Illinois DUI Lawyer Blawg

A woman in Carmi, Illinois was recently arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI). There are several interesting questions that this article reporting the arrest raises.

The driver was first brought to the attention of the police due to an unidentified citizen's report, made through a 911 call, of erratic driving. The 911 call alone could, under the proper circumstances, allow the police to stop a driver and investigate a DUI. However, such a stop would be justified only if the caller identified himself or otherwise had presented "indicia of reliability" such as being known as a reliable informant based upon past contact with law enforcement. Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 110 L.Ed.2d 301, 110 S.Ct. 2412 (1990); People v. Ertl, 292 Ill.App.3d 863, 686 N.E.2d 738, 226 Ill.Dec. 955 (2d Dist. 1997)

Thus, in the case of the Carmi woman, the anonymous phone call would not, without any other evidence, be sufficient to justify the police stopping her. On the other hand, the police do have grounds to stop a driver if the officer has a reasonable suspicion the driver has committed, or is about to commit, an illegal act, including traffic offenses. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 20 L.Ed.2d 889, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968)

The phone call brought the driver's vehicle to the officer's attention. He then followed the car and claimed to have notice a traffic violation; she made a wide turn and nearly struck oncoming traffic. It is significant to keep in mind that the officer's observation of a traffic violation need not be correct, so long as he held a good faith belief in its validity.

Thus, a parade of witnesses testifying that there was no wide turn would not present a defense to the initial stop if the officer was able to testify convincingly that he believed he saw the driver make a wide turn. By contrast, if the officer believed that the driver had committed an illegal act but the act was not in fact illegal, the stop would not be justified. People v. Cole, 369 Ill.App.3d 960, 874 N.E.2d 81, 314 Ill.Dec. 171 (4th Dist. 2007)

Continue reading "Illinois DUI arrest begins with 911 tip" »

It you are arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in Illinois, the police, upon having reason to believe you are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, or have any amount of a prohibited substance in your blood, breath or urine, are authorized to ask to you submit to chemical testing to detect the presence of such substances. In the case of alcohol, such tests can be used to ascertain your blood alcohol level (BAL). 625 ILCS 5/11-501.1

The choice of tests is within the discretion of the officer; the accused's request to provide a type of test different from that which the officer has demanded is deemed a refusal. People v. Kaegebein, 137 Ill. App. 3d 837, 92 Ill. Dec. 656, 485 N.E.2d 467 (2 Dist. 1985) The use of urine tests is normally confined to situations in which the officer believes the accused has drugs in his system, as urine tests do not provide an accurate BAL reading.

Breath tests are, unless the suspect is injured and taken to the hospital, normally used to determine the BAL. If the defendant is taken to the hospital and a physician draws blood for the purpose of medical treatment ("medical draw") the results are admissible in the DUI prosecution. On the other hand, for the purpose of imposing a statutory summary suspension ("SSS"), the defendant is given the right to refuse.

Chemical tests (blood, breath or urine) that are admissible in the DUI prosecution must be administered under specific procedures, by certified machines and operators. In contrast, for SSS purposes, the officer is authorized to request a portable breath test ("PBT"). The results of such a test, or the refusal, are not admissible in the DUI prosecution. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.5

Every DUI lawyer hears the question, if the opportunity ever presents itself, should I take the test? A "first offender" is someone who has not, in the previous five years, been convicted of, received court supervision for, or incurred a statutory summary suspension arising from, a DUI (unless at the time of the prior offense the offender submitted to chemical testing and was found not guilty of the DUI).

Continue reading "Breath test considerations in Illinois DUI arrests" »

At some point in the early 1980's, two people died in Illinois as a result of being struck by a drunk driver. Records showed that the driver had previously lost his license due to a DUI arrest. His license had been reinstated following a Secretary of State driver's license hearing.

In those days, the hearings primarily consisted of the revoked driver explaining how the loss of his license was causing him hardship. He would swear to never drink and drive again and would submit letters or affidavits from 3 people attesting to his good character. Reinstatement was almost automatic.

After this information became public, Jim Edgar, a state representative from the Charleston area, vowed to take on the liquor lobby. He rode the political wave to huge electoral success as Illinois Secretary of State (and later became Governor).

Thus was born the more rigorous Secretary of State administrative hearing process. Suffice it to say that the Secretary of State takes any driving-related fatality, particularly those involving alcohol or other drugs, very seriously, as does the Illinois General Assembly.

Until January 1, 2011, the Secretary of State (SOS) could, but was not required, to suspend or revoke the driving privileges of an at-fault driver who was involved in a non alcohol-related fatality. 625 ILCS 5/6-206(a)(4); 92 Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) §1040.46. The driver's license sanction the SOS imposed depended upon the number of points accumulated on the driving record, in accordance with this administrative rule.

In 2009, a young lady, while texting and driving, struck and killed a bicyclist. Her offense was minor enough that the SOS did not impose any driver's license sanctions.

Outrage ensued. She killed someone, how can this be! As a result, the law and administrative rules now provide that if you are convicted of a traffic offense that caused a fatal accident, the SOS is required to revoke your driver's license and you must have a hearing with his office in order to restore your license. 625 ILCS 5/6-205(a)(16); 92 IAC §1040.46(a) and (h).

Continue reading "Illinois driver's license hearings following a fatal crash" »

If you lose your driver's license due to a DUI conviction, you must have a driver's license hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State in order to obtain any type of driving privileges. You may apply for a restricted permit during the statutory summary suspension period if you are a first offender as defined by 625 ILCS 5/11-500. If you are not a first offender, you are prohibited from having a hearing if your statutory summary suspension has not ended. 625 ILCS 5/6-208.1(g).

Once the suspension terminates, you may be eligible to request reinstatement of your full driving privileges, or you may only be eligible for a restricted driving permit (RDP) if your period of eligibility for reinstatement has not ended. The period of ineligibility for full reinstatement due to a DUI conviction depends upon your prior driving record and upon whether you took or elected not to submit to tests to determine your blood alcohol level. The revocation period (i.e., the period of ineligibility for full reinstatement) will be 1, 5 or 10 years.

During the period that you are ineligible for reinstatement, any application for driving relief requires you to demonstrate undue hardship. Undue hardship is more than mere inconvenience to yourself or others. However, the Fourth District Appellate Court, in Clark v. White, rejected the notion the Secretary of State advanced that if you are managing to get to work, undue hardship is automatically lacking.

Restricted permits may only be issued for purposes of employment (to and from and on the job), ongoing medical appointments for you and/or family members, attendance at support meetings such as Alcoholics Anonymous, substance abuse treatment, court-ordered community service, educational pursuits for you or family members and day care. 625 ILCS 5/6-205(c)(1); 92 Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) §1001.420 (b). Neither the statutes nor the administrative rules authorize granting a permit to seek employment, to drive to the doctor in case of an emergency or to buy groceries.

Continue reading "Illinois driver's license reinstatement formal and informal hearings" »

An Illinois resident, or any person, whether a resident or not, who holds an Illinois driver's license, may find an out-of-state Driving Under the Influence (DUI) arrest coming into play at an Illinois driver's license hearing.

Illinois is one of 45 states that is, at present, a member of the Driver License Compact (DLC). 625 ILCS 5/6-700 et. seq. It is common (and wrong) knowledge that out-of-state DUI offenses enter the driver's license hearing process only through the DLC.

It is certainly true that the state where the offense occurred may, if it is a member of the DLC, and even if it is not, report a DUI conviction to Illinois. In that case, Illinois will enter a conviction on the Illinois driving record and a discretionary revocation. The length of the revocation will be the same as if it were an in-state conviction. 625 ILCS 5/6-208 (explicitly including out-of-state offenses in the calculation).

Thus, a first conviction leads to a 1 year revocation, a second conviction causes a 5 year revocation if the prior conviction was within the preceding 20 years and a third conviction will yield a 10 year revocation. 625 ILCS 5/6-208 b) 1-4 If any fourth or more conviction results from an arrest that occurred on or after January, 1, 1999, there is a lifetime ban on any type of driving relief, even a restricted license. 625 ILCS 5/6-208(b)4; 92 Illinois Administrative Code §1001.420(o)

These rules determine when a person is eligible to petition for driving relief, assuming the statutory summary suspension has ended. But the drug and alcohol evaluation that determines an offender's risk classification (minimal, moderate, significant or high risk) is driven in part by the number of "DUI dispositions". Out-of-state dispositions must be included. It is not that difficult of a concept to grasp when all the offenses are shown on the driving abstract.

Continue reading "Impact of out-of-state DUI offenses in connection with Illinois driving relief" »