Justia Lawyer Rating
Super Lawyers
Leading Lawyers
The Best Lawyers in America
Avvo Clients' Choice
Avvo Rating 10.0
National College for DUI Defense
National Collage for DUI Defense
American Council Of Second Amendment Lawyers
Avvo Rating
Trial Lawyers University
Best Lawyers
James Publishing Author
Super Lawyers
Trial Lawyers College

DI-93 vs. DI-177: Key Differences and Their Implications

When dealing with Michigan's Implied Consent Law and drunk driving charges, understanding the distinction between the DI-93 and DI-177 forms is crucial. These forms serve different purposes depending on whether you voluntarily submit to a chemical test or refuse it.

DI-177: "Breath, Blood, Urine Test Report"

The DI-177 form is issued when you voluntarily take a chemical test (breath, blood, or urine) and return a BAC result of 0.08% or higher, indicating an unlawful level of intoxication. Note that no BAC result will be listed on the DI-177 when a blood sample is taken because the blood sample must be sent to the lab for a result to be obtained. Here are its key features:

Driver’s License Confiscation: Your physical driver’s license is confiscated and destroyed by the police.

Temporary Paper License: The DI-177 serves as a temporary driving permit, often referred to as a "paper license" or 625G permit. It includes:

  • Your personal details (name, address, license number).
  • Information about the BAC test, unless a blood sample was obtained, and the arrest.
  • A statement specifying that this temporary license is valid only if you had a valid Michigan license at the time of the arrest.
  • A notation that any prior restrictions on your original license will apply to the temporary permit.
The DI-177 is valid until:
  • Criminal charges are resolved (dismissed or acquitted).
  • The Secretary of State takes action to suspend or revoke your license.

This form essentially bridges the gap between the arrest and formal adjudication or administrative action. It also remains valid through a restrict license period.

After the driver’s license sanction is served, a $125 fee is required for full license reistatement, assuming no other sanctions apply.

DI-93: "Officer’s Report of Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test"

The DI-93 form comes into play when you allegedly refuse to submit to a chemical test. Refusing a test constitutes a violation of Michigan's Implied Consent Law and triggers administrative penalties. Key points about the DI-93 include:

  • Driver’s License Confiscation: Similar to the DI-177, your physical license is confiscated and destroyed.
  • Notice of Refusal: The DI-93 documents the refusal and informs you of your rights and the consequences:
  • License Suspension: Occurs if the request for hearing is not submitted ot the Secretary of State within 14 days of refusal (this is an automatic suspension), or if there’s an adverse decision at the implied consent hearing. There is a one-year suspension for the first refusal, or a two-year suspension for subsequent refusals within seven years.
  • Six Points added to your driving record.
  • Information on your right to appeal by requesting an Implied Consent Hearing within 14 days of receiving the form.
  • Officer Certification: The bottom portion of the form includes a section for the officer to certify that you were given a copy of the form, which serves as a suspension notice and outlines your appeal rights.

The DI-93 is a critical document in the administrative process, as it officially records the refusal and initiates the suspension process with the Michigan Secretary of State.

Summary of Differences

FeatureDI-177DI-93
Issued WhenDriver submits to chemical testing, BAC ≥ 0.08%Driver refuses chemical testing
PurposeTemporary license and test reportRefusal notice and suspension initiation
License StatusLicense confiscated, DI-177 issued as paper licenseLicense confiscated, no driving privileges if no hearing requested or adverse hearing outcome
PenaltiesBased on OWI case outcomeLicense suspension, six points
Appeal RightsDependent on criminal charges14-day window for Implied Consent Hearing; Hardship Appeal

Hardship Appeal

If the 14-day timeframe for requesting a hearing is missed, or if there is an adverse decision at the Secretary of State hearing, it’s still possible to retain restricted driving privileges. To do this, a hardship appeal must be filed with the circuit court in the county in which the refusal occurred. At the hardship appeal hearing, a circuit court judge will assess whether it would be an extreme hardship for them not to have driving privileges for a year. The hardship appeal process could be the difference between restricted driving for 365 days, or no driving at all; between keeping a job, and losing a job. For these reasons, it’s essential to have focused DUI attorneys like those at the Barone Defense Firm to give you the best chance at retaining some level of driving privileges.

Practical Implications

Understanding whether you have received a DI-177 or DI-93 is essential because the administrative and legal outcomes differ significantly. Knowing your rights and the steps to take for each form can make a substantial difference in protecting your driving privileges and defending against potential charges.

If you’re navigating issues related to Michigan’s Implied Consent Law or OWI charges, contact the DUI attorneys at the Barone Defense Firm as soon as possible. Even if the 14-day window to request a hearing with the Secretary of State was missed, there may still be an option to get restricted driving privileges. Our experienced attorneys can guide you through the complexities of the law and build a robust defense to safeguard your future. Call us at (248) 306-9158 for a free consultation.

Client Reviews

★★★★★
Patrick Barone is the ONLY choice for DUI defense. He was realistic from the start and made it a point to look at my case before taking my money. As a business owner, when I think of attorneys, I think of the "shark infested waters. Patrick is a shark alright, but his prey is not the client; it's justice for his client. Ten stars Patrick!! Chris F.
★★★★★
Attorney Patrick Barone was very helpful and helped me understand the charge and sentence absolutely clearly. He also guided me through step by step helping me form a statement. His instructions were clear and detailed. It was obvious he cared about me understanding every important detail within my case. I would absolutely recommend this defense firm to anyone in need. Aaron B.
★★★★★
The Barone Defense Firm is the firm I recommend. They are truly concerned about the person, not just the legal issue, but the person as well. They are the most knowledgeable defense firm that I am aware of, having actually written the book on DWI Defense. If you are faced with a DWI you will not find a more professional and skilled law firm. But, most importantly, they care about how the accused individual recovers his or her life when the case is complete. Very remarkable group of lawyers. William H.