Illinois DUI Lawyer Blawg

Published on: July 1, 2010

Illinois DUI arrests and traffic offenses for CDL holders

A commercial driver’s license (“CDL”) is in essence a trucker’s license. In order to obtain a CDL, you must pass a number of written and driving tests administered by the Illinois Secretary of State.

What may surprise you as a CDL holder is that you can lose your CDL for offenses that do no occur in your commercial motor vehicle (“CMV”). When the Illinois Secretary of State invalidates a CDL, it is known as a disqualification (“DQ”).

If you commit any offense that causes a suspension or revocation of your regular driving privileges, your CDL will also be invalid. For example, a suspension for too many traffic tickets in a non CMV (your car for example) would cause your CDL to also be invalid.

If you are under 21, you can obtain a CDL. There are certain offenses such as drinking tickets, minor-in-a-tavern, minor-in-possession and fake ID’s that will cause a suspension of your driver’s license even if you are not driving. Remember that a suspended license will also invalidate your CDL during the suspension period.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 24, 2010

Multiple DUI Offenders in Illinois

By Theodore Harvatin

Someone with multiple DUI convictions in Illinois may be charged with a felony and could be sent to prison. In addition, their driver’s license will be revoked either for 5 years, 10 years or life.

Illinois DUI law provides for escalating criminal penalties for each new DUI charge. In the more extreme cases, probation is not an option; you will be sentenced to prison (the Illinois Department of Corrections, not just the county jail). You should also expect to pay higher and higher fines for each new DUI offense.

In addition, upon being convicted of DUI, you will have a driver’s license revocation. If you have not had a successful driver’s license reinstatement hearing, any later DUI arrests will mean you were also driving with a revoked license. Upon conviction for that offense, you will face jail time separate and apart from any jail or prison time you receive if you are convicted of the new DUI. In addition, your license will be revoked for another year.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 17, 2010

Illinois DUI crash leads to arrest

By Theodore Harvatin

A woman in Galesburg, Illinois was recently arrested for DUI after an accident. The driver fled on foot but police later apprehended her. She was arrested and transported to the hospital for treatment of her injuries.

While the police were no doubt concerned about the driver’s safety, they had a second motive in transporting her to the hospital. Her emergency room doctor was no doubt told that police suspected she has used alcohol and drugs. As a result, the doctor ordered blood tests, as alcohol or drugs in the driver’s system could affect the doctor’s decision about what medications to order.

The blood tests results the doctor ordered for treatment purposes will not be admissible in determining whether or not the driver’s license of the accused will be suspended due to registering over the .08 legal limit and whether she will be required to obtain an MDDP. On the other hand, those results are admissible in the DUI prosecution itself. This prosecution, if successful, could result in a driver’s license revocation, and the driver would then need an Illinois driver’s license reinstatement hearing.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 10, 2010

Two Springfield Illinois DUI cops among most active in the state

By Theodore Harvatin

Two Springfield DUI police officers are among the Top 15 for DUI arrests in Illinois. These figures come from the Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists (AIIM).

AIIM’S name suggests that it is a “grass-roots” organization. However, the fine print on its web page reveals that AIIM is nothing but a government-sponsored entity masquerading as something else (they had me fooled at first).

Anyone ever arrested in Illinois for DUI knows that while the government claims DUI enforcement is all about public safety, they sure make a lot of money off it. Towing expenses, bond, fines, fees, and so forth all benefit the state, the county, police agencies and some other special interests whose mission bears little, if any, relationship to public safety.

If you are convicted of DUI, even a first offense carries with it the potential of up to $2,500 in fines, not to mention probation fees, random drug testing (at your expense), head trauma funds, victim impact panel funds, and whatever else the authorities can conjure up to take money out of your wallet. The state police even charge a fee for arresting you!

There’s more: prepare to pay for high risk insurance that you must carry for 36 months, a drug and alcohol evaluation, 20 to 75 hours of alcohol counseling that will probably cost at least $25.00 an hour and possibly driver risk education courses.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 3, 2010

Representative Stephens apologizes for DUI arrest

By Theodore Harvatin

As a follow up to an earlier Blawg,, Illinois State Representative Ron Stephens has apologized for his recent Illinois DUI arrest.

Stephens’ legislative district encompasses Highland, Illinois. While speaking before that community’s City Council, Stephens for the first time publicly commented on his recent DUI arrest. He apologized for the “huge mistake” he made by driving impaired.

Stephens’ pharmacist’s license was suspended several years earlier due to his personal use of controlled substances that he used his license to obtain. When the suspension ended, his license to practice pharmacy was automatically reinstated.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 26, 2010

The time has come for Illinois to lift the lifetime ban on obtaining a drivers license

By Theodore Harvatin

An experienced Illinois driver’s license reinstatement lawyer knows that Illinois will not issue a new driver’s license, renew an existing one or clear a hold so that you can obtain an out-of-state driver’s license if you have a fourth DUI arrest after January 1, 1999 that results in a conviction. In determining the number of convictions you have, Illinois will include out-of-state convictions even if the convictions do not appear on your Illinois driving record but appear on the National Registry/PDPS.

This leads to harsh results. Years ago, the law did not treat DUI seriously and there was no four-conviction rule. Yet the old DUI counts against you forever, even though you received it before the four-conviction rule applied.

This could result in your paying for a DUI you received 20 or 30 years ago but did not fight because it was “no big deal”. You have now, years later, been convicted of a fourth DUI from an arrest that occurred after January 1, 1999 and been informed that you can never drive again, not even for work.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 19, 2010

Some question reliability of the Breath Alcohol Interlock Ignition Device (BAIID)

By Theodore Harvatin

As any lawyer familiar with Illinois DUI laws is aware, since January 1, 2009, Illinois has allowed drivers suspended for DUI to obtain a driving permit upon installation of a BAIID machine. Some commentators have questioned whether the MDDP program is effective.

The BAIID machine is part of the MDDP program. Evidence exists that the BAIID machine provides false alcohol readings caused by pizza, mouthwash, cough medicine and other substances other than alcohol. Therefore, we arguably have a program that is not only ineffective but also unfair.

The MPPD program comes into play when your license is suspended before you conclude your DUI case. On the other hand, if you are convicted of the DUI, your license will be revoked and you must have an Illinois Driver’s license reinstatement hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 12, 2010

Illinois state legislator pleads guilty to DUI

By Theodore Harvatin

State representative Ron E. Stephens has pleaded guilty to DUI in Macon County (Decatur) Illinois circuit court. This was his first DUI offense.

As any experienced Illinois DUI lawyer can tell you, this makes Stephens eligible for court supervision. Under a supervision disposition, you do not suffer a revocation of your Illinois driver’s license and thereby avoid an Illinois driver’s license reinstatement hearing.

In addition to protecting his driver’s license, Stephens was able to avoid jail time that could have resulted from a DUI conviction. Stephens was ordered to pay fines and court costs of $1,410.00. Furthermore, during the one year he is subject to the supervision of the Macon County courts, Stephens is to refrain from the consumption of any amount of alcohol.

As a Springfield, Illinois DUI and driver’s license reinstatement lawyer, I am familiar with nearby Macon County practices. The sentenced he received, as well as the fines and conditions of his supervision, are the same that any other Macon County DUI offender could expect.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 5, 2010

Illinois DUI leads to fatal crash and reckless homicide charges

By Theodore Harvatin

As reported, an alleged drunk driver was involved in a fatal crash and charged with DUI and reckless homicide. A reckless homicide conviction could result in prison time, and a conviction for DUI or reckless homicide will cause a driver’s license revocation, the length of which will depend upon the driver’s previous driving record and whether the conviction is for DUI or reckless homicide.

A knowledgeable, highly experienced Illinois driver’s license reinstatement lawyer will explain to you that the Illinois Secretary of State, Department of Administrative Hearings considers fatal accidents to be the most serious type of case his office hears. In the typical Illinois Driver’s License Reinstatement Hearing, the Secretary of State has only limited information about your Illinois DUI arrest. In a fatal accident case, he will have all the police investigate reports, accident reconstruction reports, photographs, a transcript of the county coroner’s inquest and jury verdict, the crash report, the autopsy, and the grand jury indictment or the criminal information or complaint filed against you.

For hearings involving fatality, the Secretary of State allows extra time on his calendar to hear the case. This is done because you will be questioned in detail about all the information in the materials that the Secretary of State has gathered from the State’s Attorney and the police. In addition, the Secretary of State will notify the family members of the deceased that you have requested a Driver’s License Hearing and will advise them of their right to appear and testify at the hearing.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 28, 2010

Is DUI just a money racket?

By Theodore Harvatin

Ron Larson argues that DUI is nothing more than a scheme to extract money from the accused. He blames various actors involved in the DUI process for turning a DUI arrest into an expensive proposition. His solution is to remove all of them from the equation and automatically sentence someone charged with DUI to a year in prison.

Larson claims that DUI lawyers are an unnecessary expense. Let’s examine his thesis more carefully.

DUI is a crime. Under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, anybody in this country who is charged with a crime is entitled to legal representation. This right is considered so important that the United State Supreme Court ruled in 1963 that the government is required to provide a free attorney to anyone who is accused of a crime and cannot afford an attorney.

Therefore, the author’s solution- removing lawyers from the process- would require repeal of the Sixth Amendment. Were that to occur, no person charged with an offense- from speeding to murder- would have the right to a lawyer.

Under Larson’s concept, you would not be given the chance to defend yourself and a mere accusation would stand as proof of your guilt. This would place our country’s legal system on the same footing as those of North Korea, Cuba, Iran and Venezuela, where authorities imprison their political opponents on the basis of trumped-up charges that the accused has no right to contest through a lawyer.

Continue reading →