10 Things to Do If You Have Been Pulled Over for a DUI

Do you know your rights when you are pulled over for a DUI in Michigan (in Michigan it is known as OWI-Operating While intoxicated)? What you do or don't do could have ramifications on your case. Read this article and know your rights.

The police must have a reason to pull you over. Just because they saw you coming out of a bar at 1:30 am is not enough (ironically, if you have the fuzzy dice one your mirror,that is enough to pull you over). Once they pull you over, this is where you must know your rights.

1) Always have your drivers license, proof of insurance and registration in an accessible place. The officer is looking to see if you are "fumbling" about the car, and this will give him or her reasonable suspicion that you have been drinking.

2) Next the officer will ask, is if you know why you were pulled over. Always answer no to this because anything you say can be used as an admission. Let them tell you why you were pulled over.

3) The officer will probably ask if you have been drinking. Remember, it is not against the law the drink, then drive. It is against the law to drive while drunk. So if you answer yes, this will give the officer more reasonable suspicion that you were drinking. Politely refuse to answer this question. Don't make the job easier for thee officer.

4) Next the officer will ask you to submit to the Field Sobriety Tests (FST). These tests were developed by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA). The three standardized tests that are recognized in court are:

1-The Walk and turn

2- The one leg stand

3- The Horizontal Gaze Nystygmus (HGN).

Also known as the "pen test".

All other tests are not standardized and cannot be used in court. You do not have to submit to these tests and should refuse them. Most of the time, they are done incorrectly by the officer and are always subjective. Politely refuse the FST's.

5) Next the officer will ask you to submit to the preliminary breath test (PBT). This test is to detect if there is any alcohol on your breath. They are wildly inaccurate in detecting your blood alcohol content (BAC). The officer is using this test to determine if there is probable cause to arrest. Whether you refuse or accept, chances are you will be arrested. But without the PBT, we have a better chance to argue an illegal arrest. If you take the PBT,and it is positive for alcohol, then the ability to argue an illegal arrest diminishes.

6) The officer must advise you of your rights in regards to the PBT test. if they do not, then your rights have been violated. There is no automatic suspension of your license by refusing the PBT. It is only a civil infraction, with no points on your record. If the officer tells you you already consented because you signed your drivers license, still refuse the test. Your license will not be suspended for refusing the PBT. The Datamaster test will have sanctions, as will be discussed later. One caveat: if you are a commercial driver, refusal of the PBT will result in a misdemeanor charge and license sanctions.

6) If you have refused the tests, then the officer may place you under arrest (remember, if you take the tests you may still be arrested anyway, but you have in fact helped prove the State's case against you. They will take you to the station to be booked. If they have not read you your Miranda rights, then they cannot ask you any questions, other than standard booking questions. DON'T VOLUNTEER ANY INFORMATION AND IMMEDIATELY REQUEST AN ATTORNEY!!

7) The officer will next conduct the Datamaster test. This test is more accurate than the PBT, but less accurate than blood draw. Before they conduct this test, the must read you your Chemical Rights Test. If they do not, then the Datamaster test cannot be used in court. You have the right to refuse to submit to the Datamaster test. However, if you do, your drivers license will be suspended for one year and you will have cost and fines to get your license back. So think long and hard about refusing this test. If you can do without your license for a year, then refuse to take this test.

8) If you refuse to take the data master test, then the officer will request a warrant to do a blood draw to determine your BAC. In order to do the blood draw, they must have a warrant. They will take you to a hospital (of their choice) to do the draw.

9) If the police to a blood draw, then you have a right to an independent test and should use this right. Always request an independent test. If the police refuse, we can use this refusal in front of the urn to show your rights were no respected.

10) Call an experienced Michigan DUI lawyer right away after you are released. This is important s your lawyer needs to start working on the case and gathering evidence. One of the most important pieces of evidence is the in-car video from the police. This shows how the FST were conducted, the PBT administered and what transpired. Everything on video and audio. Most police departments recycle the video's after a certain time, so it is imperative that you contact an attorney right away so this evidence can be preserved. Keep in mind, many times you will not receive a court date for a DUI until months after you are arrested. By this time the video may be gone. Don't wait until you get a court date before hiring an attorney.

Post Source: ezinearticles

DUI Drivers License Restoration in Michigan

This article deals with DUI driver's license restoration in Michigan. Michigan is different from many states in that drivers who have been convicted of two or more alcohol related charge in seven years automatically lose their driver's license. This means that they have to petition to have their driver's license restored.

Most people find that losing their driver's license severely cripples their lifestyle. They have to depend on other people or public transportation for all of the basics of life including going to work, shopping, and going to church. And much of the state of Michigan is made up of small communities that lack public transportation options.

Getting your driver's license restored in Michigan is a complicated process. Many people who try to do it on their own are unsuccessful. For this reason, you may want to consider hiring an experienced attorney for your DUI driver's License Restoration in Michigan.

If you are trying to get your license restored, you must file a case with the Michigan Driver's License Appeal Division. If you lose this hearing, you cannot reapply for six months, so it's important to get it right the first time.

At the DLAD hearing, the Petitioner (you) have the responsibility to show clear and convincing evidence that any substance abuse problems are under control, that repeat alcohol problems are unlikely, that repeat drunk driving is unlikely, and that petitioner has the ability and motivation to drive safely and within the law.

The petitioner must present three different sources of evidence to prove his or her claims. This can include urinalysis to prove that a petitioner is "clean," letters from people involved in treatment, and proof of AA meetings.

If the petitioner proves his or her case, they can get either a restricted license or full restoration of driving privileges.

That's the low down on DUI driver's license restoration in Michigan DUI.

Post Source: ezinearticles

DUI Statistics Misleading

An interesting article was posted recently on legalnews.com entitled: Expert Witness: Little Changes at DAAD Mean a Lot. The article addresses the new DAAD form to be used for driver license restoration, among other things. In his article the author, Michael G. Brock, correctly indicates as follows:

In December the DAAD made some subtle changes to their evaluation form that may not seem like a big deal, but might be the difference between a person getting his or her license reinstated and have to wait another year and try again. The Substance Abuse Evaluation form is now the Substance Use Disorders Evaluation. Other than the title, the only real change in the form is the order of information requested, and that the relapse history has been replaced by a section titled "Periods of Abstinence" and "Abated by What?" Meaning the cause of the relapse; i.e., quit going to AA meetings and began hanging around drinking/using friends.

In practice, the biggest changes seem to be that the hearing officers are digging into the appellant's background more than in the past, and they are interested in any substance the person has ever taken, including those taken for only a brief time recreationally and a long time ago.

However, the author also makes several other observations and conclusions, including:

Some people in this line of work think that the abstinence model has really not been a success and is keeping those who are not yet full fledged alcoholics from moving on into adulthood by imposing serious penalties on them for youthful indiscretions.

I don't really see it that way. It seems to me we are catching people earlier in the progression of the disease of addiction than we used to, and, in many cases, preventing them from irreparably damaging their lives and the lives of others. They may go a year or two without driving, but may be spared 20 years of addictive drinking and all the fallout that entails. And this strict enforcement of the DUI laws has been largely, if not solely, responsible for reducing drunk driving related fatalities by half in the last 27 years.

While I agree with and respect the opinion and much of what the author has stated, I am firm in my conviction that tougher enforcement is NOT responsible for any reduction in either OWI or OWI related fatalities. I have written extensively on this topic, including the following articles, all of which are from our companion site winbackyourlife.org:

• Michigan Drugged Driving Cases to Increase
• Smoking Ban Leads to Fewer DUIs
• Michigan DUI Statistics Drop

I defy the writer to provide any reasonable statistics to support his claim. In fact, there are none. I am also aware of no scientific studies to support the contention that taking away a license from a DUI offender actually increases the likelihood that they will not become or continue to be alcoholics. If this were true, and it is not, why is this not part of the recognized treatment plan of any hospital treating alcohol and drug dependence and addiction? Let's stop repeating the feel-good platitudes and look at real statistics and real science before we misinform the public and add to the already manic anti-drunk driving hysteria.

Post Source: ezinearticles