Published on:

By

In the vast majority of states, a person can be convicted of DUI if they drive with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or higher. In Utah, however, the threshold is much lower. Reportedly, the recent reduction in the legal limit did not result in increased DUI charges but instead led to a reduction of DUI crimes fewer car accidents and fatalities, and reportedly did not impact tourism or the rate of people moving to the state. While it remains unclear if Illinois or any other state will follow suit, it seems unlikely, but it is important for all motorists to understand the DUI laws where they live. If you are charged with a DUI crime in Illinois, it is practical to confer with an Illinois DUI defense attorney to assess your potential defenses.

Results of Utah’s DUI Law Changes

Reportedly, the Utah legislature voted to reduce the blood alcohol concentration threshold for per se DUI offenses from 0.08% to 0.05% in 2017. Parties in favor of the change argued that it would reduce DUI crimes and DUI-related collisions, while those opposed to it argued that it would discourage tourists or new residents from coming to Utah. So far, it appears to have had only positive impacts.

Allegedly, a study conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed that while the amount of miles Utah drivers traveled increased, the number of DUI offenses and crashes went down. Some attribute the willingness to accept the change to the fact that the majority of people living in Utah are of Mormon faith and do not drink alcohol, and alcohol is strictly regulated. Not everyone is convinced that the reduced threshold is the cause of the reduction in accidents, noting that many other states experienced similar outcomes without changing their DUI laws. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

Many states have implied consent laws. In other words, when a person obtains a driver’s license, the law states that they impliedly consent to submit to a breath test if they are under investigation for DUI. In many states, if a person suspected of DUI refuses to provide a breath sample, they can lose their driving privileges. Typically, the police must warn a driver of the consequences of the failure to abide by the implied consent law, but if the suspect does not understand the officer due to a language barrier, the warning may be ineffective. This was demonstrated recently in a Pennsylvania DUI case. The court ultimately ruled that the defendant could not face penalties for refusing to submit to a breath test because he did not understand English. If you are charged with the refusal to provide a breath sample or a DUI crime in Illinois, it is smart to speak to an Illinois DUI defense regarding your options for seeking a favorable outcome.

The Pennsylvania Case

It is reported that a police officer observed the defendant driving erratically and therefore initiated a traffic stop. The officer attempted to question the defendant, who does not speak English. He noticed the defendant smelled of alcohol, and his eyes were bloodshot and glazed. He tried to ask the defendant if he drank alcohol that evening and, if so, how much, using hand signals. The defendant responded with hand signals, stating he had three drinks.

Allegedly, the officer requested that the defendant submit to a breath test. The defendant said no, and the officer read him the O’Connell warning, which informs DUI suspects of the consequences of failing to submit to a breath test, as required by Pennsylvania law. The defendant was ultimately found guilty of refusing to submit to a breath test and lost his driving privileges. He appealed on the grounds that his refusal was not informed and knowing as he did not speak English. The appellate court ultimately ruled in his favor and stated that the onus was on the police to make sure DUI suspects understood the consequences of failing to abide by the implied consent law. Continue reading →

Published on:

By
Beginning January 1, 2022, the Secretary of State has adopted new rules that will expand driving privileges for persons who have two or three DUI convictions. Under the current permits, driving is limited to specific purposes and specific days, hours, and distances.
The new rules will make an RDP available to drive 12 hours a day, 6 days a week and up to 200 miles for any lawful purposes. If a job requires driving more expansively, the Secretary of State will allow that to happen. A driver would have to show why not being able to drive within the 12 hours, 6 days and 200 miles would not accommodate employment or medical needs, if applicable.
Furthermore, individuals who have only one conviction and are eligible for full reinstatement but are granted a permit for one year also qualify for this new permit. Those who are not yet eligible for reinstatement, including those who are operating under an extended suspension for refusing breath testing, are also not eligible for the new permit.
Published on:

By

States around the country continue to legalize medical and recreational marijuana use. Even in many states in which consuming marijuana is legal, however, people can still be prosecuted for marijuana-related crimes, like DUI. The process of determining how to test for impairment caused by alcohol, and what levels of consumption constitute impairment is not well-defined, however, any marijuana DUI laws are routinely challenged. For example, lawyers for a former basketball star in Nevada have argued the marijuana DUI charges against him should be dismissed, as the statutes out of which the charges arose are vague and unconstitutional. If you are charged with a marijuana DUI offense in Illinois, it is in your best interest to retain an assertive Illinois DUI defense lawyer to help you mount a compelling defense.

The Challenge to Nevada’s Laws

It is alleged that attorneys for a former basketball standout charged with DUI due to a fatal crash that occurred in 2020 are asking the court to dismiss the case. Police claimed they discovered a leafy green substance in the player’s car and that he had signs of cannabis intoxication. A blood test later revealed that the player had 3.0 nanograms per milliliter of THC in his blood, which was 1.0 nanogram higher than the legal limit. He was charged with careless driving but he was not charged with DUI resulting in death.

The subject motion alleges that Nevada’s marijuana DUI laws are unconstitutional and fail when tested. Specifically, they allege that the laws are not based in science and the legal limit for THC are not indicative of impairment. Further, the attorneys assert that the marijuana DUI laws violate due process and equal protection since THC levels are inaccurate and the state handles misdemeanors differently than crimes. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

Most states have DUI laws that prohibit people from driving while impaired due to the use of drugs or alcohol or with a blood alcohol level that exceeds .08%. If a person is convicted of a DUI offense in a state other than the state that issued their license, it could impact their driving rights, but it does not always. One woman is hoping to change that by campaigning for laws that would require states to share DUI convictions with one another. While the legislation is currently pending in Wisconsin, it may provide insight into the landscape of DUI law in Illinois and other states in years to come. If you are charged with an Illinois DUI crime, it is prudent to speak to an Illinois DUI defense lawyer to discuss your rights.

Wisconsin Law Regarding DUI Information

A mother devastated by the loss of her child in a drunk driving collision has focused her anguish into a never-ending campaign to alter DUI laws. Recently, it appears her efforts have begun to pay off. Her son died in 2018 after the car he was riding in went off a road near Three Lakes, Wisconsin. The driver of the car survived the accident but was charged with homicide after his blood alcohol level was found to be over two times the legal limit. He was going over double the speed limit at the time of the crash as well.

The driver held an Illinois driver’s license, which should have been suspended immediately when he refused a breathalyzer test. However, because Wisconsin is not a member of an interstate compact that allows states to share information, Illinois was never informed about the collision, and he continued to drive. Further, he was able to obtain a Wisconsin license when he moved there while his charges were still pending. He would later be found guilty of the allegations and sentenced to three years in prison. However, the mother launched a campaign to rectify the lack of information sharing between states. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

While most drivers aim to avoid DUI arrests, one Illinois man sought to impose liability on the police for neglecting to detain him for DUI. Specifically, in a novel argument, he asserted that the failure to arrest him caused him to suffer subsequent harm. The courts were not persuaded by the driver’s reasoning and ultimately dismissed his case, definitely stating that the driver could not impose liability on other parties for harm caused by his own criminal acts. If you are charged with an Illinois DUI offense, you should contact an Illinois DUI defense lawyer to discuss your potential defenses.

The Facts of the Case

According to court documents, the plaintiff became intoxicated at a friend’s house and then attempted to drive to his home. He subsequently rear-ended a car stopped at a red light. An officer was dispatched to the scene and spoke to the other driver, who reported he saw the plaintiff’s  SUV swerving. The officer spoke to the plaintiff as well and asked for his license and proof of insurance. The plaintiff gave the officer the wrong paperwork numerous times and provided several different answers when asked where he lived. The officer, whose sense of smell was compromised, did not notice an odor of alcohol.

It is reported that the officer ultimately urged the plaintiff to pay more attention. The plaintiff drove away, fell asleep behind the wheel, and crashed his vehicle twenty minutes later. Chemical testing revealed that he had a blood-alcohol level that was three times the legal limit. He suffered multiple injuries that required surgical repair. He subsequently sued the officer and the municipality that employed the officer for negligence, arguing that the officer’s failure to arrest him led to his subsequent harm. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

While the connection between DUI crimes and infrastructure seems tenuous at best, they are related in some respect. For example, in Missouri, a law that, in theory, increases the likelihood of DUI offenses triggered a shift of government funds from highway construction and repair to safety, resulting in a reduction in fatalities. Specifically, under Missouri law, it is not illegal to have open containers of alcohol in a vehicle. It is illegal under federal law, though, and the conflict has caused the subsequent diversion of funds. While the Missouri law has no impact in Illinois, it is relevant to the question of how the modification of laws relating to DUI crimes impacts other facets of the state government. If you are faced with charges that you committed a DUI crime in Illinois, it is wise to contact an Illinois DUI defense lawyer to determine your rights.

The Ramifications of Missouri’s Open Container Laws

Missouri differs from many states in that it has not criminalized the act of driving a car with an open container of alcohol in the passenger area. While it is lawful to have open alcoholic beverages in a car under Missouri law, it violates federal safety statutes. As such, since 2001, a substantial portion of federal funds that would typically be used for highway construction and repairs have been diverted to safety programs. In total, approximately $370 million in funds have been reallocated.

While many people would expect that Missouri’s lack of an open container law would lead to increased DUI-related fatalities, the opposite seems to be true. In fact, while the national rate of motor vehicle fatalities fell by 14% between 2001 and 2019, Missouri’s rate of traffic fatalities fell by 20% during the same period. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

It is well-established that the police must either obtain a warrant or consent to conduct a blood test on a person suspected of DUI. Thus, the results of a warrantless blood test that was administered without a defendant’s knowing consent may be suppressed. In some instances, though, the prosecution will attempt to obtain the results of a medical blood draw via a subpoena to use as evidence against a DUI defendant. Whether they should be permitted to do so was the question recently presented to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. While the ruling will have no bearing on Illinois law, it may illustrate how courts throughout the country will resolve the issue in the coming years. If you are charged with a DUI offense in Illinois, it is advisable to speak to an Illinois DUI defense lawyer regarding your potential defenses.

The Wisconsin Case

It is alleged that the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently evaluated the question of whether prosecutors can use subpoenas to obtain the results of blood tests they believe will establish guilt in a DUI case if a warrantless blood draw taken the same night was barred from admission into evidence. In the subject case, the defendant crashed into a building and tree. An officer found him in a yard near the accident and noted that he smelled of alcohol. He was taken to the hospital, where his blood was drawn for diagnostic purposes.

Reportedly, the defendant was arrested for DUI, and the officer took a sample of his blood without a warrant, arguing exigent circumstances required such testing. The results of the police’s blood test were suppressed via a motion. Prosecutors later issued a subpoena seeking the defendant’s medical records from the hospital. At issue is whether the medical records should be considered fruit from a poisonous tree, or as the prosecution asserted, they come from a different plant than the results of the police test. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In recent years, legislators, MADD, and other interested parties have pushed for legislation mandating that all new vehicles come equipped with alcohol detection systems that prevent people from driving while intoxicated. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act recently passed by the United States House of Representatives included an Advanced Impaired Driving Technology provision that MADD hailed as the single most important piece of legislation passed in the forty-one years the organization has been in existence. While no one denies the dangers of driving while intoxicated, compulsory alcohol sensors arguably violate people’s rights and could potentially create a host of other issues. If you are charged with a DUI offense in Illinois, it is in your best interest to speak to an Illinois DUI defense lawyer to discuss your rights.

The Advanced Impaired Driving Technology

It is reported that the Advanced Impaired Driving Technology portion of the bill sets forth a standard that MADD anticipates will prevent close to 10,000 drunk driving deaths each year. Further, MADD’s President asserted that the bill will essentially eliminate the leading cause of death on roads throughout the country.  She argued that technology is necessary to stop the dangerous driving tactics of people who fail to make the right choice.

Allegedly, the bill orders the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to begin a rulemaking process and within three years, establish the standard for impaired driving safety equipment on all new vehicles. It is expected that NHTSA will assess technology that may include, among other things, alcohol detection systems that employ sensors to assess whether a driver is intoxicated and if so, prevent their vehicle from moving. Once the safety standard is established, car manufacturers will have two to three years to implement it. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

In certain cases in which a person is convicted of DUI, the courts will order the person to install an ignition interlock device in their car. Typically, the courts will issue such orders in cases involving repeat offenders. The proponents of such devices typically argue that while their installation infringes on certain liberties, it is necessary to do so to mitigate the risk of harm the person poses to other members of society. In recent years, though, various parties throughout the country have pushed for the installation of alcohol sensing devices in all vehicles. While such efforts have yet to be successful, should such technology be mandatory in cars in the future, it may have a significant impact on driver’s rights and the prosecution of DUI cases. If you are accused of a DUI crime in Illinois, it is prudent to consult an Illinois DUI defense lawyer regarding your options for seeking a favorable outcome.

Built-In Alcohol Sensing Technology

It is alleged that researchers recently stated they had created alcohol detection sensors that would essentially eliminatedrunk driving. While the technology is still in developmental stages, it is anticipated that it will be ready to be installed in vehicles throughout the country in a few years. The developers are currently in the process of licensing the sensors. Meanwhile, legislation that would make the installation of alcohol sensors mandatory in all new passenger vehicles is before Congress.

Reportedly, the technology, which was developed by a Boston company, collects measurements with little human interaction. One device captures a driver’s breath and pulls it into a sensor, where a beam of light then calculates the driver’s blood alcohol concentration. A second device employs lasers to read the alcohol level below the surface of the skin on the driver’s finger. If the driver’s blood-alcohol level exceeds the legal limit, they will not be able to drive. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Contact Information

We have provided effective advice and assistance to thousands of clients facing driver's license suspensions and revocations, both in Illinois and out-of-state, including students from area colleges and universities.

1100 S 5th St
Springfield, IL 62703
Phone: 217.525.0520 Fax: 217.525.0901

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2014 – 2025, Harvatin Law Offices P.C.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design