Michigan Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

You Must Avoid These Top 11 Mistakes of Michigan DUI Clients

Published on: September 2, 2016 | by Patrick Barone

Assuming there is no defense: This mistake is number one for a reason, it is potentially the biggest mistake you can make. EVERY DUI case can and should be defended. It’s your Constitutional right. A belief that your case can’t be defended can only lead to one result – guilty: and this is the very result you should be trying to avoid. Remember that it is unlikely that you will ever regret aggressively defending your case, but you certainly might regret not defending it!

If you’ve already retained an attorney, then your attorney should be talking to you about what defenses apply in your case. If your attorney is not doing this, then chances are pretty good that he/she simply doesn’t know how to defend your case. This lack of knowledge can be fatal to your case.

On the other hand, if you are interviewing possible attorneys to represent you, discuss with him/her what defenses apply in your case, and equally important, how likely these defenses are to meet with success. Select the attorney who seems to be the most knowledgeable and who has the most positive outlook and attitude. As you go through this selection process it’s best to always remember one thing, success can only happen when you believe in your attorney and your attorney believes in your case!

New FOIA Rules Make Defending a Michigan DUI Easier

Published on: September 2, 2016 | by Patrick Barone

If you have been arrested for DUI in Michigan, and have found and retained a top DUI defense attorney to represent you, then he or she will be using a variety of tools to investigate your case. The purpose of this investigation is to help your DUI defense lawyer uncover defenses applicable to your case.

One under-utilized method of discovery is the Freedom of Information Act or FOIA. In a criminal case, the FOIA can be used to obtain documents from the police agencies involved in your DUI arrest, as well as agencies involved in the oversight of the specific police agency that arrested you for drunk driving.

Of particular interest in a Michigan DUI case is the State Police agency involved in oversight of the state’s breath testing program. In the case of a drunk driving / DUI blood test case, the agency of interest is the laboratory where the blood was tested for alcohol.

Do Judges Bend Law to Favor Law Enforcement?

Published on: September 2, 2016 | by Patrick Barone

Our country was founded on the principle of limited government. This means that police officers are supposed to be limited in their ability to do things like search your home, stop and frisk you on the street or even stop your car. The question is limited by whom? And the answer is, limited by judges.

The judges are members of the judicial branch of government, while the police are members of the executive. Thus, when judges limit the power of the police they are doing what the constitution says they are supposed to do. But when they expand the power of the police, they are abnegating their constitutional role.

This is a problem at all levels of government, but is a gigantic problem when we are talking about the court of final authority, the Supreme Court. That’s why it’s so significant when a Supreme Court Justice complains that the United States Supreme Court is bending the rules to favor the police and prosecutors.

New Law Makes it Easier for Michigan Drivers to Avoid a Drunk Driving Arrest

Published on: September 2, 2016 | by Patrick Barone

On September 8, 2015, Governor Snyder signed into law House Bill 4193, making it easier for Michigan drivers to avoid a DUI arrest.

According to the new law, during a traffic stop you may now show a police officer an electronic proof of insurance on your phone. This electronic proof of insurance would be considered prima facie evidence that you have properly insured your car.

So why does this make it easier to avoid a DUI arrest in Michigan? Well, one of the first things a police officer will be looking for in a DUI investigation is whether or not you are able to provide a proof of insurance. In other words, the officer will be trying to determine if you are drunk from how you respond to his/her request to provide driver license, registration and proof of insurance.

The Changing Face of Drinking and Drugged Driving Trials

Published on: September 2, 2016 | by Patrick Barone

As drunk drivers become less common on our roads, resulting in a loss of revenue to the government, the government has decided to focus on a new public enemy: drugged driving. Americans are becoming a society of medicated persons and many of those medications may affect driving. Soon, the anti-drunk driving commercials will be replaced with anti-drugged driving commercials, with all new catchphrases. “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over” or “Over the Limit, Under Arrest” may soon be talking about your “Prescription for Arrest.” While no one is advocating drugged driving, knee-jerk reactions and propaganda campaigns are not always the solution. Many times, the public outcry will tip the scales of justice towards the prosecution. Unfortunately, a mob mentality can also lead to the passage of laws that are ill-considered and ill-advised. The new attempt to ensnare drugged drivers may already be so overzealous, as to have an unintended victory for the defense.

Michigan Public Act 315, of the 2014 Legislative Session, which amends MCL § 257.625a, is intended to help officers in the field make more drugged driving arrests. Whether it will help – or perhaps even hurt – these efforts remain to be shown. This Act, combining House Enrolled Bill 5385 and Enrolled Senate Bill 863, was presented to the Governor on October 7, 2014. Signed on October 14, 2014, the Act will become effective on January 12, 2015. Essentially, the new Act requires suspects to perform a “preliminary roadside analysis.” Currently, any participation in field sobriety is voluntary; however, come January it will be against the law to refuse to stand on one leg or walk a straight line.

Perhaps the biggest, and likely unintended, change in the law will be the conduct of trials in OWI cases. Specifically, the new Act changes the language from “preliminary breath test” to “preliminary roadside analysis” in MCL 257.625a(2)(b). That amended section states: