Articles Posted in DUI

This article covers only the steps in DUI/OWI case that take place in court after a lawyer has been retained.

The first step in a Michigan drunk driving case is an arraignment on the warrant, ticket, complaint or information.  At the arraignment, a plea of not guilty will be entered on your behalf and the judge or magistrate will set a bond. Your case will then be set for a pretrial.

A pretrial conference or hearing will occur at your next appearance in court which is usually roughly three or four weeks after the arraignment.  Depending on the court and the prosecutor this may be the first time your lawyer can review all of the evidence against you. You will have four choices at a pretrial, and your lawyer should discuss them with you prior to the pretrial conference so that you know what to expect and how to proceed.

Driving a vehicle while intoxicated is a serious criminal offense across the United States. In the United States, and in no other nation, this crime is not always called a “DUI,” but D.U.I. is America’s most widely used abbreviation for this common driving crime.

Broadly stated, the crime best known as DUI (driving under the influence of intoxicants) has separate and distinct statutes in each. All 50 states and the District of Columbia created their own laws, with no two states tracking another exactly on what constitutes the evidence needed for a DUI conviction.

OWI vs DUI in Michigan - What Is the Difference?
This seemingly schizophrenic roll-out of statutes has important and fascinating historic roots, that have occurred since the early 1900s. For example, forensic breathalyzers were only invented and deployed in the late 1930s. Before that, an officer had to obtain a blood alcohol content test in any case that needed that proof of intoxication (e.g., a crash occurred, and the suspected drunk driver was not conscious).

MI-OWI-Map-300x278

Understanding the Criminal Arraignment in Michigan: What You Need to Know

The criminal arraignment is the first formal court appearance in your case, marking the beginning of the legal process. In Michigan, as in all states, you have an absolute right to an arraignment. This right is deeply rooted in history, reflecting the foundational principles of justice in the United States. The U.S. Constitution’s Sixth Amendment guarantees that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.” This safeguard ensures transparency and fairness, allowing individuals to know the charges they face and begin preparing their defense.


Why Do We Have a Right to an Arraignment?

A drunk driving conviction has lifelong consequences. Long after your driver’s license has been restored, you’ll still have the DUI conviction on your permanent record. The good news is that the expungement laws in Michigan for DUI cases have recently been changed.

Michigan DUI expungement lawyer Patrick Barone leads the Barone Defense Firm and is partners with some of the best DUI attorneys who handle the toughest DUI cases.
This means your conviction involving an operating while intoxicated OWI offense can now be removed. And this removal or expungement comes with many benefits. Many kinds of DUI convictions are eligible, sometimes even those drunk driving convictions involving injury or death can be expunged.

What Does DUI Expungement Actually Mean?

Marijuana DUI, OWI Cannabis, Michigan OWI Weed LawyerMany people ask us if you can get a DUI for being high? The answer is yes, you can get a DUI in Michigan for being high on Marijuana. If you use cannabis for medical or recreational purposes, you might wonder “how do cops test for a weed DUI? Police officers will use the same kind of roadside tests used for one involving alcohol. So from this perspective there is little difference in a DUI with weed vs. alcohol.

Without getting to technical, one difference is that a DRE officer might be involved if the cops suspect marijuana impairment. Another difference is that there is currently no DUI breath test for weed.

There also is currently no legal limit for THC in the blood for DUI. However, the police will want to know your blood THC level for the DUI. This means more lawyers are being called upon to understand the complexities of forensic blood testing.

Why Does Michigan’s Law of Implied Consent Exist?

The first DUI laws went in the books all the way back in the 1950s when cars where just starting to become very common. Back then, there were no breath tests, so that law enforcement tool in a DUI investigation was not available to police officers. That only happened ten years later, in the 1960s. Technology has improved a lot since then, and the law has changed too, because the law of implied consent is younger than the first breath tests. Back in the “olden days” people could refuse a breath test in a drunk driving case without an possible sanction. That is no longer true, and today, there are serious consequences if you unreasonably refuse to to a breath test.

The Michigan Law of Implied Consent

Michigmichigan drunk driving field sobriety testan law provides that for every person convicted of drunk driving must be subjected to substance use evaluation prior to sentencing. More specifically, Michigan Compiled Laws sec. 257.625b indicates that such individuals must undergo a screening and assessment to determine if the person would benefit from “rehabilitative services,” which may include such things as alcohol or drug education or treatment programs.

A conviction for operating under of influence of drugs has a similar requirement. This is because Michigan statutory law calls drunk driving “operating while intoxicated” (OWI). Drinking and driving is not against the law. To violate Michigan’s OWI law a person must be driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. If you operate a vehicle after drinking enough alcohol to become intoxicated, or consume enough drugs to become intoxicated, then you’ve committed the offense of drunk driving. In other words, DUI and OWI are essentially the same thing.

What is a NEEDS Survey?

Michigan Drunk Driving Lawyer Explains Proximate Causation

Michigan DUI lawyer Patrick Barone knows Michigan DUI law and how to beat a DUI.Patrick Barone, considered by many to be among the best DUI lawyers in Michigan, has indicated that a drunk driving causing death case is one of the most difficult kinds of criminal law cases to defend. The concept of proximate causation is one of the reasons these cases are so difficult and complicated.

What is Proximate Cause?

In a criminal case, after your arrest but before your conviction or acquittal, you will be on bond. There are several discretionary terms and conditions of pretrial release, and these will be determined during your first court appearance the arraignment. A show cause is what happens when someone does something on bond contrary to what’s been ordered.

The most common allegations of a bond violation that we see at the Barone Defense Firm related to alcohol and drug testing. Often, a client will miss a drug or alcohol test, which is the most common alleged bond violation, followed by a positive drug or alcohol test.

Bond Violations are Considered Contempt of Court

Michigan drivers are sometimes stopped under suspicion of intoxicated driving after a concerned citizen calls 911. The validity of these traffic stops are highly fact-specific, and depending on exactly what is reported to 911, the stop may or may not be sufficient to support a DUI conviction.

One case in Michigan where the DUI traffic stop was deemed to be invalid, and the drunk driving case dismissed, is People v. Pagano, 507 Mich. 26, 967 N.W.2d 590 (2021). In this intoxicated driving case the Michigan Supreme Court specifically found that the traffic stop based only on the 911 was insufficient to establish a reasonable suspicion that the driver was drunk. Because the stop was therefore legally invalid, the Court had no other choice but to dismiss the case outright.

In Pagano, the 911 caller reported that they had observed a woman driving while yelling at her kids and generally behaving in an obnoxious manner. While the caller indicated that they believed the driver was intoxicated, no other information was provided in support of this contention. However, the caller did provide much identifying information relative to the car being driven, including the license plate number, the make model and color of the car, and the direction the vehicle was traveling.

Contact Information