Articles Posted in DUI

Illinois, as is the case with most states and the federal government, makes it illegal to possess marijuana. A few states recognize medicinal marijuana, which can be used with a prescription.

A couple of states recently decriminalized (made legal) marijuana use. A topic for another time is how those states will square their laws with the fact that marijuana possession remains a federal offense should the Federal Government choose to press charges.

That aside, driving under the influence (DUI) is illegal in all 50 states, including Illinois. 625 ILCS 5/11-501 While the term used is “driving” under the influence, the specific law makes it illegal, while “under the influence”, to drive or to be in “actual physical control” of a “vehicle” anywhere within the State of Illinois.

A “vehicle” includes any device upon which property or person may be transported, excluding human-powered devices. 625 ILCS 5/1-217 Therefore, it is not illegal to operate a bicycle while under the influence. People v. Schaefer, 274 Ill. App. 3d 450, 210 Ill. Dec. 968, 654 N.E.2d 267 (2 Dist. 1995) An ATV is, however, covered, even though you are not required to have a driver’s license or license plate to operate one.

“Under the influence” does not require the State to prove you were “drunk, intoxicated, buzzed” etc. Rather, a person is under the influence of alcohol when, as a result of drinking any amount of alcohol, his mental or physical faculties are so impaired as to reduce his ability to think and act with ordinary care IPI (Criminal) 23.29 In essence, you may convicted of DUI based upon nothing beyond proof that alcohol reduced your ability to think and act normally.

You may also be convicted of DUI in a way that does not require proof of actual impairment. If the state can show through chemical testing that your blood alcohol level at the time you were driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle was .08 or higher, you are just as guilty as though the State had proven your ability to drive was impaired due to alcohol.

In these blood-alcohol level type of cases, the defense must attempt to attack the manner in which the test was administered or assail its general reliability to prove accurate results, or otherwise show a judge or jury that the police engaged in other irregularities that tainted the evidence or that violated your Constitutional rights. While evidence of your apparent intoxicated or sober state are not required in this type of prosecution, such evidence can either support or erode the jury’s confidence in the chemical test results that the state proffers as proof of your being .08 or above.

Continue reading →

There are approximately 40,000 Illinois DUI arrests each year. And that is just one state.

Over the course of an entire year, in the nation as a whole, there must be hundreds of thousands of such arrests. In fact, we personally represent many Illinois residents who have been convicted of a DUI while driving in another state and who, because of the conviction, lose their Illinois driving privileges, as provided for by law. 625 ILCS 5/6-206(a)(6) and 6-203.1
Yet whenever a well-known or prominent individual receives a favorable DUI outcome, a segment of the population, despite not knowing all the facts, cries “foul”! Many do not appreciate the fact that while there may be a rare number of cases in which “the fix is in”, the more probable explanation in the vast majority of dismissals is that the person had effective legal representation, coupled with factual and or legal deficiencies in the prosecutor’s case that the attorney was able to exploit.

If celebrity and clout were the ticket to getting away with DUI, the likes of Lindsey Lohan, Mel Gibson and Bobby Brown would not have been convicted. A recent situation in Washington State is instructive.

A judge was arrested for DUI. One thing to mention is that county prosecutor, whose office appears before the judge, removed himself from the case to avoid potential conflicts of interest. An outside lawyer who does not have contact with this judge’s court system, reviewed the evidence. Based upon that remove, he submitted a written report explaining in detail why he declined to prosecute the judge.

One means of attacking a DUI arrest is that the officer had no reasonable basis to initiate the stop. Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1, 20 L.Ed. 2d 889 (1968) In that regard, the police were on solid grounds. The officer observed the vehicle weaving for a substantial distance, the driver failed to signal lane changes and the vehicle was traveling well above the posted speed limit. All of these constitute traffic code violations. Even if the driver in fact was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of committing these offenses, the arresting officer had a reasonable basis to believe the driver had violated the law.

The next step in the process is to determine whether the officer could escalate a simple traffic stop into a DUI offense? The police cannot pull you over for a traffic ticket and then immediately start investigating you for DUI.

Continue reading →

Carlton Fisk was one of the great major league baseball catchers to ever suit up. He played for the Boston Red Sox from 1969 to 1980 and for the Chicago White Sox until he retired in 1993.

In the 1975 World Series, cameras caught Fisk in probably the most iconic moment ever captured live in sports history, as he “English-ed’ his home run ball fair in the early morning hours of Game 6 of the 1975 World Series at Boston. Cameras then captured him jumping for joy, earning NBC an Emmy award.

Fisk has now been arrested in Illinois for a DUI. Early news reports indicate Fisk was passed out in a cornfield near New Lennox, seated in his truck, engine running, tire flat.

Police found an open vodka bottle in the passenger seat. Police charged Fisk with illegal transportation of alcohol (the open vodka bottle), contrary to 625 ILCS 5/11-502, as well as for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) and improper lane usage (“weaving”).

After police awakened him, Fisk agreed to go to the hospital. However, once at the hospital, Fisk would not submit to a blood draw at the officer’s request.

In DUI cases involving an accident with injuries, there are typically two blood draws involved. When a person is transported to the hospital, the emergency room will normally draw blood in the normal course of treatment. This draw is important to the medical personnel treating the patient, as information about the contents and quantify of substances in a person’s blood stream is important in determining the diagnosis and treatment of any injuries
This draw is known as the “medical draw” because the blood is drawn for purposes of treatment. The results of the medical draw are admissible in a prosecution for DUI. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.4.

Such information can be used to prove actual impairment (drunk driving). The law presumes that someone with a blood alcohol level (BAL) of .08 or higher is under the influence, presumes that a BAL of .05 or less is evidence you are not impaired and creates no presumption when a BAL is greater than .05 but less than .08. Presumptions can be overcome with contrary evidence but the party with a favorable presumption has a leg up. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.2
The medical draw may also be used to demonstrate that the accused either was or was not guilty of a “per se” violation of the DUI law. Under the “per se” analysis, the state does not have to prove that the defendant was actually impaired. The mere act of driving with a BAL of .08 or above is, in and of itself, illegally, even though there may be absolutely no evidence of impairment, such as unsteady balance, blood shot eyes, a strong odor of alcohol and bad driving indicative of impairment, such as weaving. 625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(1)

Continue reading →

Someone who is arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) may have questions about how long the DUI can be used against him. This issue can arise in several contexts but should not be confused with similar but different situations.

A statute of limitations as a defense to a DUI charge is limited to one specific situation. The state (police and or prosecutor) must, in charging any criminal offense, including DUI, allege in a written instrument the date of the claimed offense.

The charging instrument may be in the form of a traffic ticket (known as a complaint) issued by a police officer. The state may alternatively make the charge by bringing an “information”, a document filed by or on behalf of the state’s attorney. Or the charge may come through a grand jury indictment.

In all cases, the charge must be filed with the circuit clerk within a limited period of time after the incident date alleged in the information, indictment or complaint. For a misdemeanor DUI, that time period, which is known at the statute of limitations, is 18 moths. For a felony, it is 3 years. 720 ILCS 5/3-5
If a charge is filed within the above time frames, the statute of limitations is no longer a defense available to the accused (defendant). There may or may not be other defenses but not the statute of limitations.

Perhaps a charge is filed against you but takes a long time to resolve. Here the applicable time limit is the speedy trial act. 725 ILCS 5/103-5 In Illinois state court, if you are in custody (jail) and file a proper speedy trial demand, you must be brought to trial within 120 days. If you are not in custody, the state has 160 days to bring you to trial.

The tricky part of what seems like simple math is that any delay in bringing the defendant to trial that is attributable to the defendant does not count. So if you fail to show up for your trial date and the case is set to a later date, that delay does not count towards the speedy trial time. Or if you or your lawyer requests a continuance, or if you and the state agree to continue the case, the delay counts against you, not the state.

If the state requires a continuance, the delay counts in your favor, although if the state can present good cause for the delay (such as a witness that suddenly becomes unavailable), the judge may give additional time. People v. Exson, 896 N.E.2d 844, 384 Ill. App.3d 794 (1st Dist. 2008) A delay that works against the state is if the court system is not prepared, such as no available judges or jurors or courtrooms.

Continue reading →

In an Illinois arrest for DUI (Driving under the Influence), law enforcement is entitled to ask you to take a breath or blood test to determine your blood alcohol contents (BAC). 625 ILCS 5/11-501.2 The officer, not the motorist, is entitled to determine which test to offer. Refusing one type of test is considered a refusal of all tests. People v. Kaegebein, 137 Ill. App. 3d 837, 92 Ill. Dec. 656, 485 N.E.2d 467 (2 Dist. 1985); People v. Shaffer, 261 Ill. App. 3d 304, 199 Ill. Dec. 431, 634 N.E.2d 31 (3 Dist. 1994).

A breath or blood test is known as a “chemical test”. Another test the police are entitled to ask you to take is the preliminary breath test screening (PBT). 625 ILCS 5/11-501.5
Before a police officer can initiate a DUI arrest in Illinois, he must have probable cause to believe you have operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. The officer may base his probable cause on general observations such as an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and difficulty locating identification documents and insurance information.

The officer may also employ standardized field sobriety tests, typically the horizontal gaze nystagmus, the walk-and-turn and the one-legged stand. The officer may also use the PBT to help establish probable cause. However, because the PBT is not a certified breath test instrument, the results cannot be used in a DUI prosecution. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.5
A blood test can be used in two different ways. It may be the basis for imposing a driver’s license suspension. The blood test may also be used as tool to convict of DUI, which is the criminal case.

On the 46th day after you submit to a chemical test that shows a BAC of .08 or more, your driver’s license is subject to a suspension for a period of 6 months if you have not had a DUI arrest in the previous 5 years and 12 months if you have. Upon refusing to take a test, you face a suspension of one year, or three years if it’s been fewer than five years since your prior offense.

A suspension is a temporary invalidation of your driver’s license. When the suspension ends, your license becomes valid again, unless it is invalid for some other reason.

Continue reading →

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) is one of the most commonly charged offenses that Illinois traffic lawyers handle. In Illinois alone, about 50,000 such cases are filed each year.

In order to sustain a charge of DUI, the state must prove that the defendant (the accused) was 1) operating or in actual physical control of a 2) vehicle 3) within the State of Illinois 4) while under the influence of alcohol, or with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .08 or greater. 625 ILCS 5/11-500. You do not have to be driving at the moment that the police observe you, and while a common indicator of actual physical control includes being behind the wheel of the vehicle with the keys in the ignition, the lack of those factors does not create an automatic defense to a DUI charge. Rather, the determination is made on a case-by-case basis. City of Naperville v. Watson, 175 Ill. 2d 399, 677 N.E.2d 955, 222 Ill. Dec. 421 (1997)

A “vehicle” includes every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway or requiring a certificate of title except devices moved by human power. 625 ILCS 5/1-217. This definition excepts bicycles, since they are human-powered. People v. Schaefer, 274 Ill. App. 3d 450, 210 Ill. Dec. 968, 654 N.E.2d 267 (2 Dist. 1995) An ATV and a farm tractor are “vehicles”. People v. Martinez, 296 Ill. App. 3d 330, 694 N.E.2d 1084, 230 Ill. Dec. 806, 1998 WL 229582 (1998)

The DUI laws apply to any driving within the State of Illinois, even to private property. On the other hand, the Statutory Summary Suspension (SSS) laws due not apply to private property People v. Montelongo, 152 Ill. App. 3d 518, 504 N.E.2d 936, 105 Ill. Dec. 651 (1987) but do apply to publicly maintained parking lots. People v. Culbertson, 258 Ill. App. 3d 294, 630 N.E.2d 489, 196 Ill. Dec. 554 (1994) Likewise, if the police observe you driving on a public way in order to access a private lot, the SSS rules apply. People v. Wingren, 167 Ill. App. 3d 313, 521 N.E.2d 130, 118 Ill. Dec. 62 (1988)

To prove that the driving occurred while you were under the influence of alcohol, the state must demonstrate that your ability think and act with ordinary care was impaired from alcohol. A DUI based upon a .08 or higher BAC implies proper calibration and administration of the testing machine.

All of these issues require a judge or jury believing what the police have to say. But what happens if some police are dishonest and/or have an agenda beyond law enforcement?

Continue reading →

If you are charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in Illinois, and it is your first offense, you may be tempted to accept whatever offer the prosecutor makes to you. This may not be a wise choice once you understand the consequences of an Illinois DUI.

You are headed home one evening after stopping for a couple of drinks after work. A peace officer, based upon an anonymous tip from someone in the restaurant you just left that a car matching the description of yours just left the parking lot with a drunk driver behind the wheel, activates his siren and emergency lights and orders you to pull up to the curb.

This very well could be an illegal stop, since the tipster was anonymous and therefore the police had no reason to believe the information the tipster provided was reliable, and since the officer has no reason independent of this anonymous tip to suspect you had committed, or were about to commit, a crime, as required under the United States Supreme Court case known as Terry v. Ohio 392 US 1, 20 L.Ed. 2d 889 (1968)

If the initial stop was illegal, then any evidence gathered as a result of the stop is also illegal and cannot be used in court against you. Without this evidence, it would impossible for the police to prove the charges against you.

Blocking illegal evidence from being introduced into a DUI case is known as the “exclusionary rule”. If you plead guilty to the DUI, you give up all your constitutional rights, including your right to assert the exclusionary rule and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Change the facts a little and suppose there was no tip and that the officer saw you make a turn without signaling, a perfectly valid basis upon which to stop you. The police cannot just come up and start asking you DUI-related questions after stopping you.

They first must have a reason to believe you may be impaired. Failure to do so would raise questions of “probable cause” to make an arrest. Once again, though, if you plead guilty, you give up your right to raise this defense.

Once the officer has made a determination to investigate you for possible DUI, there is no doubt that he will ask you to take a breath test to determine if your blood alcohol content is .08 or higher, the legal limit in Illinois. 625 ILCS 5/11-501. If you register .08 or higher, or if you elect not to provide a breath sample, the officer will issue you a notice of statutory summary suspension (SSS).

Continue reading →