DUI Category Archives — Page 38 of 41 — Illinois DUI Lawyer Blawg Published by Springfield, Illinois DUI/DWI Attorney

Published on: December 24, 2010

Choosing an evaluator after an Illinois DUI arrest

The goal of the Illinois DUI process is to prevent another DUI arrest. One way of achieving that goal is through punishment. That’s the fines, the jail time, the probation and so forth.

The second means is through rehabilitation. The thinking is that if you have a DUI, you may have a drinking problem. If you do not fix the drinking problem, you are at risk to receive another DUI.

You may need outside help. The type of help you need will depend upon the severity of your problem.

If you are arrested for DUI in Illinois and are considered an appropriate candidate for court supervision, before the judge can sentence you to supervision, you must obtain a drug and alcohol evaluation from a facility licensed by the Division of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse (DASA) These evaluating agencies will interview you about your drinking and drug habits and ask other questions designed to determine what types of problems alcohol or drug use have caused in your life apart from the DUI.

If you are not eligible for court supervision and are found guilty of the DUI, you are not required by law to obtain an evaluation but many judges will demand one anyway. Furthermore, upon being convicted of the DUI, you will lose your license and have to have a Secretary of State hearing. At such a hearing, you must produce an evaluation and other documents.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 17, 2010

Jim Leyritz avoids jail time

By Theodore Harvatin

Former Yankee catcher Jim Leyritz was charged with reckless homicide as a result of a traffic crash in Florida. Both he and the driver of the vehicle with which he collided had blood alcohol levels about the legal limit of .08.

In order to convict Leyritz of reckless homicide, a felony, the prosecutor was required to prove that his intoxication caused the crash. The evidence cast doubt on whether Leyritz or the other driver ran the red light.

Because the jury was unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that Leyritz ran the red light, he was found not guilty of the reckless homicide charge. Leyritz was found guilty of DUI and sentenced to probation with no jail time.

A DUI charge is criminal in nature. As such, the prosecutor (in Illinois he is referred to as the state’s attorney, not to be confused with the attorney general) must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person charged committed each part of the offense. In Illinois, the offense consists of 2 parts:

1. That the accused was in actual physical control of a vehicle; and
2. That at the time the accused was in actual physical control of a vehicle, the accused was under the influence of any alcohol or drug or combination of drugs to a degree which rendered the accused incapable of safely driving.

In the Leyritz case, there was no doubt he was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle. The proposition in question was whether he was “under the influence” of alcohol to such an extent that he was incapable of driving safely.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 10, 2010

Illinois aggravated DUI, an enhanced DUI charge

By Theodore Harvatin

A Springfield Illinois driver struck and killed a bicyclist and then fled the scene. Police eventually determined that Ursula Jones was the driver and located her. At that point, they suspected she may have been drinking and/or using drugs. Therefore, they drew blood from her, to be analyzed later at the police lab.

Not knowing what the lab results would show, police initially charged Jones with leaving the scene of a crash involving death. Such a charge is a Class 1 felony upon conviction. Such a conviction does not require proof that the driver was intoxicated or was even at fault but merely that she left the scene of a crash involving death. The offender is eligible for probation, thus avoiding prison time. A conviction results in a driver’s license revocation.

The blood test results showed that Jones had a BAC greater than the legal limit of .08 and had drugs in her system. Therefore, the state filed aggravated DUI charges against her.

Aggravated DUI requires proof that the driver was under the influence of alcohol and that her intoxicated state caused a crash in which someone was killed or seriously injured. Aggravated DUI is a Class 2 felony, a lower level felony than leaving the scene.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 3, 2010

Consequences of violation of the Illinois MDDP

By Theodore Harvatin

Since January 1, 2009, Illinois has authorized the issuance of Monitoring Device Driving Permits (MDDP). An MDDP allows you to drive for any reason, at any time, for any distance, during the statutory summary suspension. The statutory summary suspension occurs if you refuse to take a breath test, or take the test and register above the legal limit of .08.

In exchange for receiving driving privileges, you must agree to have a machine that tests for alcohol installed on any vehicle your drive (unless it is your employer’s vehicle). The machine records the breath results and transmits them to the Illinois Secretary of State. You pay the Secretary of State to administer the program and you pay the provider of the machine to install, maintain and monitor the machine.

You cannot have an MDDP (or otherwise drive) if you have had a DUI arrest in the past 5 years. Even if you have not had a DUI arrest in the past 5 years, you do not qualify for the program if you:

1. Have an otherwise invalid driver’s license.
2. Were charged with a DUI that resulted in death or great bodily harm.
3. Had a previous conviction for reckless homicide.
4. Are less than 18 years of age.
5. Are convicted of the DUI. In such cases, you may have a Restricted Driving Permit hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 26, 2010

Ex-Yankee catcher not guilty of DUI manslaughter charge

By Theodore Harvatin

The jury has spoken. Former Yankees catcher Jim Leyritz has been found not guilty of DUI manslaughter. Leyritz was, however, found guilty of the DUI charge.

Leyritz had been charged with reckless homicide and DUI after being involved in an intersection crash in Florida. From the outset, the case did not appear to be going in the prosecutor’s favor. The defense was able to present the jury with testimony that the deceased driver was intoxicated even though the judge had ruled the jury should not hear such evidence.

As the trial progressed, things got worse for the state’s case. The state presented two witnesses in an effort to prove that Leyritz ran a red light and thereby caused the other driver’s death. However, one witness admitted that he did not see the light but only looked at it when tires screeched. The other witness, Leyritz’s passenger, said the light was yellow. If the light was red, then Leyritz caused the accident and ensuing death; if it was yellow, it is possible the other driver ran the red light.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 19, 2010

Leyritz DUI death case in hands of the jury

By Theodore Harvatin

The jury is deliberating the DUI death case brought against former Yankee catcher Jim Leyritz. Leyritz is accused of driving drunk, thereby causing an intersection collision that led to the death of the driver of the vehicle with which he collided.

The prosecution claims that Leyritz ran a red light and that his blood alcohol content at the time of the accident was .18, well above the Florida legal limit of .08, which is the same legal limit for an Illinois DUI. At the time Leyritz was tested, 3 hours after the crash, his blood alcohol content was .14.

The state (prosecutor) hired a toxicology expert who testified about the process of “reverse extrapolation”. Reverse extrapolation simply means that the expert worked the numbers backwards. He estimated Leyritz’s blood alcohol content when he was driving was .18.

On the other hand, Leyritz offered a spirited defense of the charges. First, no witness was able to state with certainty that Leyritz’s light was red. At most, they testified it was yellow when he entered the intersection. One witness was a passenger in Leyritz’s vehicle. The other was a pedestrian.

Furthermore, Leyritz had his own expert. This expert also relied upon reverse extrapolation and the concept of the alcohol absorption curve. The idea is that alcohol does not enter the bloodstream (and therefore effect the blood alcohol content) immediately upon drinking. It takes some time.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 12, 2010

Anatomy of a Springfield Illinois DUI arrest

By Theodore Harvatin

What is the process that leads to being arrested for DUI in Springfield Illinois? What happens after you are arrested?

There are a number of reasons that you may initially encounter law enforcement in connection with the operation of a motor vehicle. Common situations include speeding, improper lane usage (weaving or crossing the centerline or fog line), other erratic driving, equipment violations (light burned out), being involved in an accident- your fault or not, a roadside safety check, a report from someone claiming to have observed you leaving a bar intoxicated, a citizen’s complaint of your supposed erratic driving, or the police randomly run your license plates and you come back suspended or revoked.

Also, the police may come upon you while you are asleep in your car or dozed off behind the wheel in traffic. There may be other reasons but these are the most common.

Now that the police have stopped you, they will be looking for reasons to believe you may be under the influence of alcohol. It all starts, even before you get out of the car, with your breath (odor of alcohol), speech (slurred) and eyes (bloodshot, watery, glassy). The next decision point will probably be whether you have difficulty producing your driver’s license, insurance card and vehicle registration.

At some point during all of this, the officer is going to ask you whether you have been drinking, or how much have you had to drink. If you answer “no” or “none” he will challenge you by claiming he smells it on your breath.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 29, 2010

Former Yankee slugger’s DUI manslaughter trial starts

By Theodore Harvatin

Former New York Yankees catcher and 1996 World Series hero Jim Leyritz is on trial for DUI manslaughter. Leyritz is accused of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol, causing the death of Freida Veitch, who was driving the vehicle with which Leyritz collided in Florida. In Illinois, this offense is known as reckless homicide.
The trial has just begun but there have already been a couple of interesting turns. Evidence shows that Veitch had a blood alcohol content of .18, well above the legal limt of .08. Leyritz’s blood alcohol level 3 hours after the crash was .14. An expert for the state, relying upon the alcohol absorption curve, concluded that Leyritz’s alcohol content at the time he was driving would have been .18.

Before the trial started, the prosecutor had obtained a ruling from the judge that the jury would not be allowed to hear evidence of Veitch’s alleged intoxication. These pretrial motions are known as motions in limine.

In a jury trial, one of the judge’s most important functions is to make rulings on whether the jury will be allowed to hear certain testimony. In some instances, a question is asked and the opposing attorney shouts “objection!” and the judge decides whether or not the witness will be allowed to answer the question. If he says “overruled”, the witness will be allowed to answer. If he says “sustained”, the witness will not be allowed to answer.

Every DUI lawyer knows, however, that there are certain questions that are so damaging that if the jury even hears the question, a sustained objection will not undo the damage that asking the question has created. This is the concept of not being able to “put toothpaste back in the tube” or “un-ring the bell”.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 22, 2010

Court Supervision for an Illinois DUI

By Theodore Harvatin

Much confusion and misinformation exists about how the Illinois Secretary of State will handle a disposition of court supervision following an Illinois DUI arrest. In addition, many people do not understand the difference between supervision, probation and conditional charge for the purpose of Illinois DUI law.

It is worth repeating the two different cases an accused faces when charged with DUI. One case involves the criminal aspects of the charges- the fines, jail time, and other matters that arise in any criminal case.

The second case concerns the impact upon your driver’s license. The two are related but taking care of one does not always take care of the other. As a result, you can be cleared of the DUI and still lose your driver’s license, sometimes for as much as three years.

Your driver’s license is subject to suspension if you refused to take a breath test or if you took the test and registered above the legal limit of .08. The suspension is longer if you refuse than if you blow. A revocation occurs if you are convicted of the DUI.

A driver’s license suspension is for a definite period of time. At the end of that time, you are required to pay a fee and then your license will be returned to you, unless you were convicted of the DUI and your driver’s license was revoked. In that case, you must have a driver’s license reinstatement hearing before you can drive legally.

Court supervision requires you to plead guilty to the DUI charge. You will be fined and be required to complete a drug and alcohol evaluation, driver risk education classes and alcohol treatment, and attend a victim impact panel. The number of hours you are required to complete depends upon the risk level at which your evaluator places you.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 15, 2010

Second Illinois DUI arrest for Walgreen Company Chief Financial Officer

By Theodore Harvatin

Wade Miquelon, the Chief Financial Officer for Walgreen Company was arrested in Kenilworth, Illinois for DUI. The chief financial officer for a company is one of its highest ranking officials. Kenilworth is one of the wealthiest suburbs in the United States.

This is Miquelon’s second DUI arrest in less than a year. At the time of his first DUI arrest, he registered a BAC of .128. The legal limit in Illinois is .08.

In connection with the first DUI arrest, Miquelon was granted court supervision for 12 months. Because a disposition of court supervision does not result in a driver’s license revocation, Miquelon was not required to have a driver’s license reinstatement hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State. Also, due to court supervision, there was no threat of jail time.

A second DUI arrest presents Miquelon with a whole new set of problems. Court supervision for DUI is available only once in your lifetime.

The idea that supervision does not “go on your record” is only partially true. The Illinois Secretary of State maintains different driving records. Access to some of those records is restricted.

Continue reading →