The Free Press this week is working on uncovering just how where you are arrested can affect your sentence in an OWI case. Because judges are allowed a great deal of discretion in misdemeanor cases like those involving drunk driving, what might get you no jail time in Utica could land you over 30 in Warren. [read more...]

Charged with a crime in Michigan? Please call (888) 595-9728.
call_now
This entry was posted on Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 2:01 pm and is filed under OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

The Farmington Patch this week ran a story on the 47th District Sobriety Court and some of the successes this alternative court has seen. According to the piece, this court and others like it in the region save the local governments money while assisting offenders in recovery, providing a win-win situation. [read more...]

This entry was posted on Friday, April 1st, 2011 at 4:19 pm and is filed under OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

If some lawmakers get their way, Michigan will become the first state to allow law enforcement to test for drugs when they suspect a driver is under the influence. Similar to breath tests used in suspected DUI cases, these tests would reportedly alert cops to the presence of illegal drugs in a suspect’s body. [read more...]

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 9th, 2010 at 10:55 pm and is filed under drug laws, OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

The 2007 Drunk Driving Audit, which is an annual report compiled by the Michigan State Police in concert with Michigan Department of State and Michigan Department of Transportation documenting arrest, accident, injury, and fatality information from all Michigan counties, indicates there was a 13% drop in alcohol/drug related fatalities from 2006 to 2007 (440 to 382), which is a 10 year low.  There were 49,867 alcohol/drug related driving arrests in 2007 which is 3,500 less than 2006.

Further, 47,267 of the 2007 arrests resulted in convictions of operating while intoxicated (OWI) or impaired driving, which is almost 95%. (see http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1586_1710-195921–,00.html ). Only, 776 convictions, less than 2%, were reduced to non-alcohol related offenses, such as Reckless Driving or Disorderly Person. (see page 485 of Audit).  The remainder were dismissed or resulted in acquittals.

However, what the Audit fails to indicate clearly is the number of repeat offenders contained within this data.  Therefore, despite reduction in arrests, the question arises whether the appropriate sentence has been ordered to help curb these numbers, or even whether there were intervening factors such as less police presence because of cut-backs.  As to sentencing, there is a mixed ideology on this very sensitive issue.  Is Jail appropriate? Is rehabilitation appropriate?  Is a vehicle interlock (breathalyzer) appropriate?  [read more...]

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 10th, 2009 at 8:47 am and is filed under OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

On December 19, 1008, Michigan Enrolled Senate Bill 1134 passed both houses of Michigan’s Legislature, and is now awaiting the Governor’s signature. Known as the “Super Drunk” bill, this legislation amends several sections of Michigan law, and most notably adds a new crime for drivers with a bodily alcohol content (BAC) of .17 or greater. Under this new statutory definition of operating while intoxicated these high BAC drivers are required to have a breath alcohol ignition interlock device (BAIID) placed on their vehicle. This new law will not take effect until October 31, 2010.

Under the bill high BAC drivers are subjected to other more punitive sanctions. For example, a first offense high BAC drunk driver’s license is suspended for one year. The first 45 days of this year is considered a “hard” suspension, meaning absolutely no driving is allowed. During the remaining 320 days the offender is entitled to restricted driving privileges, but must have an ignition interlock device placed on their car during this period. Fines are increased to $200.00 – $700.00, and potential jail time is increased from up to a possible 93 days to as much as 180 days. The court must also order a mandatory minimum one-year alcohol treatment program. The high BAC sanctions only apply to first offenders – repeat offender sanctions remain unchanged.
[read more...]

This entry was posted on Friday, January 30th, 2009 at 5:31 pm and is filed under OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

In a first-of-its-kind study, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSA) has determined that Michigan ranks near the top of the list of the states with the most instances of drunk or drugged driving. Michigan came in at number eleven, and according to the report, as many as 19% of Michigan’s drivers aged 18 and above unlawfully drove under the influence of either alcohol or drugs last year. The study, which examined a period between 2004 and 2006, calls upon States to use “their efforts and resources to address this preventable menace.”

What is interesting to note about this study is that it followed almost immediately on the heals of Michigan’s 2003 re-write of the State’s drunk driving laws. In this package of changes the State promised to lock-up repeat drunk drivers and in some instances to revoke their licenses for life. This study proves that the threat of punishment does little to actually curb or deter behavior. Clearly as a society we must employ other means to address this societal problem. One answer might be sobriety courts. In 2007 the Michigan Supreme Court released its study entitled “Michigan DUI Court’s Outcome Evaluation.” (see http://spa.american.edu/justice/documents/2352.pdf). This study lauds the effectiveness of treatment in preventing recidivism, especially when sobriety courts are compared with incarceration.

[read more...]

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 29th, 2009 at 5:29 pm and is filed under OWI. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Next Page >