By: John Luke Matthews

Oh yes, DUI. You’ve heard it all before. In almost every car accident case you will hear, it’s most likely another drunk driver who’s driving late from a party and who got too much alcohol on his system that he speed and ran onto a pedestrian. Fear got into him and away he fled. A classic case of hit and run.

Of course it’s no longer some sensational news. We hear it very often. And we even tell ourselves, “Me, a drunk driver? Hey, I’m not going to be doing that in my lifetime.” But what actually is surprising as far as statistics show is that many of these drivers caught under the influence of alcohol are not really habitual drinkers themselves. It is most likely that these drivers have underestimated the real effects of alcohol in their ability to drive carefully.

Blame it to the myths surrounding alcohol and driving. Most people have different misconceptions about it, but one thing is certain: these misconceptions can be really dangerous. To know the truth means drawing a fine line between life and death as far as driving is concerned. So what are those myths that surround alcohol?

1.) Alcohol stimulates the mind.

This is entirely false. In fact, alcohol is actually a depressant, which depresses cognitive functions of the brain.

2.) A cup of coffee can sober a drunken person.

The effects of coffee does not in any way wear off the effects of alcohol. It only makes you awake, but your brain functions are in an altered state, and will only wear off by time.

3.) Drinking beer will make you less drunk than drinking hard liquor (e.g. scotch, brandy, gin)

It actually doesn’t matter if you drink beer or whisky. It’s the same depressant found on all liquors, and the effects are all the same. Drinking a 12-ounce bottle of beer gives the same intoxicating effect as a one-ounce shot of gin.

4.) Taller and bigger people can handle alcohol better than slimmer, shorter ones.

There are other major factors that can affect the rate of alcohol being absorbed into your body. It’s not just body size, but also your metabolism, the food you ate and the amount of rest you had prior to drinking liquor.

5.) Cold water splashed on the face will take away the drunkenness.

This doesn’t work at all. Period.

6.) Driving slower can greatly reduce the risk of any road accident.

Whatever the speed you’re driving, the fact that your motor reflexes are impaired makes you no less dangerous.

There are actually more myths surrounding drinking and driving, but one thing’s for sure: drinking and driving don’t mix. Time and again, the wise adage holds true: if you drink - don’t drive, and if you drive - don’t drink.

For more information about accident injury cases visit our Los Angeles Accident Lawyers

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

By: Carson Danfield

As long as there are human police officers, injustices always will occur. A great many police officers feel they have done their job when they arrest a person for “mere suspicion” of DUI. In some instances, the arrest may be warranted, but sometimes it isn’t. As long as there are human police officers, injustices always will occur. A great many police officers feel they have done their job when they arrest a person for “mere suspicion” of DUI. In some instances, the arrest may be warranted, but sometimes it isn’t.

Although you may think that just because your Blood Alcohol Level is below the state limit, usually 0.08%, that you’ll not be arrested for DUI. Wrong! Actually, you can be arrested for DUI no matter what level of alcohol is in your bloodstream. Even if you haven’t been drinking at all, if the police officer observes anything about you that leads him to believe you may have been drinking, he can arrest you. And then, it’s up to you to prove your innocence.

For example, let’s say that you just finished a fine meal at your favorite restaurant and you had a small glass of wine. An overzealous police officer stops you for a minor traffic violation and smells alcohol on your breath. He immediately arrests you for DUI, slaps on a set of handcuffs and hauls you off to jail.

Once you arrive at the jail, you’re photographed and fingerprinted, then you’re placed in a holding cell, probably along with some pretty unsavory characters. You’ll wait there for what seems like an eternity and eventually you’ll go before a local magistrate who will decide what happens next. He may just assign you a court date and release you, or he may keep you locked up until you post a cash bail. If you don’t post bail, you’ll sit in jail until your court date.

Even when you do get out of jail, it will seem like your troubles are just starting. As a result of your arrest, your car was towed to an impound lot and when you go to retrieve it, you’ll be faced with paying hundreds of dollars in towing, storage and administrative fees.

When your court date finally arrives a few weeks later, you need to be prepared to fight your case by being knowledgeable about the DUI laws of your state. If everything concerning your arrest wasn’t done properly, there’s a good chance you can get the case dismissed and all charges dropped, thereby keeping your record clean. Even if your case does proceed to trial, your guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Again, this is where you need to be aware of the law and what’s legally required for a conviction.

Keep in mind that the police officer is not your friend. The judge is not your friend. This is a money-making enterprise for them and they would prefer to punish you as much as possible, as quickly as possible so they can move on to the next poor soul who they’ve managed to catch in their snare. If you don’t know your rights and speak up, they’ll just dish out your punishment and move on to the next victim. You will have now been rubber-stamped as a criminal and you’ll have to live with the consequences.

Carson Danfield. Don’t let this happen to you. If you’ve been falsely accused of DUI, you absolutely need to know your rights. Visit DUI-TRIX.com to find out how you can protect yourself from an unjust DUI arrest.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

Though some find it tempting to represent themselves in a drunk driving legal case, having a competent attorney, familiar with drunk driving cases is really a necessity. There’s often a chance the case may be dismissed depending on the circumstances.

If searching for a particular attorney for this situation there are state-wide, country-wide, city-wide and zip-code search functionalities online and off.

It’s always so much better not to get in that predicament in the first place. Bear in mind that if you are convicted in a DUI case, you may lose your license, or get your license and car impounded. You may have to pay a heavy fine or you may land in prison.

The arrests in DUI cases are rising because of new, more stringent laws and regulations that have been introduced in many states.

If you still must select a DUI attorney, be careful. Select a competent attorney who has some good experience in DUI cases and he will be the best defense tool for you.

Drunk driving cases are also called Driving Under the Influence (DUI), Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), Driving While Ability Impaired (DWAI) etc.

It’s very possible that your alcohol concentration will be measured by way of blood, breath, urine or saliva at the time of arrest. You may be charged with offense of intoxication, impairment or influence by the law depending on the version of the investigating officer and the eyewitnesses.

Your attorney can explain the consequences to you after assessing your case so you will be prepared to defend yourself against those consequences. The laws vary from one place to another and it may be difficult for you to know the local “law of the land”. He can help you understand the possibility of license problems, imprisonment, community service etc. He/She will let you know if there are any special laws regarding underage drunk driving and BAC above the limit.

A drunk driving attorney will be able to manage the whole process for you. All the proceedings in drunk driving cases may be frustrating and time consuming. But that’s the price you pay. Fortunately you have legal assistance able to represent you in court. Perhaps the technicalities will help you to do it smoothly and come out with lesser punishment.Learn more about stats, arrests, accidents and legal ramifications involved with drunk driving. http://www.drivingdrunk.org

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

By: Denny Soinski

An Issue of Mixed Messages

How can something as prevalent, accepted, and accessible in our society as drinking alcohol be so harmful, unhealthy, AND illegal when consumed at or slightly above moderate intake levels? The simple asking of this question immediately uncovers a number of issues, one of which is the mixed messages that exist in our society about drinking alcohol.

The Accessibility and Acceptability of Alcohol

On the one hand, consider the thousands upon thousands of bars and taverns in the United States. Now add to this list the restaurants, night clubs, sporting events, festivals, state fairs, hotels, casinos, carnivals, etc. where alcoholic beverages are regularly served. Moreover, add the grocery stores, liquor stores, beverage stores, the Convenient Food Marts, the 7/11 stores, and the state stores where an adult can legally purchase as many bottles, cans, and/or cases of alcoholic beverages as he or she desires.

Drinking Alcohol is Cool

Not only is alcohol extremely accessible in our society but there are also a number of factors that reinforce the idea that drinking alcohol is “cool.” For instance, consider beer advertisements and commercials on TV. Indeed, it can be argued that some of the most memorable, funniest, and “best” commercials and advertisements on TV have been those that were associated with drinking beer. To push the point further, why would beer manufacturers spend millions of dollars for a commercial during the Super Bowl if this expenditure did not lead to more sales? From a slightly different perspective, consider professional athletes and movie stars who, by their actions and advertisements, reinforce the idea that drinking alcohol is “cool.”

Religious Rituals and Cultural Traditions

When religious rituals that make use of alcohol, cultural traditions that encourage drinking alcohol, special events and holidays that are associated with drinking alcohol, and the increasing popularity of adding alcohol to food for enhanced flavor–when all of these are factored into the equation, it becomes obvious that alcohol is deeply ingrained in our society. The point: when people are surrounded with alcohol and bombarded by events, traditions, holidays, and advertisements that are alcohol-related, it becomes part of their socialization process that in turn makes it easier to simply accept that they should drink alcohol if they are to “fit in” and become members of our society.

Alcohol Abuse and Drinking While Driving

If the prevalence, acceptability, and accessibility of alcohol represent the one side of the coin regarding the mixed messages in our society, then the dangerousness, unhealthiness, and illegality represents the other. Indeed, consider the numerous negative and harmful messages and statistics associated with alcohol abuse and drinking while driving that we have heard from the medical community, federal government, police, politicians, organizations such as MADD, and school and college administrators.

(more…)

By: Lance Knowlton

Technically, Breathalyzer is a proprietary name for piece of testing equipment that determines blood alcohol concentration (BAC). There are two other types of devices that measure BAC, Intoxilyzer and Alcosensor, and they work differently than the Breathalyzer. This article will explain how each one works.

All three devices require a person to exhale into them. That is because they all work on the same principle of testing, which is that alcohol shows up in the breath because it is absorbed into the bloodstream, not digested, where its chemical composition remains unchanged. As the blood flows through the lungs, the alcohol in it, which is volatile, evaporates into the lungs.

There is a mathematical relationship between the amount of alcohol in the lungs and the amount of alcohol in the blood, and it can be manipulated to determine how much alcohol is in the blood without actually drawing any. All BAC testing equipment measures alcohol in the breath and uses this formula to calculate how much alcohol is in the blood. Accordingly, all the devices have a mouthpiece through which the test subject blows air and a sample chamber to hold the air. Beyond that, each device is different.

The Breathalyzer detects alcohol by monitoring a chemical reaction that produces a color change. Besides the mouthpiece and sample chamber, it consists of two glass vials to contain the chemical reaction and a system of photocells connected to a meter. The air is bubbled through one vial containing a chemical mixture and into another vial. From that vial, the air is passed over the photocells so the meter can measure the color change and calculate the BAC.

Alcosensor works by detecting the occurrence of a chemical reaction of alcohol in a fuel cell. The fuel cell has two platinum electrodes with a porous acid-electrolyte material layered between them. As the exhaled air flows past the electrodes, the platinum oxidizes any alcohol in the air to produce acetic acid, protons and electrons. The electrons flow through a wire connecting the first electrode and an electrical-current meter and the second electrode, which converts the other particles into water. The more alcohol oxidized, the greater the electrical current. A microprocessor measures the electrical current and calculates the BAC.

The Intoxilyzer detects alcohol by infrared spectroscopy, which identifies molecules based on the way they absorb light. Each molecule absorbs light differently so alcohol molecules can be identified, counted and fed into the formula by computer. In the Intoxilyzer, a lamp generates a multiple wavelength infrared beam. The beam passes through the sample chamber and is focused by a lens onto a spinning filter wheel. The wheel contains band filters for the specific wavelength of alcohol. The light passing through the filter is detected by a photocell, where it is converted into an electrical pulse. Each pulse is relayed to a small computer which uses them to calculate the BAC.

Each device is a sophisticated piece of testing equipment that must be calibrated before each use. Police officers are often trained on how to use and calibrate them, and DUI defense attorneys often get the results of the tests thrown out based on improper use or calibration.With nearly 17,000 alcohol-related deaths in the US each year, drunk driving is still a big problem. How many deaths so far this year? See our Death Clock here: http://www.alcoholalert.com/deathclock.html . Learn how you can alert possible drunk driving in your community and earn money at the same time, visit: http://www.alcoholalert.com/alcohol-breath-testing.html .

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

On October 23, 2007, in the case People v. Middler, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the DUI defendant’s conviction of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of liquor (OUIL) under M.C.L. 257.625(1) – her third offense – and of operating a motor vehicle with a suspended license, under M.C.L 257.904(3)(a). The DUI defendant was sentenced to 90 days in jail with 44 days of credit, and 24 months’ probation.

On appeal, the DUI defendant argued that her convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence. The court of appeals disagreed. The court’s analysis first began with a review of the elements the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict a DUI defendant of operating under the influence of liquor: “(1) that defendant was operating a motor vehicle upon a highway or other place open to the general public; (2) that while so driving he was under the influence of alcohol; and (3) that as a result of the drinking, defendant was substantially deprived of normal control or clarity of mind.”

First, the court noted that the DUI defendant and the prosecutor both stipulated to the fact that she was found to have an alcohol content of 0.16 grams per 210 liters of breath, which was twice the legal limit of .08. Consequently, the issue became a question of how the DUI defendant arrived at the home of her former boyfriend. If there was sufficient evidence to show that she drove herself there (meaning operating a vehicle on a public highway), she would be guilty of OUIL, whereas, on the other hand, if there was not sufficient evidence, then the DUI defendant could be found guilty.

The court explained that under the Michigan Vehicle Code, M.C.L. 257.35a, operate means “being in actual physical control of a vehicle regardless of whether or not the person is licensed under this act as an operator or chauffeur.” According to the Michigan Court of Appeals, there was sufficient evidence to indicate that the DUI defendant operated a vehicle while under the influence of liquor:

“At trial, Officers Wakerly and Will both testified that defendant said she ‘took the back roads’ to get to Slocum’s on the night in question. Defendant never said or implied that someone else had driven her to Slocum’s, and there was no evidence indicating that anyone else had been present at the scene that night. Although defendant’s daughter, Brandi, testified that she drove defendant to Slocum’s residence and was then picked up by her then boyfriend in a separate vehicle, Officer Wakerly testified that the only tire tracks seen in the snow that night belonged to defendant’s truck, and there was only one set of foot prints seen in the snow, which also presumably belonged to defendant. Similarly, Officer Will testified that the only tire tracks she observed belonged to defendant’s truck and Officer Wakerly’s vehicle. Additionally, Brandi contradicted herself during the course of her testimony, such as when she initially stated that she collided with Slocum’s vehicle fairly hard upon arriving at the residence and then later said she did not really hit the vehicle very hard. The testimony of Officers Wakerly and Will, along with the appearance of the scene of the crime, cast doubt on the credibility of Brandi’s testimony.”

The court ruled that a rational jury could have found the DUI defendant’s testimony to not be credible based on the inconsistencies described above. As a result, the court found sufficient evidence to support the DUI defendant’s conviction of OUIL.

Click here to read the entire opinion.

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

By: Lance Knowlton

As many people know, the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States forbids the unreasonable search or seizure of U.S. citizens. Generally, there must be probable cause to arrest or search persons or their private property, which means that the officer must have a reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts that some wrongdoing has occurred. How, then, are law enforcement agents able, constitutionally, to stop motorists at sobriety checkpoints?

According to constitutional law, some stops are not considered seizures of a person. This is the case with a so called “stop and frisk” in which an officer detains a person for a very brief period of time and quickly checks their outer clothing for contraband. Sometimes, if a person is detained for less than 48 hours, it is not considered a seizure. However, this is not true for DUI roadblocks. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that stopping someone at such a roadblock does constitute a seizure of that person under the Fourth Amendment.

One “however” further and the language of the Constitution gets tangled up in the thicket of constitutional interpretation and case law. The Supreme Court could have claimed that these stops without probable cause are constitutional under the doctrine of exigent circumstances. The Court has repeatedly held that when an officer believes evidence is about to be destroyed, he can perform a search without a warrant. However, this doctrine seems only to apply to searches. Instead, it appears as though the Court used a balancing test, common in other areas of constitutional law, whereby the “minimal intrusion on individual liberties” was weighed against the need for and efficacy of roadblocks and found to be less important.

To some, it seems that the Court has simply carved out of the Constitution another exception, similar to the one for exigent circumstances, for sobriety checkpoints. DUI defense attorneys often refer to this as “the DUI exception to the Constitution.” Critics and dissenting justices have pointed out that the Fourth Amendment does not make exceptions. The only question is whether the officer has probable cause to stop the individual driver. Justice Brennan wrote, “That stopping every car might make it easier to prevent drunken driving…is an insufficient justification for abandoning the requirement of individualized suspicion.”

The Court’s justification for the exception rested on the assumption that DUI roadblocks are necessary and effective. However, there is some controversy as to whether this is true. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently released data on alcohol-related deaths in 2003 and 2004. There was a decline in such fatalities in 2004, and most of the drop occurred in states that don’t use sobriety checkpoints. Critics already concerned about the large outlay of resources required to operate checkpoints are doubly concerned if spending the resources does not even necessarily prevent DUI offenses.

On the other hand, law enforcement agents believe that checkpoints are effective even if intoxicated drivers get around them because they spread the message that driving under the influence is not tolerated. Officers often provide informational pamphlets to motorists stopped at checkpoints, explaining the consequences of drunk driving, which may have a deterrent effect.Having been struck by drunk drivers twice, Lance Knowlton has a deep appreciation for this serious problem. To learn how you can help prevent drunk driving in your community and earn money at the same time, visit: http://www.alcoholalert.com .

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

On October 18, 2007, the Michigan Court of Appeals released an unpublished opinion in the case People v. Swift, affirming the DUI defendant’s guilty conviction of driving under the influence of a controlled substance causing death under M.C.L. 257.625(4). The DUI defendant was sentenced as a second habitual offender to 142 to 270 months in prison.

The DUI defendant argued on appeal that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions of driving under the influence of a controlled substance causing death.

According to the court of appeals, the DUI defendant did not dispute that he was driving the automobile at issue or that the victim died from injuries suffered in the accident. Further, the court explained that it is not disputed that that marijuana and THC, its active ingredient, are controlled substances under M.C.L 333.7212(1)(d).

In this DUI case, experts testified on behalf of the prosecution that the DUI defendant’s level of THC was too high to have been the result of secondhand smoke, and that the DUI defendant likely consumed the marijuana within 12 hours of the accident. Consequently, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that there was sufficient evidence from which a jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that
the DUI defendant knowingly consumed marijuana before the accident, and that a reasonable jury could have also determined from this evidence that the DUI defendant voluntarily decided to drive knowing that he might be impaired.

The only issue the appellate court had to review was whether the element of causation was satisfied, because under Michigan DUI law, to be convicted of driving under the influence of a controlled substance causing death, there must be evidence that the DUI defendant caused the death simply by his driving — whether his
driving was “impaired” is irrelevant to the analysis, the court noted. “For the purposes of . . . driving under the influence of a controlled
substance causing death, the defendant’s driving must be the factual cause of death.” As the court stated, “[a] defendant’s act is the factual cause of the accident and the death if ‘absent the defendant’s conduct’ the accident would not have occurred.”

The DUI defendant argued that he was not the factual cause of the accident, claiming that it was the accident victim’s act of “pulling out into the intersection when he had an obligation to wait at the stop sign until traffic had cleared” that was the factual cause of the accident.

But the court of appeals disagreed, stating that but for the DUI defendant’s driving, the accident would not have occurred. The court, however, did not end its analysis there. It next reviewed whether there was proximate cause, or as the court explained, whether “the fatal accident was the direct and natural result of defendant’s excessive speed and marijuana consumption.” According to the court, had the DUI defendant not been speeding or impaired by drugs, “he likely would have driven with ordinary care and would have had time to react to avoid the accident.”

The defendant argued, however, that there was an intervening, superseding cause breaking the causal chain between his conduct and the victim’s injury. “Defendant argues that the victim’s act of pulling out in front of him was an intervening cause that broke the causal link.” But again, the court disagreed. “[A]n act breaks the causal link and becomes a superseding cause only if the ‘act by the victim or third party was not reasonably foreseeable—e.g., gross negligence or intentional misconduct . . . .’”

“We conclude that the victim’s driving into the intersection may have been negligent, but it was not grossly negligent and was foreseeable based on an objective standard of reasonableness. Drivers pull out in front of other cars regularly. A reasonable driver is aware that a sudden stop to avoid an accident may be required, and adjusts his or her speed accordingly. Although defendant had the right of way, he did not have the right to be driving 30 miles per hour or more in excess of the posted speed limit after having consumed marijuana. It appears that the victim pulled out directly in front of defendant; however, the victim may well have believed that defendant was traveling at the posted speed limit and that there was accordingly sufficient time to do so safely. Indeed, testimony suggested that when a car is approaching another, it is often difficult to judge its speed. While the victim apparently misjudged defendant’s speed, his pulling out into the intersection was not grossly negligent and was reasonably foreseeable. Under the circumstances, a reasonable jury could have concluded that defendant’s driving was both the factual and proximate cause of the accident, and that the victim’s act was not a superseding, intervening cause.”

The court, thus, concluded that there was sufficient evidence to establish a factual causation and proximate causation with respect to the charge of driving under the influence of a controlled substance causing death.

Click here to read the entire opinion.

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review with a recommended DUI lawyer.

By: Colleen Gray

In most states, if you are suspected of drunk driving, you must take a blood alcohol content test such as a breathalyzer when asked to do so by police or face very harsh penalties. But police must have reasonable suspicion that you have been drinking before they can ask you to take a BAC test.

To establish reasonable suspicion police use a range of questions and DUI pre-screening or field sobriety tests. You are not required to answer the questions or to participate in any of the tests. If you do go along with these tests you are only giving the officer the reasonable suspicion he or she needs to require you to take a BAC test.

Refuse to Have a Nice Chat and Avoid a DUI Test
One of the simplest ways for police to get the reasonable suspicion they need to administer a BAC test is to just ask you if you have had anything to drink. Do not admit to having had even one drink. If you do, that’s reasonable suspicion.

The officer may also ask you where you have been and what you’ve been doing. This may seem very innocent but if you admit to having been out with friends or attending a sports event or being anywhere where alcohol is commonly served you have given the officer reasonable suspicion. You are not required to answer these questions or to have a friendly chat with police.

Refuse the DUI Field Sobriety Tests
If you are stopped by police the officer may ask you to take a field sobriety test such as the one-leg-stand, finger-to-nose or the nystagmus test which involves the officer shining a flash light in your eyes and looking for erratic eye motion.

These tests have just one purpose, to give the officer the reasonable suspicion he or she needs to require you to take a BAC test. You have almost no chance of passing these tests. Some of them, like the one-leg-stand, could be difficult for a trained athlete to perform perfectly and your pass or fail grade rests not with a panel of judges but entirely with the police officer. You are not required to perform these tests and you should politely refuse to do so without getting drawn into a conversation with the officer. Don’t make excuses for not taking the test, just refuse.

The most important point to remember is that if you are charged with a DUI offence and the case ends up in court the officer must be able to justify requiring you to take the BAC test. Don’t give the police extra ammunition by talking too much or taking a field sobriety test that is all but impossible to pass.

A DUI charge is serious and should be handled by a qualified DUI attorney. Get detailed information on specialized drunk driving lawyers in your area. http://dui-lawyer-la.com/

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.

By: Bryan Wayne

There are many cases of road accidents where alcohol is the sole reason behind the accident. After witnessing an increase in alcohol related accidents the government of United States has come up with a new law called DUI. Now you may be wondering what is DUI? Well, DUI stands for Driving under Influence. It is one of the most serious driving offenses in the US. A person charge with a DUI may face serious consequences afterwards. If the person is found to have blood alcohol level of above .08 then he/she may be arrested. Also, his/her driving license may get suspended or revoked in case he/she is guilty.

Driving under the influence of alcohol is a phenomenon that has been witnessed all over the world. There may be different rules regarding drunken driving in various countries but the punishment remains almost the same in all the countries.

When is a person charged with a DUI? If a person is charged with DUI, it generally implies that the individual is intoxicated by the use of alcohol or any other drug to the extent that he/she is incapable of exercising his/her motor skills. This is not only applicable in the case of cars and bikes but also for aircrafts and driving boats. In the United States, this offence is taken seriously and the person charged with the same is considered to be a criminal.

BAC is a widely used scientific term which stands for Blood Alcohol Concentration. This is generally measured in milligrams of alcohol per millimeter of blood. The threshold level is .05% but several countries have zero tolerance laws.

If an individual is a first time offender he/she may get off the hook by paying either a little fine, imprisonment or social service along with a suspension of his/her driving license. But if an individual is a repeat offender then a huge fine and imprisonment can come across the way of the individual. Also his/her license will be revoked or suspended and the vehicle impounded.

For determining whether you are under alcohol influence or not the law enforcement officers may conducts several tests like one leg stand test, walk and turn, horizontal gaze, etc. All these are a part of the standard procedures under the DUI laws. All these tests help to evaluate the condition and ability of the individual and also indicating the coordination and balance between his/her limbs and brain.

I hope what is DUI is no more a question to you. By now you would have known the all the important aspects related to it. After all, drunken driving is a serious offence. It is against not only the law but also humanity. You should never indulge in it.Bryan Wayne owns and operates http://www.drunkdriving101facts.com Drunk Driving

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

---

The GL Law Group, PLC provides free information on Michigan DUI law and guide to choosing a good Michigan DUI attorney. If you have recently been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to contact a good DUI lawyer soon. A guilty DUI conviction can ruin your life. Contact us to set up a free DUI case review.