Brought to you by Colorado DUI Drunk Driving Defense

Silver Spring DUI Lawyers

1. Gerstenfield, Gary: YouÕve been charged with drunk driving. The DWI / DUI laws in Maryland are very serious. You stand to lose a lot. You may pay fines, lose your driverÕs license, attend DUI driver education classes, be put on probation, have your car insurance rates go up Ð even spend time in jail. Consequences can be severe. Now is the time to get a lawyer. The sooner you contact an experienced DWI / DUI defense attorney, the better your rights can be protected. Whether youÕve just been pulled over by the police, or have actually been charged with an offense, your lawyer can advise you on your best course of action. DWI / DUI charges can be complex. Both criminal and civil actions may be taken against you. Both the Maryland courts and the MVA will be involved. Your lawyer can help you keep or regain your driverÕs license, and minimize the criminal penalties or avoid conviction altogether.
2. James N. Papirmeister: You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
3. Jon Katz: Surprise is a common response my clients have to their first arrest for driving while intoxicated. Sometimes the surprise is because the person is simply not guilty. Often, however, the person did drink over the legal limit, but just did not realize that it does not take much alcohol to make a person culpable of driving while intoxicated. One Too Many? - Defending Drunk Driving Cases DUI DWI DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED BY ALCOHOL DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED DRIVING IMPAIRED By Jonathan L. Katz Surprise is a common response my clients have to their first arrest for driving while intoxicated. Sometimes the surprise is because the person is simply not guilty. Often, however, the person did drink over the legal limit, but just did not realize that it does not take much alcohol to make a person culpable of driving while intoxicated. The penalties for driving while intoxicated can be harsh, including imprisonment and the loss of one's license for a lengthy period of time. With drinking and driving laws as stiff as they are, it is best to never risk driving after drinking more than a moderate amount of liquor, if even that much. It is commonly said that the body should not be expected to metabolize more than one drink (e.g., a 12-ounce beer, a 4-ounce glass of wine, or one ounce of liquor) per hour. Unfortunately, it is hard to get the benefit of the doubt from a police officer who smells liquor on a driver's breath, or who thinks a driver is acting intoxicated. Police are not experts in identifying drunk drivers, and drivers need to know their rights in dealing with the police. Even if a person has broken the drinking and driving laws, there is no reason for the driver to make a bad situation worse by providing unnecessary cooperation to the police. The police and prosecutor have the burden to prove a driver guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law; the accused walks into court presumed innocent. The driver should do whatever is honestly and legally possible to be found not guilty, and to get the most favorable sentence if found guilty. A driver should not help make the police officer's job easier if that only will increase the driver's risk of being treated harshly in court. When a driver is stopped by the police, the driver and the car's passengers should try to identify whether the driver did anything to justify being stopped. This information will be important for the arrested driver's attorney to argue in court that the police stopped the car illegally, and, therefore, to throw out any evidence beginning with the traffic stop. In general, a driver has no obligation to provide a police officer any information other than the driver's license and car registration. An arrested person's silence generally cannot be used against the person in a criminal trial. Police are trained to persuade people to answer their questions. People must remember, however, that police generally do not want to help suspects avoid a conviction. Once a police officer suspects that a driver has been drinking beyond the legal limit, the officer will likely ask the driver to step out of the car, and to perform a number of so-called field sobriety tests. These tests may include walking a straight line from heel to toe, standing on one leg with one's arms fully extended outwards, following the officer's pen or flashlight, counting backwards, and reciting the alphabet from the middle. The driver has no legal obligation to perform such tests, and, even if fully sober, the average person may very well perform poorly with some or all of these tests. Unfortunately, the police may be permitted to testify that the suspect refused such tests, and negative inferences might be unfairly drawn from such a refusal. A driver suspected of drinking too much may be asked to blow into the officer's portable alcohol-reading device. These devices are so inaccurate that their results are generally inadmissible in court. Finally, if still suspected of drinking too much, the driver will be taken to the police station, and will be asked to submit to a test of the suspect's blood alcohol level. Ideally, the driver should have the advice of a qualified attorney at this point about whether to take the blood alcohol test, because the many variables in making such a decision are too voluminous and sometimes minute to sufficiently cover in this or any other article. Unfortunately, many drunk driving arrests take place during the weekends and early morning hours when it is hard to reach a qualified attorney. In any event, if the suspect is able to reach an attorney, that should be the time also to talk about the advisability, permissibility, and availability of getting an expert witness onsite to check the accuracy of the testing as it happens. Different jurisdictions have a jumble of civil and criminal rules about sanctions for refusing to take blood alcohol tests, the weight that judges and juries may place on such refusals, and even rewards for blood alcohol results below a certain level (e.g., as of the updating of this article, Washington, DC, generally has a diversion program in Superior Court for first-time arrestees with blood alcohol levels below 0.15). For those who take a breath test at the police station, be ready to be asked to blow very hard into the machine; this certainly is unfair for people who physically are unable to blow forcefully. When the driver takes the breath test, the defense lawyer has more discovery and defenses to prepare, including: sufficiency of the rights read to the driver before the test is taken, including overcoming any language barriers with drivers who are not fluent in English; the time that elapses between the time of arrest and the time the breath test is offered; inferences of no intoxication that might arise from improperly advising the driver of the right to take or refuse the test and of the implications of such refusal or acceptance; an improperly administered test, and a low blood alcohol reading; the qualifications of the breath test technician; the accuracy of the breath testing equipment; and the willingness of the breath technician to permit the driver to reverse a refusal or agreement to take the test. The driver's defense counsel will demand or subpoena the breath technician's presence in court within the deadline established by the applicable court rules, to avoid the court's automatic admission of the breath test results into evidence. It is also vital to try to find ways around any per se drunk driving statutory provisions. Apparent intoxicated behavior often can be explained by such other circumstances as health problems, fatigue, personality, weather conditions, and traffic conditions. Sometimes, intoxicated behavior results from drugs in one's body. When the breath test result is low, and when the arresting officer still suspects foul play, the officer might then call in a drug recognition ("DRE") expert to try to establish that the driver was driving under the influence of drugs. Unless the arresting officer has found drugs in or around the driver, has smelled drugs, or has an admission that the driver has been using drugs, the prosecutor must rely on blood test results and/or circumstantial evidence. Defenses to the blood test results include that drugs can stay in the bloodstream long after they have any effect on driving; moreover, most of the defenses against the breath test results can be adapted to defending against the blood test results. Often, the drug recognition expert is a police officer who has minimal classroom training and on the job training in drug recognition, and little to no college training in this subject. A stronger argument can often be made against accepting the DRE as an expert than accepting the breath technician as an expert. Although bench trial judges may be willing to be more lax in qualifying the DRE as an expert, a stronger argument can be made against the prejudice of having the jury hear the DRE when the DRE's expertise is too much in question. If the DRE is allowed as an expert, often the DRE will make outrageous claims about circumstantial evidence that will provide strong ammunition for effective cross examination. The driver will be concerned not only with the criminal implications of a drunk driving arrest, but also about the possibility of administrative loss of the driver's license both after a conviction and through a parallel motor vehicle administration suspension hearing. Although administrative suspension defense issues can fill many pages, a few key considerations for defending at administrative hearings include: taking maximum advantage of the absence of opposing counsel at such hearings, including the inability of the government to respond to creative legal arguments; calling live witnesses, which can sometimes be more powerful than the opposition's presentation of mere documentary evidence; and seeking restricted driving privileges for the shortest amount of time, in the event that a suspension is ordered. No matter how draconian the states' drunk driving laws become, the defenses remain numerous and often powerful enough that "innocent" should continue to be a frequently heard plea for such cases.
4. Bartley, Shawn: Traffic/DWI In Maryland, the most commonly charged criminal offenses are those that involve the act of driving while under the influence of alcohol and/or driving while impaired by alcohol. A charge of driving while under the influence (better known as ÒDUIÓ) can be proven against an accused by demonstrating to the Court that a test result of .08 or more was obtained through an authorized chemical test or by evidence showing that the driver's normal coordination has been substantially impaired as a result of the consumption of alcohol. The maximum penalties allowed under Maryland statutes are 1 year and $1000 for a first offense, 2 years and $2000 for a second offense, and 3 years and $3000 for a third offense. DUI also carries 12 points with the MVA and at a hearing before the MVA, the driver's license may be revoked. The other most commonly charged criminal offense is that of driving while impaired by alcohol (also commonly known as ÒDWIÓ). This charge can be proven by demonstrating to the Court through evidence showing that the driver's normal coordination was impaired to some extent as a result of the consumption of alcohol. A DWI offense can also be proved by evidence of a test result of .07 or more, but less than .08. The maximum penalty is 60 days and $500 for a first offense and one year and $500 for a subsequent offense. DWI also carries 8 points with the MVA and at a hearing the driver's license may be suspended The legislature has added enhanced penalties for repeat offenders. As a result of House Bill 4/Senate Bill 352 a person who is convicted a second time of driving under the influence in violation of ¤ 21-902(a) within 5 years of a prior "a" conviction receives a mandatory one year suspension of their driver's license or privileges. There is no work permit or interlock restriction allowed for the one year. After the year the person is required to put an interlock on all vehicles they own for from 3 months to one year. They are entitled to a hearing for an Adminstrative Law Judge (ÒALJÓ) to determine the length of the interlock restriction and whether there is financial hardship involved with installing an interlock on more than one car. Additionally, a second "a" conviction within 5 years of the first carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 days incarceration or 30 days community service. A third "a" conviction within 5 years carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 days incarceration or 60 days community service. Incarceration includes house arrest or in patient treatment. Lastly, adriver who has been found guilty of either DUI or DWI has not had a prior DUI or DWI in Maryland within the previous 5 years, such driver may be eligible for a probation before judgment or PBJ. When a driver receives a finding of guilt, or pleads guilty in exchange for a PBJ, they are placed on probation for a specified length of time. If they follow the court's order without any violations, points are not assessed and the entry of guilt goes on a segregated record at the MVA that is not available to the public, but is available to law enforcement and the courts. When someone is charged with either a DUI or a DWI, it is imperative that they contact an attorney as soon after obtaining their release from the arresting agency. In many cases, there may be a viable factual and/or legal defense to the charges. Arroyo & Associates is committed to zealously pursue the interest of our client and defend him to the outmost of the rules of ethics and the law, to achieve the best possible result for the client. IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: In Maryland, it is imperative that a DUI/DWI accused see a lawyer AS SOON AS POSSIBLE after being charged, to fully protect your rights.
5. Duboff & Associates: Felonies and misdemeanors DUI/DWI Drug offenses (including possession and distribution charges) Violent crimes Traffic violations Theft crimes Sex crimes Weapons crimes Domestic crimes Juvenile crimes/arrests
6. Andalman & Flynn: serious crimes, felonies, misdemeanors, juvenile offenses and traffic citations
7. Cooper, Steven: Despite intense media attention to harsh penalties and rigorous law enforcement, arrests for driving under the influence (DUI) Ñ sometimes referred to as DWI Ñ remain extremely common in the Silver Spring area and throughout Maryland. It is a big risk and potentially major mistake to face this serious charge on your own, without a lawyer who will look hard at circumstances and strive to protect you against the most severe consequences.
8. Katz, Jon: The penalties for driving while intoxicated can be harsh, including imprisonment and the loss of one's license for a lengthy period of time. With drinking and driving laws as stiff as they are, it is best to never risk driving after drinking more than a moderate amount of liquor, if even that much. It is commonly said that the body should not be expected to metabolize more than one drink (e.g., a 12-ounce beer, a 4-ounce glass of wine, or one ounce of liquor) per hour. Unfortunately, it is hard to get the benefit of the doubt from a police officer who smells liquor on a driver's breath, or who thinks a driver is acting intoxicated. Police are not experts in identifying drunk drivers, and drivers need to know their rights in dealing with the police. Even if a person has broken the drinking and driving laws, there is no reason for the driver to make a bad situation worse by providing unnecessary cooperation to the police. The police and prosecutor have the burden to prove a driver guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law; the accused walks into court presumed innocent. The driver should do whatever is honestly and legally possible to be found not guilty, and to get the most favorable sentence if found guilty. A driver should not help make the police officer's job easier if that only will increase the driver's risk of being treated harshly in court. When a driver is stopped by the police, the driver and the car's passengers should try to identify whether the driver did anything to justify being stopped. This information will be important for the arrested driver's attorney to argue in court that the police stopped the car illegally, and, therefore, to throw out any evidence beginning with the traffic stop. In general, a driver has no obligation to provide a police officer any information other than the driver's license and car registration. An arrested person's silence generally cannot be used against the person in a criminal trial. Police are trained to persuade people to answer their questions. People must remember, however, that police generally do not want to help suspects avoid a conviction. Once a police officer suspects that a driver has been drinking beyond the legal limit, the officer will likely ask the driver to step out of the car, and to perform a number of so-called field sobriety tests. These tests may include walking a straight line from heel to toe, standing on one leg with one's arms fully extended outwards, following the officer's pen or flashlight, counting backwards, and reciting the alphabet from the middle. The driver has no legal obligation to perform such tests, and, even if fully sober, the average person may very well perform poorly with some or all of these tests. Unfortunately, the police may be permitted to testify that the suspect refused such tests, and negative inferences might be unfairly drawn from such a refusal. A driver suspected of drinking too much may be asked to blow into the officer's portable alcohol-reading device. These devices are so inaccurate that their results are generally inadmissible in court. Finally, if still suspected of drinking too much, the driver will be taken to the police station, and will be asked to submit to a test of the suspect's blood alcohol level. Ideally, the driver should have the advice of a qualified attorney at this point about whether to take the blood alcohol test, because the many variables in making such a decision are too voluminous and sometimes minute to sufficiently cover in this or any other article. Unfortunately, many drunk driving arrests take place during the weekends and early morning hours when it is hard to reach a qualified attorney. In any event, if the suspect is able to reach an attorney, that should be the time also to talk about the advisability, permissibility, and availability of getting an expert witness onsite to check the accuracy of the testing as it happens. Different jurisdictions have a jumble of civil and criminal rules about sanctions for refusing to take blood alcohol tests, the weight that judges and juries may place on such refusals, and even rewards for blood alcohol results below a certain level (e.g., as of the updating of this article, Washington, DC, generally has a diversion program in Superior Court for first-time arrestees with blood alcohol levels below 0.15). For those who take a breath test at the police station, be ready to be asked to blow very hard into the machine; this certainly is unfair for people who physically are unable to blow forcefully. When the driver takes the breath test, the defense lawyer has more discovery and defenses to prepare, including: sufficiency of the rights read to the driver before the test is taken, including overcoming any language barriers with drivers who are not fluent in English; the time that elapses between the time of arrest and the time the breath test is offered; inferences of no intoxication that might arise from improperly advising the driver of the right to take or refuse the test and of the implications of such refusal or acceptance; an improperly administered test, and a low blood alcohol reading; the qualifications of the breath test technician; the accuracy of the breath testing equipment; and the willingness of the breath technician to permit the driver to reverse a refusal or agreement to take the test. The driver's defense counsel will demand or subpoena the breath technician's presence in court within the deadline established by the applicable court rules, to avoid the court's automatic admission of the breath test results into evidence. It is also vital to try to find ways around any per se drunk driving statutory provisions. Apparent intoxicated behavior often can be explained by such other circumstances as health problems, fatigue, personality, weather conditions, and traffic conditions. Sometimes, intoxicated behavior results from drugs in one's body. When the breath test result is low, and when the arresting officer still suspects foul play, the officer might then call in a drug recognition ("DRE") expert to try to establish that the driver was driving under the influence of drugs. Unless the arresting officer has found drugs in or around the driver, has smelled drugs, or has an admission that the driver has been using drugs, the prosecutor must rely on blood test results and/or circumstantial evidence. Defenses to the blood test results include that drugs can stay in the bloodstream long after they have any effect on driving; moreover, most of the defenses against the breath test results can be adapted to defending against the blood test results. Often, the drug recognition expert is a police officer who has minimal classroom training and on the job training in drug recognition, and little to no college training in this subject. A stronger argument can often be made against accepting the DRE as an expert than accepting the breath technician as an expert. Although bench trial judges may be willing to be more lax in qualifying the DRE as an expert, a stronger argument can be made against the prejudice of having the jury hear the DRE when the DRE's expertise is too much in question. If the DRE is allowed as an expert, often the DRE will make outrageous claims about circumstantial evidence that will provide strong ammunition for effective cross examination. The driver will be concerned not only with the criminal implications of a drunk driving arrest, but also about the possibility of administrative loss of the driver's license both after a conviction and through a parallel motor vehicle administration suspension hearing. Although administrative suspension defense issues can fill many pages, a few key considerations for defending at administrative hearings include: taking maximum advantage of the absence of opposing counsel at such hearings, including the inability of the government to respond to creative legal arguments; calling live witnesses, which can sometimes be more powerful than the opposition's presentation of mere documentary evidence; and seeking restricted driving privileges for the shortest amount of time, in the event that a suspension is ordered. No matter how draconian the states' drunk driving laws become, the defenses remain numerous and often powerful enough that "innocent" should continue to be a frequently heard plea for such cases. NOTE:
9. Hamilton, Dontrice: DUI/DWI/drinking and driving If you have been pulled over for DUI/DWI you need immediate attention to protect your rights. I will challenge evidence against you including field sobriety tests, breathalyzer results, and witness or officer reports. I will provide the strategic and aggressive defense you need to successfully defend a DUI/DWI charge.
10. Colravy Law Firm: Click on one of the links below to find out more about some of the most frequently asked questions about these areas of law. Criminal Defense Juvenile Delinquency Civil Litigation/Personal Injury Family Law
11. Phillip A Guzman: Drunk Driving (cited as Driving Under the Influence, or Driving While Impaired) is by far the most commonly encountered offense in the courts today. In 2002, it is estimated that nearly 17,500 people were killed in automobile collisions involving alcohol. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), this fact represents 41 percent of the 42,815 people killed in all traffic accidents and crashes. In 2002, an estimated 17,419 people died in alcoholrelated traffic crashes an average of one every 30 minutes. These deaths constitute 41 percent of the 42,815 total traffic fatalities.
12. Gary Gerstenfield: You've been charged with drunk driving. The DWI / DUI laws in Maryland are very serious. You stand to lose a lot. You may pay fines, lose your driver's license, attend DUI driver education classes, be put on probation, have your car insurance rates go up - even spend time in jail. Consequences can be severe. Now is the time to get a lawyer. The sooner you contact an experienced DWI / DUI defense attorney, the better your rights can be protected. Whether you've just been pulled over by the police, or have actually been charged with an offense, your lawyer can advise you on your best course of action. DWI / DUI charges can be complex. Both criminal and civil actions may be taken against you. Both the Maryland courts and the MVA will be involved. Your lawyer can help you keep or regain your driver's license, and minimize the criminal penalties or avoid conviction altogether.
13. Kirchman Law: Driving under the influence of alcohol, or driving while intoxicated, is considered a very serious offense in most jurisdictions.Ê However, knowledgeable legal counsel can help you avoid hefty fines, license suspensions, or large insurance increases.
14. Arroyo & Associates: In Maryland, the most commonly charged criminal offenses are those that involve the act of driving while under the influence of alcohol and/or driving while impaired by alcohol. A charge of driving while under the influence (better known as DUI) can be proven against an accused by demonstrating to the Court that a test result of .08 or more was obtained through an authorized chemical test or by evidence showing that the driver's normal coordination has been substantially impaired as a result of the consumption of alcohol. The maximum penalties allowed under Maryland statutes are 1 year and $1000 for a first offense, 2 years and $2000 for a second offense, and 3 years and $3000 for a third offense. DUI also carries 12 points with the MVA and at a hearing before the MVA, the driver's license may be revoked.
15. Richmond Davis: Drunk driving is a criminal charge. Conviction of driving while intoxicated in the State of Maryland can result in a sentence of four years in jail and a $4,000 fine. In addition, a convicted drunk driver may have his license revoked by the Motor Vehicle Administration and his insurance rates are likely to go up dramatically. Court: Because you are a defendant in a criminal case, you are entitled to the same constitutional protections as a defendant in any other criminal matter. This means you have the right to be represented by a lawyer, to confront the witnesses against you, to cross examine them and make the state prove its case against you beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if the case goes against you at trial, the veteran attorney will ensure that you are prepared for sentencing. This means that he may have you evaluated for a drinking problem. What Judges Look For If you do not usually have a lot to drink, and are a social drinker, the judge will want to know this. He will take this fact into account when passing sentence upon you. On the other hand, if an individual does have a drinking problem, it is important that the defendant receive appropriate treatment and counseling before trial. The lawyer should know how to advise you in either circumstance. Consult a lawyer as soon as possible after your arrest. This makes it easier for him to help you. Experience is Essential An experienced lawyer will review the entire arrest procedure, including what you were doing prior to being stopped. He will know what facts to look for to help your defense at the MVA hearing and in court. The skilled lawyer will interview your witnesses and the arresting police officers. He will also review all reports made by the police as well as the documents which the prosecutor will attempt to use in court against you.
16. Marks & Katz: Surprise is a common response my clients have to their first arrest for driving while intoxicated. Sometimes the surprise is because the person is simply not guilty. Often, however, the person did drink over the legal limit, but just did not realize that it does not take much alcohol to make a person culpable of driving while intoxicated.
17. Thomas Mooney: The consequences of a DWI/DUI charge are not resolved in one proceeding. Rather, the consequences are encountered at several stages of the legal process. In addition, the consequences depend greatly on the individual case. Upon arrest for an alleged alcohol related infraction, the arresting officer will confiscate the driverÕs Maryland issued license if the driver submitted a breath sample of .08 and higher, or if driver refused the test. Out of state drivers will retain their physical license upon arrest. However, their privilege to drive in the State of Maryland is still in jeopardy. The officer provides a temporary license that allows driver to drive for a forty-five day period as if it were his/her regular license. Attached to the temporary license is a request for Administrative Hearing that should be completed and mailed to the Office of Administrative Hearings within 10 days of receipt. A check for $125.00 must accompany the request for hearing. All of this information is clearly stated on the Hearing Request Form attached to the temporary license. A lawyer will assist you with any procedural questions that may arise. The MVA hearing is not your Court date. At this hearing, your case will be decided by an Administrative Law Judge at a branch of the Motor Vehicle Administration. Administrative rules of law are applied and the standard of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. This standard is one in which the evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than the evidence which is offered in opposition to it, that is evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not. An Administrative Law Judge can only suspended a DriverÕs license. He/She cannot put points on a license, put a Driver in jail, or even impose a fine. The period of suspension is detailed in the Process section of the website. A lawyer can be extremely helpful at an MVA hearing. Depending on the case, there are a number of issues that, if present, could result in the MVA taking Òno actionÓ against you.