Articles Posted in DUI Sentencing

Published on:

In Illinois, the punishment imposed for a DUI conviction depends, in part, on whether the defendant caused any other person to suffer bodily harm. For example, a defendant involved in a fatal DUI crash will most likely be charged with aggravated DUI, which carries a mandatory penalty of three years in prison for each person killed. As demonstrated in a recent Illinois case, the courts do not take kindly to DUI defendants attempting to avoid a guilty verdict with novel legal theories and are apt to impose significant penalties. As such, if you are charged with aggravated DUI, it is critical that you retain an Illinois DUI defense lawyer with the skills and resources needed to help you seek the best legal outcome available under the facts of your case.

The Fatal Collision and Subsequent Conviction

Reportedly, a South Peoria man was convicted of aggravated DUI, reckless homicide, and aggravated street racing after a crash that killed two people and seriously injured another. The defendant attempted to argue that a past appellate court case provided him with some leeway, but the judge rejected his assertion, stating that the case in question was not applicable. The defendant also claimed that the victims’ car crossed in front of him during the incident, but the judge dismissed this argument as well.

It is alleged that the defendant was found guilty of having numerous narcotics and illicit drugs in his system at the time of the accident. During the sentencing hearing, the defendant expressed remorse, but the judge criticized him for his arrogance and lack of accountability. The judge sentenced the defendant to 31 years in prison, with the possibility of release in approximately 22 years. He plans to appeal the decision. Continue reading →

Published on:

People that cause drunk driving fatalities often face significant criminal penalties, including jail time and fines. In some states, if a person killed in a drunk driving crash was the parent of a minor child, the person that caused the collision may have to pay child support as well. Tennessee is the most recent state to introduce such legislation via a law named after children left behind when their parents died in drunk driving collisions. The law indicates a movement to dissuade people from driving while intoxicated by increasing penalties, and similar legislation was previously bought in Illinois. If you are charged with causing a DUI collision, it is smart to speak to an Illinois DUI defense attorney about your possible defenses.

The Tennessee Legislation

It is reported that a 2023 Tennessee law requires people who cause drunk driving accidents that kill parents to pay child support for any surviving children. Specifically, the law dictates that if a person is convicted of vehicular homicide due to intoxication and the person killed in the accident was the parent of a child under the age of majority, the sentencing court must order the defendant to pay restitution in the form of maintenance to each child left behind by the victim.

Allegedly, the support obligation will endure until the child reaches the age of eighteen or graduates from high school. The courts must determine what constitutes a reasonable and necessary support obligation based on all relevant factors, including the child’s financial resources and needs, the financial resources and needs of any surviving parent, and the standard of living the child is accustomed to enjoying. The law was created by a drafted resident of Missouri after her grandson, Bentley, was orphaned by a drunk driving accident; the statute is named Ethan’s Hailey’ and Bentley’s Law. Continue reading →

Published on:

Beginning January 1, 2022, the Secretary of State has adopted new rules that will expand driving privileges for persons who have two or three DUI convictions. Under the current permits, driving is limited to specific purposes and specific days, hours, and distances.
The new rules will make an RDP available to drive 12 hours a day, 6 days a week and up to 200 miles for any lawful purposes. If a job requires driving more expansively, the Secretary of State will allow that to happen. A driver would have to show why not being able to drive within the 12 hours, 6 days and 200 miles would not accommodate employment or medical needs, if applicable.
Furthermore, individuals who have only one conviction and are eligible for full reinstatement but are granted a permit for one year also qualify for this new permit. Those who are not yet eligible for reinstatement, including those who are operating under an extended suspension for refusing breath testing, are also not eligible for the new permit.
Published on:

Judges and prosecutors have distinct roles in the criminal justice system, and generally, they refrain from exercising powers outside of the scope of their authority. If they do overstep their bounds, however, it may lead to unexpected outcomes. For example, a prosecutor in North Dakota recently sued a judge, arguing that the judge violated the separation of powers by refusing to approve a plea deal that would have ignored one of the defendant’s prior DUI convictions. The lawsuit, which alleges that defendants convicted of fourth DUIs are subject to less stringent penalties than those convicted of third DUIs, seeks to remedy a perceived injustice. If you are charged with a third or subsequent DUI offense, it is smart to meet with a knowledgeable Illinois DUI defense attorney to assess your rights.

The North Dakota Case

It is reported that the North Dakota legislature recently increased the penalties for repeat DUI offenders. Specifically, a person convicted of a third DUI, which is a class A misdemeanor, faces a 120-day jail sentence, while a person convicted of a fourth DUI crime, which is a Class C felony, may be imprisoned for one year and one day. The prosecutor alleges that, essentially, sentences for fourth DUIs are paper penalties, in that parties convicted of such offenses spend significantly less time in prison than those convicted of lesser crimes.

Allegedly, the prosecutor attempted to subvert the sentencing deficiencies by entering into a plea agreement with a defendant that would have reduced the number of the defendant’s prior DUI convictions, which would have resulted in a lesser sentence on paper but arguably more time in prison. When the judge refused to adopt the plea agreement, the prosecution filed suit, arguing the judge violated the separation of powers. Continue reading →

Published on:

In most if not all states, a DUI is a misdemeanor charge. Many states, however, also allow the state to increase the severity of a DUI charge and penalties if certain factors are present. In cases where driving under the influence of alcohol results in an accident that causes bodily injury or death, a defendant may face severe penalties far more substantial than typically imposed for a DUI charge.

For example, in a recent California case, a 26-year-old woman was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to thirty years to life in prison following an alcohol-related accident that resulted in the death of six people. If you are accused of aggravated DUI you should consult an Illinois DUI attorney to assist you in formulating a defense.

Factual Background of the California Accident

Allegedly, the driver was driving a Camaro 100 miles an hour in the wrong direction on a California highway in 2014 when she crashed into a Ford Explorer, which then struck a third car. The driver’s sister and best friend were passengers in her car. Several people were ejected from both the Camaro and the Explorer, and only the driver and the driver of the third car survived. The driver’s blood alcohol level was calculated to be .15% three hours after the accident. The driver had previously been convicted of a DUI and warned about the dangers of driving under the influence of alcohol. Her license, which was suspended following her previous DUI conviction, was reinstated just one week before the crash. She was charged with six counts of second-degree murder, to which she plead no contest. She was subsequently sentenced to thirty years to life in prison.

Continue reading →

Published on:

Historically, an individual arrested for DUI in Oklahoma automatically has his or her license suspended. The suspension process involves an administrative proceeding with the Department of Public Safety, while the DUI itself is handled by the criminal courts. After a first offense, a driver can have his license revoked for up to six months. But a September 2016 Oklahoma Supreme Court decision put a wrench in this practice — at least for the time being.

In a 7-2 ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision setting aside a license revocation based on problems with the Itoxilyzer 8000 breathalyzer.

Continue reading →

Published on:

A 28-year-old Sumner, Illinois resident was recently sentenced to 30 months in prison after pleading guilty to aggravated DUI for the June 2014 car accident that killed her boyfriend. She was sentenced this month by Lake County Circuit Court Judge James Booras. Her prison sentence is periodic, meaning she will occasionally be released for treatment and medical services. Following her jail sentence, she will be required to serve four years of probation.

According to Waukegan police records, officers responded to a report that a car struck a utility pole at around 3 a.m. on June 28, 2014. According to witnesses, the driver was traveling at high speeds when she crashed into the pole on North Lewis Avenue. While her 24-year-old boyfriend was killed instantly, the crash also resulted in the driver losing both of her legs. She was immediately airlifted to a hospital in Libertyville, where she was announced to be in critical condition. No other cars were involved in the crash, and both the driver and her boyfriend were wearing seat belts.

Continue reading →

Published on:

After a jury trial, defendant Jeannine Jenkins was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Following Jenkins’ direct appeal, the Illinois Court of Appeals for the First District remanded the case to the trial court for a hearing on Jenkins’ pro se motion for a reduction of her sentence. On remand, the trial court denied the defendant’s motion. Jenkins appealed. The appeals court affirmed the judgment against the defendant in an unpublished opinion.

At trial, the evidence established that in April 2012, the defendant picked up her granddaughter from daycare. The daycare workers reported that the defendant was possibly intoxicated. The Palatine police were called and located the defendant within minutes. The defendant appeared to be under the influence. The defendant’s granddaughter was not strapped into a car seat and was “sitting loose” in the car. The defendant was arrested and charged with aggravated DUI. Following a jury trial, the defendant was found guilty of aggravated DUI.

Continue reading →

Contact Information