Articles Posted in Out-of-state DUI

Published on:

By

Washington State law defines “vehicle” to include bicycles. In 1995, however, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled that the state DUI statute does not include bicycles. While this case is not controlling law in Illinois, attorneys who help people charged with an Illinois DUI find its reasoning compelling.

bicycle
At about 3 a.m. in June 1992, the defendant was riding his bicycle in Montesano, Washington. An officer pulled him over after watching him swerve and make wide turns. The officer testified that the defendant had slurred speech and smelled like alcohol. The officer asked him to perform field sobriety tests, several of which he failed. He was arrested for DUI. At the station, he waived his Miranda rights. A breath test indicated his blood alcohol level was .13.

Following a bench trial, he was convicted of driving while intoxicated. His motion for a new trial was denied, and he appealed.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The Washington Supreme Court recently considered whether a probationer convicted of DUI may legally be required to submit to a random urine test for drugs and alcohol. In an en banc opinion, the state high court affirmed the intermediate court’s holding that since the urine test was ordered to track whether she was complying with a valid probation condition requiring the appellant’s sobriety, it did not violate the state constitution.

chemistry lab

In the summer of 2014, the appellant pleaded guilty to one count of DUI. As a condition of her sentence, the court ordered that the appellant not do drugs that weren’t prescribed or drink alcohol. Over defense counsel’s objection, the court required the appellant to submit to random urine testing.

 

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In a case of interest to Illinois DUI lawyers, the founder of the International Polo Club raised 13 issues before Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal regarding his DUI manslaughter conviction. The appeals court affirmed, addressing only three of the issues raised by Goodman:  (1) whether the State prematurely released his vehicle after his first trial in violation of his due process rights and requiring dismissal under California v. Trombetta; (2) that the jury instructions on the failure to render aid enhancements violated due process by failing to require that he knew that the accident resulted in injuries or death; and (3) that his blood was drawn without a warrant, violating the Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure Clause.gavel Following a late-night car accident, in which the other driver died after his vehicle was submerged in a canal, the defendant was charged with DUI manslaughter with failure to render aid and vehicular homicide with failure to render aid. He was convicted and sentenced following his first trial. After juror misconduct came to light, the first conviction was vacated, and he was granted a new trial. In the second trial, he was again found guilty.

Regarding the defendant’s first challenge on appeal, the court agreed with the state and held that the court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss due to the loss of the car. Pursuant to Trombetta, the constitutional duty of the state to preserve evidence must be limited to evidence that might be expected to play a significant role in the suspect’s defense. To meet this standard of constitutional materiality, evidence must both possess an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed and be of such a nature that the defendant would be unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means.

The appeals court agreed with the trial court that the state did not act in bad faith in releasing the car. Therefore, it had to determine whether the car constituted materially exculpatory or only potentially useful evidence. The trial court held a full hearing on the issue of the exculpatory nature of the car and concluded that it was merely potentially exculpatory. It reasoned that the defendant’s expert, by his own testimony, had already formed an opinion of the malfunction and that his opinion on the state of the car at the time of the crash was complete. The “mere possibility of helping the defense” by conducting more testing on the car, which was already subjected to extensive testing by three experts, did not rise to the level of constitutional materiality.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

When a motorist drives on a road in Pennsylvania, he or she is “deemed to have given consent” to chemical testing to determine whether he or she is driving under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance (“DUI”), provided that a police officer first develops “reasonable grounds” to suspect such an impairment. Nonetheless, this “implied consent” statute also grants DUI arrestees the right to refuse chemical testing. While Illinois has its own laws, these principles are also relevant to Illinois DUI defendants.blood test

In a recent case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted an appeal to consider the lawfulness of a warrantless blood draw conducted upon a motorist who, having been arrested for DUI, had then been rendered unconscious by medical personnel before a police officer provided O’Connell warnings and before the officer requested the motorist’s submission to a chemical test. The Philadelphia Municipal Court, the Court of Common Pleas, and the Superior Court all held that a blood draw conducted under these circumstances is impermissible and that the results of the derivative blood test are accordingly inadmissible at trial. Since the seizure of blood violated Pennsylvania’s implied consent statute, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1547, and since no other circumstances justified the failure to obtain a search warrant, the state high court affirmed.

On December 29, 2012, at approximately 3:30 p.m., a Philadelphia Police Officer was on routine patrol when he received a radio call indicating that there was a person screaming in the vicinity of 100 West Penn Street. The radio call warned him to be on the lookout for a maroon SUV. When he arrived on West Penn Street, he observed a vehicle matching that description with its engine running and its brake lights repeatedly flickering on and off. A man later identified as the defendant was sitting in the driver’s seat. The officer activated his siren and emergency lights and pulled up behind the maroon SUV. The defendant exited the vehicle and began to stagger toward the officer, even though he had not been ordered to step out of the vehicle. He tried to speak, but his speech was so slurred that the officer could not understand what he was saying. He detected the smell of alcohol emanating from the defendant, and he observed a bottle of brandy on the front seat of the SUV. The bottle was in plain view, since the defendant had left the driver’s door open when he exited the vehicle. Based upon his observations and experience, the officer believed that the defendant was intoxicated to the point that he required medical attention. He placed him under arrest for DUI and called for a wagon, which transported the defendant to Einstein Medical Center.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Texas residents with DUI records might soon be able to seal their records. House Bill 3016, also known as the “second-chance” bill, will allow many first-time, low-level offenders to keep their criminal records from being made public. This makes it easier for people to apply for jobs if they have low-level offenses on their records and have shown that they are unlikely to reoffend.

gavel

In addition to DUI defendants, the bill protects people convicted of some felonies involving small amounts of marijuana. Eligible individuals can petition the court for orders of nondisclosure, and the bill alters some waiting periods. If the offense was a misdemeanor punishable only by a fine, the petitioner may request an order of nondisclosure immediately upon the date their sentence is completed. If the misdemeanor was not punishable by a fine only, however, they must wait until the second anniversary of the date of the completion of their sentence to petition the court.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The Illinois Secretary of State is required to revoke the driver’s license of anyone who is guilty of committing the offense of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) while operating a motor vehicle in this state. Moreover, even if you do not live in Illinois or have an Illinois driver’s license, the Secretary of State will revoke your driving privileges after a DUI conviction, meaning you may not drive in Illinois even if you have a valid driver’s license issued by another state. 625 ILCS 5/6-205

Furthermore, your driver’s license and driving privileges will be revoked if the Secretary of State receives a report of a conviction stemming from a DUI offense committed in another state, if at the time of the offense, you were a resident of Illinois or held an Illinois driver’s license. Most states have agreed, via the Interstate Driver’s License Compact, to report convictions to Illinois, and even states that are not Compact Members may report those convictions voluntarily.

Illinois has an interest in making certain that those who live in, drive in or hold a license issued by, Illinois do not endanger the health and safety of its citizens by driving drunk. To revoke their right to drive in Illinois makes sense.

But even someone who now lives in another state and whose privileges Illinois revoked under any of the above circumstances-DUI in Illinois or DUI in another State while having an Illinois license or being an Illinois resident-and who has no interest in ever driving in Illinois or having an Illinois driver’s license may still be required to clear the Illinois revocation, or “lift the hold”.

The reasons for this are two-fold. First, the Compact stipulates that one state may not issue a driver’s license to someone who is revoked in another state until at least one year has passed since the revocation occurred. 625 ILCS 5/1-117 But there are also U.S. Department of Transportation requirements that prohibit one state from issuing or renewing a driver’s license to its own residents if the applicant has a hold from another state due to a DUI offense.

It does not matter how long ago the revocation on your Illinois driver’s license occurred. Nor is it relevant that you did everything your new state required of you, or that you completed all the requirements of the court that processed the DUI that led to your Illinois revocation There are no double jeopardy or statute of limitations defenses.

You cannot always rely upon your DMV driving records to determine your status. Illinois may find other DUI offenses that were expunged from your record. You are still required to deal with them.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

For many, the most troublesome part of an arrest for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in Illinois is the loss of your driver’s license. A single DUI conviction results in a driver’s license revocation. 625 ILCS 5/6-205(a)(2) This includes out-of-state convictions. 625 ILCS 5/6-206(a)(6)

A revocation causes the termination of your driver’s license and your privilege to operate a motor vehicle upon the Illinois roadways. You must have a hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State if your license is revoked. However, before you can request a full license, you must wait out the revocation period, which can be 1, 5 or 10 years.

A single DUI conviction in Illinois, or an out-of-state conviction that the other state reports to Illinois, causes a revocation for one year (the waiting period). If you have two convictions within 20 years of each other, your revocation will be in effect for five years. A third conviction, no matter how many years it occurs from the second conviction, will result in your being revoked for ten years. 625 ILCS 5/6-208
Because it is a revocation, you do not receive your license back after a year. You must have a driver’s license hearing and meet all the requirements of the Secretary of State. 625 ILCS 5/2-118; 92 Illinois Administrative Code § 1000.10 et. seq.

However, depending upon the status of your statutory summary suspension (SSS), you may be entitled to request a hardship license (RDP). This privilege only applies if you are what is known as a “first offender”, meaning that you have not been arrested for a DUI in the previous five years. 625 ILCS 5/11-500
First offenders may apply for an RDP with the Secretary of State during the SSS. The SSS for a first offender who agrees to give a breath or blood test is six months. It is one year if you do not agree to provide a sample.

Non-first offenders must wait out their entire suspension, a period of time that will be one or three years. The suspension will run for one year if you give a breath or blood sample at the time of the most recent DUI and three years if you refuse. 625 ILCS 5/6-208.1 Even if you have a driver’s license issued by another state, that foreign license will not be valid in Illinois if your driving privileges are revoked here.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Most are aware that it is illegal to operate a motor vehicle in the state of Illinois while under the influence. If you are convicted of Driving Under the Influence (DUI), your driver’s license will be revoked. 625 ILCS 5/6-205(a)(2)

A revocation is a termination of your present driver’s license and driving privileges. 625 ILCS 5/1-176 In order to reacquire the legal authority to drive, you must apply for a new driver’s license through an administrative hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State.

You cannot make application for a new license immediately. For a first conviction, you must wait one year. For a second conviction that occurs less than 20 years after the first conviction, you are required to wait five years.

A third conviction, no matter how many years it occurs after the second one, entails a waiting period of ten years. 625 ILCS 5/6-208(b) A fourth conviction, including out-of-state convictions, makes you ineligible to apply for a license for your entire life, if any of the offenses occurred after January 1, 1999. 625 ILCS 5/6-208(b)4); 92 Illinois Administrative Code §1001.420(o)

A DUI that is dismissed, or reduced to reckless driving, or a successfully completed court supervision do not count as convictions. Therefore, every DUI arrest might not count against you for purpose of determining at what point you are eligible to apply for reinstatement.

Someone with one DUI conviction may apply for a Restricted Driving Permit (RDP) (also known as hardship license or work permit) after 30 days. Following a second or third conviction, there is a one-year waiting period before you can apply for an RDP. A person with four or more convictions cannot request an RDP.

You must also consider the effect of a statutory summary suspension (SSS). An SSS is entered at the time of a DUI arrest when you are asked to take a breath or blood test and either refuse to do so, or register above the legal limit of .08.

Forty six days after you are served with the summary suspension notice, your driver’s license will be suspended for between six months and three years, the length of which depends upon how many prior DUIS you have on your record and on whether you took or refused the test at the time of the most recent DUI.

A suspension is a temporary withdrawal of driving privileges for a specific period of time. 625 ILCS 5/1-204 When the period of time ends, the suspension terminates.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

If you hold an Illinois driver’s license and receive a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in another state, Illinois will proceed as follows: If at the time of the arrest, you refuse chemical testing, the SOS will enter a suspension against your Illinois driver’s license and driving privileges for the same period of time as though you had refused testing in Illinois 625 ILCS 5/6-203.1
A DUI suspension is a temporary license sanction imposed for a definite period of time. Once that time elapses, you automatically get your license back upon payment of the appropriate fee, provided driving privileges are not invalid for some other reason. 625 ILCS 5/1-204
One of the things that will invalidate your license and take away the right to automatic restoration is a revocation. 625 ILCS 5/6-208 A revocation is the withdrawal of driving privileges for a period of 1, 5 or 10 years following a conviction.

At the end of that period, restoration of your driving privileges is not automatic. Rather, it is contingent upon a successful hearing before the Illinois Secretary of State.

The Secretary of State will not suspend your Illinois license if you submit to a breath test during a DUI arrest in another state. However, if you are convicted of the out-of-state DUI, your driver’s license will be revoked. 625 ILCS 5/6-206(a)(6)

Other than determining whether the lifetime driving ban applies (discussed below), the SOS, in determining the length of a revocation, takes into account a DUI conviction from another state only if the rendering state directly reports the conviction to Illinois in compliance with the Interstate Drivers License Compact. DUI convictions that Illinois discovers only through a search of the National Registry/PDPS do not become part of the revocation equation.

If you have no previous DUI revocations that appear on your Illinois driving record, the revocation must be for one year. 625 ILCS 5/6-208(b)(1) Putting aside any credits that may apply, after a year, you may request full restoration of your driving privileges provided that the implied consent suspension has run its course.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The impact an out of state offense for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) has on your Illinois driver’s license depends upon a number of factors. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.

If someone holds a driver’s license in one state (the licensing state) and receives a DUI in another state (the reporting state the Interstate Driver’s License Compact (Compact) requires the reporting state to notify the licensing state of that fact. So if you receive a DUI in Iowa, a Compact state, Iowa is supposed to report that to Illinois, also a Compact state. Illinois will enter that conviction on your driving record.

Compact states are also obligated to report breath and blood test refusals to the licensing state even if the DUI is dropped or reduced to a lesser charge. After Illinois receives a refusal report, the Illinois Secretary of State will suspend your driver’s license for 12 months if you have no other DUI record and for 3 years if you have had a DUI in the previous 5 years.

A driver’s license suspension ends automatically without the need to got through a hearing with the Secretary of State, as is required if your driver’s license is revoked. A revocation will occur if the reporting state notifies the licensing state of a DUI conviction. You can be suspended and revoked for the same offense, or only suspended if the DUI is dropped, or only revoked if you take a breath test but are convicted of the DUI.

Your right to request a driver’s license or driving permit depends, among other things, upon your driving record of DUI convictions, including those that are reported to Illinois in accordance with the Compact. If the out-of-state DUI offense results in your one and only conviction, you will be revoked for one year.

If the out-of-state conviction is one of two DUI offenses that appear on your Illinois record, you will be revoked for 5 years. If the out-of state conviction is one of three DUI offenses on your Illinois record, you will be revoked for 10 years.

Continue reading →