to be drunk to be arrested for or convicted of OWI in Michigan. Michigan OWI convictions can be obtained where a person operates a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, or operates a vehicle with a blood alcohol level (BAL) or breath alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or greater

2. Operation of the vehicle or proof of operation (such as an accident, vehicle in a ditch or on the side of the road). The police do not have to witness the offender actually driving or operating the vehicle. In the cases researched, you can be charged and convicted with OWI if the police had probable cause to believe the accused was operating the vehicle.

3. A valid traffic stop. A traffic stop may be based upon a violation of any traffic law. Drivers are often stopped for straddling lane markers, weaving between lanes, driving at excessive or very slow speeds, braking erratically, obstructed vision, defective equipment, coming in close contact with objects or other vehicles, or while fixing a flat tire!

PLANNING A DEFESE STRATEGY STARTS AT THE FIRST CONSULTATION

Our goals are always the same with every criminal case that we handle: Avoid a conviction and avoid jail! The question in every drunk driving is the same: Can we beat the case? Based upon our experience, there is hope even if someone gets charged with a drunk driving third offense.

Since the judges are stuck with minimum sentence requirements for someone convicted of a drunk driving third offense (felony), it is important for a criminal defense lawyer to explore every legal option. Our inquiry starts out with immediately when we are retained. Aside from ordering the discovery (police reports, video, etc.), our firm obtains an extensive personal history from our client:

-Dates of prior drinking and driving convictions
-Prior criminal history (dates and offenses)
-Any habitual offender Issues for prior felony convictions
-Employment, family, education, achievements, community involvement
-Substance abuse treatment and Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)
-Compliance with bond conditions (alcohol monitoring, random testing)
-Relapse history (prior periods of abstinence)

In situations when an offender is charged with his or her third (felony) drunk driving, there may be an opportunity to fight for a misdemeanor. Our firm has negotiated the lower more favorable misdemeanor deal when various facts and circumstances are present. The following factors, among many others, may influence the outcome or sentence of a felony drunk driving:

-Is the offense a *true 3rd DUI offense (meaning the offender has only 2 prior DUI convictions)?
-Are any of the prior drinking & driving offenses used to support the felony more than 10 years old?
-Does the offender have a felony record?
-Does the pending offense involve an injury accident?
-Is the Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) is less than .20%?
-Has the offender engaged a substance abuse counselor and/or AA?
-Is the offender on probation for any other criminal matter?

*In Macomb County, our firm has advocated plea bargains to a misdemeanor if the offender is charged as a true third drunk driving offender. We have achieved this result in numerous cases; including for offenders with more than two (2) prior offenses in exceptional cases. Public policy, accidents involving injuries and directives by the County Prosecuting Attorney may have an impact on plea bargaining drunk driving cases.

We are proactive and will make recommendations to our clients after the first consultation. Within a reasonable time after being retained for a drunk driving third (felony) our attorneys set goals and can usually provide an educated prediction of the outcome based upon our experience.

POSSIBLE OUTCOMES FOR DRUNK DRIVING FELONY

Everyone likes to believe that they will win their drunk driving case at trial. This is not realistic since the vast majority of drunk driving offenses (as well as other criminal offenses) in Michigan result in a conviction based upon a plea bargain or verdict after a trial. However, our attorneys have handled drunk driving cases from every angle including:

-Trial which may result in a verdict of guilty or not guilty
-Motions to dismiss because of an illegal traffic stop
-Irregularities in the testing process or equipment
-Plea bargaining to a misdemeanor (achieved by our firm in numerous drunk driving cases)
-Negotiating the minimum sentence (30 days with community service)
-Negotiating to lessen sentence enhancement and habitual offender provisions
-Negotiating delayed jail sentence, house arrest (sobriety monitoring)

Rarely is a client willing to roll the dice at trial when we can secure a deal to have a drunk driving felony reduced to a misdemeanor which we have achieved in several cases. In a recent St. Clair County case, our client received a minimum sentence on a drunk driving felony (1 year probation and 30 days in jail). He was released from jail after servicing 24 days (6 days credit). He called and thanked us because other offenders were sentenced to much longer periods of incarceration followed by half-way-house residency upon release from jail.


Continue reading "DUI THIRD OFFENSE IN MICHIGAN: Felony Drunk Driving; Third Lifetime Offense Involving Drinking and Driving" »

Proving Drug Possession: "Actual Possession" is not always required

August 31, 2012,

Every drug crime requires the element of "possession". In fact, drug crimes rank high on the list of frequently occurring felony cases in Michigan. Drug crimes include: "possession" or "possession with intent to deliver" marijuana, heroin, cocaine, MDMA or analogues.

Drugs.jpg

Whenever someone is charged with any drug crime, our criminal defense attorneys will question whether the accused legally possessed the alleged drugs.

Michigan Courts Define Possession In Criminal Cases

In Michigan, a person must knowingly and intentionally possess an illegal drug to be charged with possession of a controlled substance under Michigan's drug possession statute. But what does that mean?

The courts in Michigan consolidate possession into two categories

1. Actual possession: an individual has drugs on their person (pocket or shoe)
2. Constructive possession: individual has the right of control and dominion over the controlled substance



Actual possession is simple. If the drugs are in a person's pocket, that person possesses the drugs. But what if the drugs are found in a home where multiple people are present? What about in a car with more than one occupant? What if the person was unaware the drugs were in the car? Determining whether or not the individual had a right of control or dominion over the drugs, or over the premises (car, apartment, house) in which the drugs were found, is critical in these situations. However, an individual's presence in the same house or automobile as the drugs is insufficient to establish possession; a connection between the drugs and the individual must be found as well. When a person is merely present at a place where drugs are found or is an innocent bystander, our firm will argue that there is insufficient evidence to establish the element of possession.

Michigan Courts broadly interpret possession:

People v Nunez (2000): In this case, police entered a home and discovered, along with several occupants, a large stash of cocaine. Although Mr. Nunez didn't have the cocaine on his person, he was charged and convicted of possession of cocaine. The police arrived at their conclusion by observing the apartment and its contents. Mr. Nunez had a key for the apartment and stayed at the apartment most of the time. His name was also found on bills within the apartment. The connection between Mr. Nunez and the drugs was straightforward in this case.



People v Meshell (2005): In this case, police observed a man emerging from a garage in which they later discovered methamphetamine. Upon entering the area, police noticed a strong chemical odor coming from the garage. Mr. Meshell was the only person in the area of the garage and when police ran his record, they discovered past issues with methamphetamine. Because Mr. Meshell had past issues with meth, it was obvious that he knew the smell. He was also the only one in the area at the time police observed him exiting the garage.

People v McKinney (2003): In this case, police entered a home and discovered a large amount of cocaine. Police found crack in drawers containing women's clothing, and linked the drugs to Ms. McKinney because she was frequently staying at the apartment. Drugs were also found within the pockets of women's clothing in the bedroom she was sharing with the owner. By using the drug's location as evidence, the police were able to successfully charge and convict Ms. McKinney of possession of cocaine.

As you can see from the cases above, police can use the surrounding circumstances to establish an individual's possession of a controlled substance:

1. Any past drug-related criminal activity
2. The smell of the drugs, particularly marijuana
3. Whether or not the person was alone
4. Utility bills for the home in which the drugs were found


Continue reading "Proving Drug Possession: "Actual Possession" is not always required" »

Criminal and Traffic Jurisdiction of the 41-A District Court, Sterling Heights, Michigan

August 28, 2012,


imagesCA2KPH2C.jpg

This is one of many blogs that our law firm has posted about the Courts where our criminal defense attorneys frequently practice in Macomb County. This is an informational public service blog about the 41-A District Court.

The 41-A District Court in Sterling Heights has jurisdiction from 14 Mile Road to M-59 and from Dequindre to Hayes. This geographical area of approximately 36 square miles contains several major Macomb County thoroughfares such as Hayes, Schoenherr, Van Dyke, Mound and Dequindre. Within Sterling Heights, you will find major shopping centers, the Lakeside Mall, major automotive factories and established residential areas. According to the 2010 US census, the city of Sterling Heights boasts a population of 129,699 and is the second largest suburb in the Metro Detroit area. For these reasons, there are three (3) judges that are needed to administer justice for the City of Sterling Heights. (GOOGLE MAP, CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS)

The 41-A District Court has jurisdiction to handle non-criminal traffic tickets (civil infractions), criminal matters such as misdemeanors, drunk driving (OWI) and criminal traffic violations. Here is a partial list of offenses which fall under these offense classifications:

Civil Infractions: Speeding, Fail to Obey Traffic Device, Improper Turn, Careless Driving

Criminal Traffic: Drive While Suspended (DWLS), Reckless Driving, Leave Scene of Accident, Fail to Merge for Emergency Response Vehicle

Drunk Driving: Zero Tolerance, Operating While Intoxicated (DUI, OWI), Super Drunk (OWI With a High BAC over .17%)

Misdemeanors: Retail Fraud, Domestic Violence, Disorderly Conduct, MIP, Possession of Marijuana, Possession of Paraphernalia, Malicious Destruction of Property (MDOP), Larceny under $200.00

Criminal Felonies: The district court handles the initial stages of a felony which include issuance of the complaint and warrant, arraignment, bond hearings and preliminary examination. Some arraignments occur after the accused receives a letter and appears voluntarily. The court also utilizes video arraignments for persons that are in custody.

Criminal Warrant Letters: Do not panic if you receive a letter from the Sterling Heights Police directing you to surrender yourself because a criminal warrant has been issued. This would be the time to hire a lawyer if you have not already done so. Our firm has positive experience with scheduling these matters or getting the job done immediately or before a holiday weekend (we don't like to have warrants hanging over our heads over a long weekend). Ordinarily, we can get the warrant, booking, arraignment and bond addressed without any entanglements.

Legal Objectives: Civil Infractions (Traffic Tickets)
As we have mentioned in our other blogs; if you are found guilty of a civil infraction, the offense will appear on your driving record and you will receive point. The Michigan point system is used to determine high risk drivers which can result in license suspension after a person accumulates 12 or more points. In addition, points are used by insurance companies to rate drivers and raise insurance premiums. Do you think insurance companies find it in their best interest to know when a customer has a new ticket? When handling civil infractions, we attempt to reduce or avoid both points and any offense appearing on a client's record.

Legal Objectives: Criminal Cases (Misdemeanors)
If you are found guilty of a criminal offense, it will stay on your permanent criminal record. Our goal is to avoid convictions or to obtain dismissals under special provisions of Michigan laws. While nobody can insure or guarantee that a criminal record will completely disappear after the case is concluded, we will aggressively seek the best case scenario by employing delayed sentence dispositions which result in dismissals for offenses like retail fraud, HYTA for youthful offenders (age 17 but under age 21) and statutory first offender deals such as MCL 333.7411 for drug crimes and MCL 769.4a for domestic violence. Since our firm practices extensively in the 41-A District Court (Sterling Heights and the location in Shelby Township), I can say that the Judges are very receptive to outcomes which are consistent with our objectives based upon several years of experience in this jurisdiction.

The Court also has limited jurisdiction over the initial stages of felony cases which include: authorization of criminal charges, issuance of warrant, arraignment (bond) and preliminary examination. However, felony cases are ultimately resolved in the Circuit Court unless reduced to a misdemeanor in the District Court.

The 41-A District Court is located at 40111 Dodge Park, Sterling Heights, Michigan 48313, Phone: 586-446-2500. The Presiding Judges for the 41-A District Court are Judge Michael S. Maceroni, Judge Stephen S. Sierawski and Judge Kimberley A. Wiegand.


Continue reading "Criminal and Traffic Jurisdiction of the 41-A District Court, Sterling Heights, Michigan " »

37th District Court Of Macomb County; Jurisdiction Covers the Cities of Warren and Centerline

July 25, 2012,

Warren-Police-cars-full.jpg

Many of our blogs explore criminal and drunk driving issues within the realm of our law firm's expertise. Others are about the Courts where we frequently practice law. This blog is about the 37th District Court where we regularly provide legal services to our clients who are charged with traffic offenses, criminal (felony or misdemeanor) and OWI cases arising out of Warren and Centerline.

The 37th District Court has two locations which are located in the cities of Centerline and Warren. (MAP OF WARREN) The jurisdictional boundaries of these Courts covers 36 square (from 8 Mile Road to 14 Mile Road and from Hayes to Dequindre). South of 8 Mile Road is the City of Detroit and West of Dequindre is the County of Oakland. Within the boundaries of the 37th District Court are major Macomb County roads, the I-696 expressway, industrial centers, General Motors Tech Center, Automobile Dealers, over 100 restaurants and retail establishments.

The Warren Police Department (WPD) is located directly behind the 37th District Court. The WPD is one of the most active law enforcement agencies in Macomb County with a major detective bureau, air force (helicopter) motorcycle and traffic patrol squad. The detective bureau has a drug enforcement team as well as other units which engage in various undercover operations including cracking down on prostitution. The Michigan State Police also have a presence in Warren as the law enforcement entity responsible for patrolling I-696 expressway.

Our firm has represented clients charged with just about every imaginable misdemeanor and/or felony crime in the 37th District Court including drunk driving (OWI), drug crimes, disorderly conduct, prostitution, offer to engage or solicit sex from another, domestic assault, assault crimes, retail fraud, larceny, fraud, breaking and entering, child abuse, criminal sexual conduct, indecent exposure, malicious destruction of property, traffic violations, DWLS and probation violations.

As experienced criminal defense attorneys in Macomb County, I can say that the 37th District Court is a just and fair place to practice law. What I mean is that Judges are willing to listen to arguments and fairly dispose of criminal, drunk driving and traffic cases. I have found that the Judges are willing to give a criminal defense attorney some leeway when a case goes to trial or preliminary examination. In addition, most criminal cases handled by our firm are resolved without trial (90% or more are resolved by aggressive plea negotiations).

Criminal Cases in the 37th District Court

We set various goals when a client is charged with a criminal or drunk driving offense. Avoidance of a criminal conviction and jail are on the top of our list of goals. Some of our success stories include reducing a felony to a misdemeanor or having a case taken under advisement with a dismissal after a period of probation and compliance with the Court's conditions. We have utilized every special provision of law in the 37th District Court to obtain dismissals of retail fraud, domestic violence, possession of drugs/marijuana, MIP and many other criminal offenses. The Court will also consider petitions to have youthful offenders (age 17 but under age 21) placed on a special status where the public record will be sealed and the offense dismissed for eligible offenders.

Drunk Driving Cases in the 37th District Court

I have found the Judges in the 37th District Court to take some mercy on first offenders whether they are charged with a criminal offense or drunk driving (OWI). Drunk driving cases rarely get dismissed. However, by aggressively defending our clients, an OWI charge can often be reduced to a lesser offense which will save a client money, points and driver responsibility fees. I have represented two (2) clients in July 2012 who had BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) results of .17% or greater. In both cases, I was able to have the charges reduced to impaired driving. (A chemical test result of .17% or greater is known as a "Super Drunk" case and the policy is usually against any reduction in the charge).

Traffic Violations in the 37th District Court

When resolving a traffic matter in the 37th District Court, we are often able to have traffic tickets amended and avoid points. A traffic ticket can be reduced to a Michigan civil infraction known as "impeding traffic" which does not appear on a person's driving record and does not carry any points.

We take every precaution to know the strengths and weaknesses of our cases, set realistic goals and formulate strategies to achieve favorable results. In doing so, we will obtain discovery (police reports, videos, test results), witness statements and make recommendations to our clients for counseling whenever this is an appropriate course of action.

37th District Court Locations:

Warren: 8300 Common Road, Warren, MI 48093 Phone: 586-574-4910

Centerline: 7070 East 10 Mile Road, Centerline, MI 48015, Phone: 586-757-8333

37th District Court Presiding Judges:

John Chmura, Matthew Sabaugh, Jennifer Faunce, Dawn Gruenburg

Soon, Judge Dawn Gruenburg will be leaving the 37th District Court for a Federal Judicial Appointment. She will be dearly missed. Her replacement will be appointed by Governor Rick Snyder. Our firm has sent letters to Governor Snyder in favor of qualified candidates.


The Abdo Law Firm: Notable Cases And Results Part 1

July 24, 2012,

abdo law firm.bmp

The Abdo Law Firm, established more than 30 years ago, prides itself on personal service, professionalism, empathy, and most importantly RESULTS. The purpose of this blog is to share some notable success stories that our office has had since Matthew Abdo has joined the Firm. In all of our cases, hundreds a year, we fight to get charges reduced or dismissed and we always push to eliminate or minimize jail time. Though all of our cases are important to us, beneath are some where we feel we achieved exemplary outcomes.

Charge: Home Invasion 3rd Degree / Malicious Destruction of Property
Max. Jail: 5 years
Court: 41-A District, Shelby

In this instance, Cy was able to negotiate a resolution whereby the original charges were dismissed in lieu of a plea to Entering Without Permission. This is a notable result not only because a 5 year felony was reduced to a misdemeanor and the client did not have to serve any jail time, but because he will eligible to have this off his record after successful completion of probation.

Charge: Assault to do Great Bodily Harm Less Than Assault Less Than Murder
Max Jail: 10 years
Court: 37th District, Warren / Macomb County Circuit

Here, Matthew, through extensive negotiation, advocacy, and motion practice, got the original charge reduced to a Disorderly Conduct. Initially, the client was facing up to 10 years in prison. Ultimately, a plea was offered to a 90 day misdemeanor. After a 4 month period of non-reporting probation the matter was dismissed. The client did not serve any time in jail.

Charge: Placing Harmful Objects in Food
Max Jail: 10 years
Court: 41-A District, Shelby / Macomb County Circuit

This charge, where the client was looking at potentially 10 years of incarceration, was reduced to a 1 year misdemeanor. Furthermore, the client did not have to serve any time and is additionally eligible to have the conviction off his record after succession completion of a manageable term of probation.

Charge: Criminal Sexual Conduct 2nd Degree
Max Jail: 15 years
Court: 41-A Shelby (Utica)

The client in this matter was looking at serious jail time on a conviction of 2nd Degree CSC. Through extensive discussions this matter was dropped to a 1 year misdemeanor and concluded in District Court. At sentencing, the client did not receive any jail time. Further, Cy was able to petition the Court in order to allow the client, an out-of-state resident, to leave Michigan.

Charge: Vicious Dog, Animal at Large
Court: 38th District, Eastpointe

In this case the client's job was at stake with a conviction and so Matthew was presented with a must-win scenario. The Firm would not settle for anything less than a dismissal and appeared in court 5 times until a dismissal was ultimately granted.

Charge: Animal Abuse, Abandonment
Court: 72nd District, Port Huron

This was another case where the office felt anything short of a dismissal would not be an appropriate outcome considering the surrounding facts and circumstances. Through pretrial negotiation the charge was dismissed, preserving the client's clean record. No jail, probation, or fines were assessed.

Charge: Assault, Probation Violation
Court: 41-B District Court, Clinton Twp. and 40th District Court, St. Clair Shores


This legal matter is an example of how our office often takes on cases that have implications in multiple jurisdictions. Here, the client was serving a term of probation in St. Clair Shores and was subsequently charged with assault in Clinton Twp. The client was innocent and therefore would not take anything less than a total victory. A guilty verdict in Clinton Twp. would have violated the client's probation in St. Clair Shores and he very likely would have been looking at jail time. Matt fought the case up to the date of trial, and on that date it was dismissed. Subsequently the client's St. Clair Shore's probation violation was excused. No jail, probation, or fines were assessed.

42-2 District Court in New Baltimore (Macomb County) Fines and Costs Schedule for Misdemeanors and Drinking and Driving Cases

July 20, 2012,

FINES AND COSTS.jpg
Many of our blogs explore criminal and drunk driving issues within the realm of our law firm's expertise. Others are about the Courts where we frequently practice law. This blog is about the 42-2 District Court in the City of New Baltimore where we regularly provide legal services to our clients who are charged with criminal and OWI cases arising out of New Baltimore, Chesterfield Township, New Haven and Lenox Township.

The 42-2 District Court, located in the City of New Baltimore, has posted a list of possible fines and costs for various crimes. The list also contains a warning as follows: ALL FINES AND COSTS ARE DUE AT THE TIME OF SENTENCING, WE DO NOT GIVE TIME TO PAY. This warning is followed by strong language that failure to pay fines and costs will result in jail time.

42-2 District Court Drunk Driving Range of Fines and Costs

The approximate range of fines and costs for a first offense Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) or Impaired Driving (OWVI) in the 42-2 District Court is from $500.00 to $1,000.00. For a second drinking and driving offense, the range jumps to $1,000.00 to $2,500.00. This does not include other costs such as probation oversight expenses, substance abuse screening, driver responsibility fees, police/municipal response costs, random testing and substance abuse counseling. The driver responsibility fee for OWI is $1,000.00 per year for 2 years and for $500.00 per year for 2 years upon conviction of Impaired Driving. Based upon my experience, Judge Hackel yields to the low side of the range for fines and costs with respect to drinking and driving cases compared to many other courts.

42-2 District Court Partial List of Fines and Costs for Misdemeanors and Drunk Driving

  • OWI, IMPAIRED First Offense $500.00 - $1,000.00
  • OWI, Impaired, Second Offense $1,000.00 - $2,500.00
  • Driving while License Suspended $300.00 - $500.00
  • Domestic Violence $300.00 - $800.00
  • MIP and Open Intoxicants $200.00 - $500.00
  • Disorderly Conduct $200.00 - $500.00
  • Possession of Marijuana $200.00 - $800.00
  • Retail Fraud $200.00 - $800.00

Again, the above range for fines and costs does not include probation oversight expenses, restitution to any victim, driver responsibility fees, evaluations, police/municipal response expenses and other possible costs.

I would also like to add that our firm can often have many of these listed crimes dismissed whenever a client is eligible for a delayed sentence or a first offender program. For example, our firm handled a retail fraud case for a client who did not have a prior record. The case was dismissed after a short period of non-reporting probation after the client paid only $300.00 fines and costs. We have had similar results in other cases involving domestic violence, disorderly conduct, possession of marijuana, youthful offenders (age17 to 20) and other criminal offenses.

An attorney cannot ethically guarantee a result in a criminal case. However, I have found that some Judges will consider a person's financial circumstances when imposing fines and costs. In addition, our firm has been able to advocate that an impoverished person be allowed to provide community service to defray fines and costs in extreme cases.

Judge Hackel is a Judge that will listen to a lawyer's arguments and be willing to give someone an opportunity to have a case dismissed upon compliance with terms of probation. He is a concerned and reasonable Judge that wants to see a person improve his or her life. However, like other Judges in most jurisdictions where we practice, he is not likely to be sympathetic if someone violates probation.

The 42-2 District Court has jurisdiction over the following municipalities: New Baltimore, Chesterfield Township, New Haven and Lenox Township. Judge William Hackel III is the presiding Judge for the Court which is located at 35071 23 Mile Rd New Baltimore, MI 48047, phone: 586-725-9500. Information about other district courts located in Macomb County can be found at the county's website.

Other Court and Community Blogs:

ROMEO FINES AND COSTS

RETAIL FRAUD IN ROMEO OR WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP

ST CLAIR COUNTY

RETAIL FRAUD CASES AND THE 52-4 DISTRICT COURT TROY

RETAIL FRAUD CASES AND THE 32-A DISTRICT COURT HARPER WOODS

RETAIL FRAUD IN THE 41-B DISTRICT COURT CLINTON TOWNSHIP

CRIMINAL AND TRAFFIC JURISDICTION OF THE 42-2 DISTRICT COURT

41-A DISTRICT COURT, STERLING HEIGHTS

Continue reading "42-2 District Court in New Baltimore (Macomb County) Fines and Costs Schedule for Misdemeanors and Drinking and Driving Cases" »

Michigan Crime of Assault With A Deadly Weapon (FELONY ASSAULT); No Physical Contact or Injury Is Required

July 20, 2012,

GOODFELLOWS.jpg
The offense of Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW), is also known as Felonious Assault in Michigan. ADW is felony which is punishable by up to 4 years in prison. ADW is a crime which involves an assault with a deadly weapon (such as a gun or knife) or any other instrumentality which is fashioned or used as a weapon (car, club, bottle) which is capable of inflicting serious bodily injury or death. A criminal charge or conviction does not require actual physical contact or an injury. The offense is considered complete upon placing another in fear of an assault by a person who possesses a deadly weapon. A person charged with ADW in Michigan may assert several defenses including: lack of intent or self- defense.

INTENT: The prosecutor must prove that a person had criminal "intent" to cause an injury or an intent to put the victim in reasonable fear of an immediate battery. Unfortunately, our criminal defense lawyers have seen many misunderstandings and over charged cases when a person is in possession of a weapon or object during a heated argument which is never intended to be used aggressively to harm anyone. This often is the case in domestic violence cases where a spouse or significant other is intoxicated and angry, has a knife or dangerous instrumentality and utilizes ambiguous words which are misconstrued in the charging process. I think the police are more apt to charge ADW to be on the safe side and avoid being accused of being lenient on domestic violence offenders. An aggressive criminal defense lawyer can often neutralize the situation by exposing weaknesses in the prosecutor's case.

DANGEROUS WEAPON: In addition to the element of "intent", ADW requires that the aggressor have a weapon or object which can inflict death or great bodily harm. A plethora of objects have been declared to be dangerous weapons in cases which involve ADW. A car, golf club, shoe boot, cane, ashtray or beer bottle have been construed to be dangerous weapons which may support a conviction of ADW.

ADW and assault crimes are closely associated with Domestic Violence cases which our firm handles extensively. As criminal defense lawyers in Macomb County, we have successfully defended ADW cases and have avoided felony convictions and jail for our clients. Avoidance of a felony conviction can occur by effective plea bargaining to have the felony charge of ADW reduced to a misdemeanor such as simple assault and battery. Every detail is important in the defense of an ADW case. The facts may indicate that a person was acting in self-defense or lacked the requisite intent. The prior assaultive history of the defendant and victim are also relevant. The mental health history of the parties may also come into play. This information may be utilized to resolve a case before trial even though the same evidence may not be admissible at trial because of relevancy, privilege or hearsay pursuant to the Michigan Rules of Evidence.


Continue reading "Michigan Crime of Assault With A Deadly Weapon (FELONY ASSAULT); No Physical Contact or Injury Is Required" »

The Nautical Mile in St. Clair Shores, a Metro Detroit Landmark

May 26, 2012,

nautical mile marinas.jpg
The Nautical Mile is located on Jefferson between 9 Mile Road and 10 Mile Road in the City of St. Clair Shores. The Nautical Mile is a Michigan landmark which consists of numerous restaurants, marinas and boat dealers along a one mile stretch of land along the Lake St. Clair shoreline. It is a major Metro Detroit area attraction and is well known for nightlife, dining, water sports, boating or just cruising on Jefferson Avenue.

In 2010, Michigan claimed third place among the 50 states with total boat registrations boasting 812,066 boats and watercraft. Florida and Minnesota rank above Michigan while California trails Michigan in the total number of registrations. The marinas located in St. Clair Shores, along with other Macomb County Marinas located in Mt. Clemens, Harrison Township and New Baltimore, claim a major share of these registrations. The major marinas consist of Miller Marina, Jefferson Beach Marina and Emerald City Harbor.

The locally popular restaurants along the Nautical Mile (Brownies, Pat O'Brien's, The Beach Grill, Waves) offer excellent culinary options and popular night spots. This combined with the marina and boating activity are a recipe for a summer long party atmosphere.

Alcohol is a close cousin of the boating scene which can lead to numerous criminal offenses. Our firm has represented individuals charged with drunk driving (OWI), boating under the influence (BUI), assault crimes, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, public intoxication, MIP and domestic violence for various behavior on the waterfront. Whether on sea or shore, many of the confrontations with the police on the Nautical Mile are associated with alcohol consumption and/or drug use which can lead to misdemeanor or felony criminal violations.

The 40th District Court, located in St. Clair Shores, sees a fair share of cases associated with criminal activity along the Nautical Mile. I can say that the Judges of the 40th District Court are knowledgeable, proactive and reasonable when it comes to alcohol related crimes in their jurisdiction. Like other Judges in Macomb and Oakland County, the 40th District Court bench will give most first offenders a chance to dig out. The Judges in this Court are receptive to statutes which allow for deferrals and dismissals upon compliance. In this regard, our firm has negotiated and achieved special sentencing dispositions resulting in dismissals of drug crimes, domestic violence, disorderly conduct, MIP and other criminal offenses involving adults or youthful offenders pursuant to the Youthful Trainee Act (HYTA). Drunk driving cases are not so easily resolved but are often reduced to a lower offense which does not result in loss of license or jail time if handled properly. Clients facing a repeat criminal offense, violent crime, narcotic crime or property destruction will need a serious defense strategy.

A person who commits an alcohol related crime can expect probation along with random alcohol testing to insure compliance. The 40th District Court has its own probation department and I can say that they will set up a probation violation hearing upon notice of non-compliance or an alcohol/drug test failure. The 40th District Court is located on the corner of 11 Mile Road and Jefferson: 27701 Jefferson, St. Clair Shores, Michigan 48081; Honorable Mark A. Fratarcangeli and Honorable Joseph Craigen Oster presiding, Phone: 586-445-5280, criminal extension #3.

Continue reading "The Nautical Mile in St. Clair Shores, a Metro Detroit Landmark" »

Notice to Parents and Adults: Think Twice Before Allowing Under Age Drinking as You Face Liability Pursuant to Michigan Social Host Liability Law and Criminal Charges

May 23, 2012,

plant.jpg

This is the high season for high school graduation parties, summertime picnics and 4th of July gatherings. Now through Labor Day, teens will freely drink alcoholic beverages at the homes of their friends with adults/parents consenting to the illegal conduct. Otherwise responsible adults with no criminal record will break the law and allow under-age children to consume alcohol at their homes.

Michigan Social Host Liability (Civil Liability) for Furnishing Alcohol to a Minor

In Michigan, the adults who allow persons under age 21 to consume alcohol face civil liability if the minor's consumption of alcohol causes injury or death to another. The injured third party or the minor may file a lawsuit and recover under a social host theory! Think again if you believe that your adult friends who let their minor children drink at your home will support you if one their children is injured after consuming alcohol at your residence. The Social Host Liability law is friendly to personal injury lawyers as it imposes almost strict liability upon the adults that provide consent or lack of supervision leading to the consumption of alcohol by an under-aged person who causes the death or injury to another.

Michigan Criminal Offenses for Furnishing Alcohol to a Minor

Pursuant to MCL 436.1701, a person or retail establishment that sells or furnishes alcohol to a minor faces misdemeanor criminal charges. If the minor's alcohol consumption causes a person's death, the person who furnished the alcohol can be charged with a felony. An adult may also be prosecuted under the statute known as Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor.

-A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 and imprisonment for not more than 60 days for a first offense, a fine of not more than $2,500.00 and imprisonment for not more than 90 days for a second or subsequent offense, and may be ordered to perform community service. For a second or subsequent offense, the secretary of state shall suspend the operator's or chauffeur's license of an individual who is not a retail licensee or retail licensee's clerk, agent, or employee and who is convicted of violating this subsection.

-A person is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 10 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both, if the subsequent consumption of the alcoholic liquor by the minor is a direct and substantial cause of that person's death or an accidental injury that causes that person's death.

The police will also charge a minor who is found in possession of alcohol or who has consumed alcohol (except when the minor can prove he has legally consumed alcohol in a place like Canada). This charge is commonly known as MIP which is given coverage on the Abdo Law Firm website.

Our blogs usually include an image at the beginning of the entry. I thought long and hard about an appropriate image for this blog. My ideas included cheerful graduates, backyard celebrations, car crash photos, teen alcohol consumption, images of someone in a wheelchair, a funeral, etc... In the end, I decided to use the cute July 4th plant image. I want this to symbolize all of the other images that I considered and my sincere hope that everyone has a safe graduation and summer season.

Continue reading "Notice to Parents and Adults: Think Twice Before Allowing Under Age Drinking as You Face Liability Pursuant to Michigan Social Host Liability Law and Criminal Charges" »

St. Clair County; An International Border to Protect, Miles of Shoreline and Major Summer Events

May 18, 2012,

blue water bridge 2.jpg
St. Clair County is located in the south eastern part of the thumb area of Michigan. It is the gateway county to the northern thumb and the Great lakes. It is known as the Blue Water Area. St. Clair County borders Macomb, Lapeer and Sanilac Counties and is just a short distance (across the Port Huron River via the Blue Water Bridge) from Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. The Blue Water Bridge is a major international crossing from Canada into the United States. Interstate expressway I-94 runs north and south through St. Clair County, I -69 runs east and west and ends in the City of Port Huron. M-29 is the highway that is located on the eastern shoreline of St. Clair County which takes you in and around the St. Clair River and Anchor Bay. Map of St. Clair County Link.

The eastern side of St. Clair County consists of shoreline on the St. Clair River, Lake Huron, Anchor Bay and Lake St. Clair. The major cities which border these bodies of water are Port Huron (the county seat), St. Clair, Marine City and Algonac. One can enjoy views on the river (freighters, Canada) in any of the cities along these shoreline cities.

Click this link for a live web-cam of the Port Huron River and the Blue Water Bridge.

Recreational attractions in this area include boating, hunting and fishing. The City of St. Clair would be my top pick for dining (Charly's River Crab, St. Clair Inn) or enjoying the charm of a small town with a large park area dedicated along the river. In 2012, more than 50,000 visitors are expected to attend the Blue Water Fest which occurs just prior to the Port Huron to Mackinac Race.

St. Clair County is well guarded and policed because of its international border with Canada and heavy recreational traffic. The courts in St. Clair County see a fair amount of cases associated with recreation violations, DNR violations, border crossing issues (on both the US and Canada side) and drunk driving cases. A drive along the winding highway of M-29 which meanders along the St. Clair River is not a place to be if you have had any alcohol or drugs. In some places, the road is only a matter of feet from the water. Unfortunately, a fair share of accidents and OWI cases occur on this road.

A traffic violation, drunk driving or criminal case (such as domestic violence, disorderly conduct, boating under the influence, drug crimes) in St. Clair County will wind up in the 72nd District Court in either Port Huron or Marine City:

72nd District Court (Port Huron)
201 McMorran Blvd.
Room 2900
Port Huron MI 48060

72nd District Court (Marine City)
2088 South Parker (M-29)
Marine City, MI 48039

The courts and law enforcement officers in St. Clair County tend to be protective of their communities. They have the responsibility of keeping order in an area which has an international border and hosts recreational activities which often involve alcohol. (Jobbie Nooner). Our experience in these courts has been positive. I find the Judges to be reasonable when it comes to first time offenders of criminal acts such as drunk driving, disorderly conduct or simple drug possession charges. Often, such an offender is looking at probation. If the offense involves a first time drug charge or the offender is age 17 but under age 21, a dismissal is possible special Michigan statutes (HYTA and MCL 333.7411).

Continue reading "St. Clair County; An International Border to Protect, Miles of Shoreline and Major Summer Events " »

Charged with Retail Fraud in Romeo or Washington: What to Expect

May 17, 2012,

42nd-District-Court-Division-1-Romeo-Lawyer-Attorney-2.jpgThe objective of this blog post is to give readers an idea of what to anticipate if they are being charged with misdemeanor retail fraud in Romeo's District Court (42nd District - Division 1). Though our blog and website cover retail fraud extensively, the crime of retail fraud is the purposeful taking (or attempting to take) of an item from a store without the intent of paying for it. Concealing an item with the goal of not paying for it constitutes this type of theft even if you are apprehended before you leave the store.

Since the development of the 26 Mile corridor in Washington Twp., on the border of Shelby, our office has seen an increase of retail fraud calls originating from that area. Specifically, our office is frequently retained on retail fraud charges that occur at the Meijer located at 26 Mile Road and Van Dyke. A retail fraud allegation is one that should be taken very seriously. A conviction on one's permanent record indicating dishonesty can be particularly damaging for those applying for school or a job. However, where defendants retain experienced counsel they can typically keep this charge off their record and avoid being incarcerated.

Normally, a retail fraud proceeding that doesn't go to trial can be resolved in Romeo's District Court in 3 appearances; an arraignment, a pretrial, and a sentencing. One advantage of retaining counsel is that it will typically cancel out an arraignment date. Beyond allowing clients to avoid taking time off work, this also has favorable legal repercussions. Most notably, going to an arraignment unrepresented can result in an unfavorable resolution of the case or additional terms being added to the bond. If you are arraigned without an attorney it is ALWAYS advised you plead not guilty.

The goal in such a case is always to protect the client's record. This can be accomplished either through a HYTA (for youthful offenders) or 771.1(first time offenders) plea. Most of the time, the case will take two appearances from our office, a pretrial and a sentencing. It is our experience that the presiding Judge, The Honorable Denis LeDuc, really takes time to understand the defendant's background. To that end, he encourages family members to join the defendant at the podium. Further, before sentencing, it is often required that defendants be screened. A screening is an interview with the probation office to learn more about the defendant's background. Often they are seeking to determine underlying drinking problems, substance abuse issues, and/or mental health complications.

The case concludes with a sentencing, where we have found that clients, so long as they are cooperative during proceedings, are very likely NOT looking at jail. A typical sentence in this Court for a retail fraud charge is going to be about a year of probation. Depending on the circumstances it may be reporting or non-reporting, possibly with testing and counseling where the facts warrant it. If a deferral has been offered (which as we stated it usually is for first time or youthful offenders) there will be no conviction after successful completion of a probationary term.

Continue reading "Charged with Retail Fraud in Romeo or Washington: What to Expect" »

Operating Under the Influence in Michigan: The 'Koon' Decision a Reminder of 'Zero Tolerance" Approach to Drugs and Driving

May 3, 2012,

www.abdolaw.com.jpgThe recent Court of Appeals case, People v. Koon (which can be read in its entirety here), illustrates how Michigan deals with drugged driving. Oftentimes clients are under the misguided impression that a prescription or a medical marijuana card offers them immunity from prosecution for operating a vehicle while intoxicated. However, Michigan law has two provisions to deal with this. For Schedule 1 narcotics (cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, for example) where there is 'any amount' of the illicit substance the driver can be convicted. Alternatively, impairment must be proven where a client is charged with driving under the influence of a prescribed medication.

The Koon case deals with 3 issues; 1) the 'any amount' provision of MCL 257.625(8); 2) Michigan's Medical Marijuana Act; and 3) marijuana that was ingested hours before the defendant operated the automobile. In this instance, the defendant had a medical marijuana card and had used marijuana five to six hours before driving his automobile. Nonetheless, marijuana's active ingredient THC, which can remain in one's system for weeks after it's ingested, showed up in Mr. Koon's blood. Both the District Court and Circuit Court held that the Medical Marijuana Act was a defense to the zero tolerance law. Unfortunate for Mr. Koon and other card holders, the Court of Appeals did not.

The opinion, which I recommend those visiting this blog take the time read (it's not too complicated), reasons that the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act does not carve out an exception to the 'any presence' law. The MMMA does not reschedule marijuana (it remains Schedule 1) and further specifically states there are no protections for those driving under the influence of marijuana. The issue may be taken up with the State Supreme Court in the future.

What are the takeaways from this case? Most specifically as it pertains to marijuana card holders, they remain at risk driving long after they ingest marijuana. The result does seem harsh given that THC can remain in one's system for weeks after it is initially used. Nonetheless, this seems to shed some light on the way Courts are interpreting that law. Further, this should serve as a reminder that the State does not take lightly to drugged driving. If you are being prosecuted for operating an automobile under the influence of any drug, a marijuana card or a valid prescription does not offer blanket protection. This is likely an issue that will continue to take shape in the Legislature and Court of Appeals over the coming years.

Continue reading "Operating Under the Influence in Michigan: The 'Koon' Decision a Reminder of 'Zero Tolerance" Approach to Drugs and Driving" »

What to Expect If You Get Charged With A High Blood Alcohol Level OWI (.17% or greater); An Update on Super Drunk Cases Since 2010

May 2, 2012,

drunk_superman_RE_Dear_Ensx-s326x303-79442.jpg

Michigan's "Super Drunk" law has been on the books since October 31, 2010. If you do not already know, this law imposes harsh punishment and license sanctions for anyone convicted of a drinking and driving offense in Michigan with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .17% or greater. The noteworthy penalties for a "Super Drunk" or "High BAC" conviction are as follows:

  • 6 points,
  • $1,000.00 per year driver responsibility fee for 2 years,
  • 1 year license sanctions as follows: 45 day hard suspension of license (NO DRIVING) followed by 320 days restricted license with ignition interlock upon approval by Secretary of State,
  • Up to 180 days in jail,
  • Any violation of the ignition interlock will result in additional mandatory license sanctions (another 45 day hard suspension followed by 320 days of restrictions.

Click for link to Michigan Secretary of State website for all drinking and driving penalties.

I never really liked the label "Super Drunk" based upon the simple truth that a person who consumes alcohol and has a BAC of .16% could be branded as a "Super Drunk" by consuming one more sip of a drink. Other factors which influence the BAC are metabolism and the passage of time. Females also tend to have higher BAC levels based upon same variables as men (body weight and number of drinks consumed).


Super Drunk or High BAC Clients Face Policy Against Plea Bargaining

Most counties now have a policy against reduction, or plea bargaining, of High BAC cases to lower drinking and driving crimes. However, we have handled several Super Drunk, or High BAC cases as I prefer to call them, since its passage in 2010. We have had success in avoiding a High BAC convictions in many cases where the factors are in our favor. Our consultations with clients charged with a drinking and driving offense includes: an analysis of the drinking and driving incident and detailed background of our client (education, employment, children, substance abuse history).

In my opinion, the ideal candidate for consideration of a plea bargain to a lesser offense (such as Operating While Intoxicated or Impaired Driving):

  • Does not have a criminal record, especially involving drinking and driving,
  • Was not involved in an accident, especially an accident involving injuries,
  • Is willing to attend counseling before the court orders the individual to do so,
  • Was cooperative with the arresting law enforcement agency.

Typical High BAC cases cannot be reduced without a policy deviation approved by the prosecuting attorney. A deviation request is made by exposing weaknesses in the case and by providing the prosecuting attorney with positive information regarding our client. When a deviation request is made, the case may take several court appearances before a response is obtained as to whether the deviation is approved or denied. If a deviation request is denied, the case can be set for trial or motion hearings to attack the traffic stop or other aspects of the case such as technical aspects of the blood alcohol testing equipment.

Continue reading "What to Expect If You Get Charged With A High Blood Alcohol Level OWI (.17% or greater); An Update on Super Drunk Cases Since 2010" »