By: Vanessa Francisco

Approximately 30 percent of all Americans are expected to be involved in a drunk driving accident in their lifetime. More than 10 percent of Americans aged 12 and older drove under the influence of alcohol at least once in 2001 and that nationwide. A rough average of 59 people is killed every hour in a drunk driving auto accident. (Proner, 2007)

Drunk Driving is one of the leading causes of fatal automobile accidents in the United States. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), nearly 40% of total traffic fatalities are alcohol-related incidents.

Life is precious and those who are not killed by the negligence of drunk drivers, though fortunate, may be left with life-altering injuries that could prevent them from their previous way of life. These auto accident injuries may be severe enough to prevent a person from returning to work or engaging in recreational activities he was once used to. Sprains, ruptured disks, fractures, paralysis and brain damage are some of the debilitating injuries that haunt victims even for years after the accident.

Drunk driving is a criminal offense, punishable by fines, jail time, and revocation of license. Drunk drivers are charged with driving under the influence or driving while intoxicated, which includes the use of alcohol and drugs that impair the ability to operate a motor vehicle properly. This includes common illegal drugs, such as cocaine and marijuana, as well as over-the-counter drugs and prescription medications that warn against use while driving.

Victims of car accidents where the negligent driver is charged with “Driving under the Influence” (DUI) could be entitled to punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. Negligent drunk drivers, on the other hand, may serve time in prison or have their licenses revoked and pay huge amount of fines, but pain and trauma suffered by the victims due to the drunk driver’s negligent actions remain, unchanged, without direct remedy available. No amount of penalty or compensation can make up for personal damage, but that is the closest a victim can resort to.

A drunk driver is held liable for paying compensatory damages, actual and general ones, which include medical expenses and loss of future wages; pain and suffering damages for the emotional distress the accident has brought upon the victim and his or her family; and punitive damages to serve as punishment for his or her negligent actions. In some cases, the establishment that provided alcohol to the drunk driver may also be held liable.

It is important for a victim to seek California legal service, talk to an experienced attorney, and file an auto accident or injury case as soon as possible after a drunk driving accident. In many states, the statute of limitations for filing these cases is two years from the time of the accident, but varies in others. By the time the statute of limitations expires, in most cases, the victim will not be able to pursue a case and obtain compensation for incurred injuries.

Mesriani Law Group offers professional California Legal Service for clients with cases involving personal injury, employment law, business law and social security disability issues.

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.

You’ve recently been arrested for a Michigan DUI-related violation, be it operating while intoxicated (OWI), operating while visibly impaired or a violation under the zero tolerance laws. And thankfully your decision to drive under the influence did not result in any injuries to yourself or another person. At this point, you need a specialized Michigan DUI attorney to defend you.

So you start shopping around looking for a Michigan DUI attorney and you start to realize that a specialized Michigan DUI attorney charges a higher legal fee than say a general criminal defense lawyer or low-tier DUI lawyer, someone who will charge a much lower legal fee in order to basically just stand next to you while you plead guilty and cut a deal.

Is it worth it to pay a specialized Michigan DUI attorney the higher legal fee? You better believe it. A guilty conviction or plea can ruin your life. A DUI conviction will stay on your record and if you are found guilty in the future of a second DUI-related offense within so many years of the first guilty conviction or plea, then your punishment will escalate. This makes it even more important that you be able to avoid a guilty DUI conviction or plea.

Your best bet to avoiding a guilty DUI conviction is to retain the services of an expert Michigan DUI attorney that specializes in nothing but DUI defense law. But yes, such a specialized Michigan DUI attorney may charge a higher legal fee, but it is justified. To make him or herself an expert in Michigan DUI law, the Michigan DUI attorney invests a lot of time, money and effort to make him or herself the leading authority in DUI defense law in Michigan and to learn and be trained in chemical testing devices, police procedures, and not to mention, staying up-to-date on the latest in DUI law and trial practice.

A heart surgeon probably charges more than a general practice physician, and if you needed heart surgery, who would you really performing surgery on you? The heart specialist or your family physician?

It’s an easy decision. If you are arrested for a DUI-related violation, then seek out the legal services of a specialized Michigan DUI attorney and be willing to pay the higher costs if it means you have a better shot at avoiding a guilty conviction.

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.

If you choose to drive after having consumed alcoholic beverages, which you should think twice before doing, then one way to minimize your chances of being arrested for a DUI-related violation is to simply follow the traffic laws.

First, follow the given speed-limit, going no more than 5mph over the speed limit and going no under than 5-10mph below the speed limit. Speeding will get you pulled over and give the police an opportunity to evaluate whether you have been driving under the influence, whereas going too slow may raise police suspicion, causing the police to follow you until they have sufficient cause to pull you over.

Make sure you come to a complete stop at every stop sign, and do not proceed forward until you have the right of way. Do not pull one of those lazy rolling stops, where you simply pump the brake a little without actually coming to a dead stop.

Watch those u-turns, also and make sure you maintain a safe distance from the car ahead of you at all times. Don’t change lanes or turn without first signaling. When approaching a blinking yellow light, make sure you slow down before proceeding forward and/or signaling before turning.

Remember, the police look for any justification to have sufficient cause to pull you over, so don’t give them any reason to do so.

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.

Drinking and driving is definitely not condoned, but it happens and probably is going to continue happening. If you are someone that plans on going out, drinking alcohol and then driving afterwards, then you are at risk of being arrested for a DUI.

One way to reduce this risk is to keep your car in good shape. The police will use any lawful justification they can to pull you over. This includes a broken tail light, a cracked windshield, loose parts on your vehicle that poses a danger, missing outside mirrors, window tinting in violation of Michigan law, missing or improperly placed tags, poor tire tread, etc. The true reason to pull you over for these reasons may ver well be to determine whether you are driving while intoxicated or visibily impaired.

If you go out and you plan on driving, do yourself a favor and take 15 minutes to make sure your car is properly maintained. While the best preventative measure to a DUI arrest is simply not driving after drinking alcohol or taking illegal controlled substances, you can minimize your chances of being arrested for a DUI arrest if you don’t give the police an easy reason to pull you over.

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.

The most simplest advice that can be given to anyone who wants to avoid being arrested for a DUI or operating while intoxicated or visibly impaired, is to simply don’t drink and drive. If you’re going out and planning on drinking an alcoholic beverage, make sure you have a designated driver or that you drive with someone else who will not be drinking. It’s as easy as that. If you drive, don’t drink. If you drink, don’t drive. This is by far the safest method you can employ to avoid a DUI arrest, not mention maintaining the safety of yourself, your passengers and other drivers or pedestrians on the road.

The penalties for hitting a construction worker have gone up dramatically in Michigan, and a lot contruction road work often takes place at night and during the weekends. Not to mention that if you kill someone or seriously injure someone as a result of operating while intoxicated or visibly impaired, you will be charged with a felony in Michigan - a serious crime - and face a stiff punishment under Michigan DUI law.

And in Michigan, there were over 40,000 DUI arrests in 2006, and this number could easily grow each year. This number suggests that the odds of being arrested for a DUI violation in Michigan is pretty good. Why give the police an opportunity to arrest you for a DUI violation? A guilty conviction can ruin your life. Just don’t drink and drive. It’s the safest strategy for everyone.

If you have been arrested for a DUI violation, contact an expert Michigan DUI attorney as soon as possible to understand your chances of avoiding a guilty conviction and to start your DUI defense immediately.

On October 4, 2007, in the DUI case People v. Cullen, the Michigan Court of Appeals, in an unpublished opinion, reversed the trial court’s decision to sentence the DUI defendant, who plead guilty to operating a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor — his third OWI offense (M.C.L. 257.625(9)(c)) — to three years of probation, with 60 days to be served in jail that was “subject to review.”

The prosecution appealed the trial court’s sentencing, arguing that imposing a 60-day jail sentence “subject to review,” meant that the court would consider at a later date whether it would require the defendant to serve the jail
sentence. The prosecution argued that this essentially imposed a suspended sentence in violation of M.C.L. 625(9)(d), and the Michigan Court of Appeals agreed.

According to the court of appeals, Section 625(9)(c) offers two alternate, but mandatory minimum sentences, either of which can be imposed. However, by making the 60 days of jail time “subject to review,” the court ruled that it essentially equaled that of a suspended sentence:

“Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed) defines ’suspended sentence’ as a sentence that is ‘postponed so that the defendant is not required to serve time unless he or she commits another crime or violates some other courtimposed condition.’ In other words, the defendant is not required to serve the sentence at the time it is imposed. Thus, a suspended sentence is one that is imposed by the court, which the defendant may or may not be required to serve at a later date even though, as a practical matter, the defendant usually is not required to serve the sentence.”

Consequently, the court of appeals found the trial court’s sentencing to be invalid and remanded it back to the trial court for setencing again in accordance to M.C.L. 625(9)(c).

Click here to read the entire opinion.

On September 18, 2007, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued an unpublished opinion in the case People v. Maclean, upholding a jury conviction for operating while intoxicated and causing death. One of the defendant’s principal arguments on appeal was the trial court erred by allowing admission of the blood alcohol test result, claiming there was insufficient testimony regarding the chain of custody.

The Michigan Court of Appeals disagreed and held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion allowing the blood alcohol test results:

“At trial, the nurse testified that she drew defendant’s blood upon his arrival at the hospital, pursuant to a doctor’s orders. The blood went into a vacuum-sealed tube, which she labeled and sent to the laboratory for analysis. The medical technologist testified that, according to her analysis, defendant’s blood alcohol level was .28. The results of the blood alcohol test were then admitted into evidence. Defense counsel cross-examined both witnesses regarding their involvement in the collection and testing of defendant’s blood, and, during closing argument, highlighted the deficiencies in the chain of evidence. The record arguably supported a conclusion that the chain of evidence was somewhat deficient regarding the manner in which defendant’s blood sample arrived at the laboratory for testing. However, no evidence was presented, and defendant does not argue, that the blood actually tested did not belong to defendant. Moreover, given the comparable result in the unchallenged police blood-alcohol test, the accuracy of the hospital blood-alcohol test is evident. Any deficiency in the chain of custody or evidence goes toward the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the report containing defendant’s blood alcohol level.”

Click here to read the entire opinion.

On September 18, 2007, the Michigan Court of Appeals issued an unpublished opinion in the case People v. Waldeck, upholding a jury conviction for operating while intoxicated. The defendant was sentenced by the trial court to probation for two years and 183 days to serve in jail. This was the defendant’s third offense.

“Defendant’s conviction arises from a traffic accident that occurred on October 30, 2003. The principal question at trial was whether defendant was intoxicated at the time of the accident. The prosecutor contended that defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident, but defendant asserted that the alcohol in his system was consumed shortly after the accident occurred.”

“A store clerk was the only witness who encountered defendant before defendant claimed to have consumed alcohol after the accident in order to control his breathing. While the clerk testified that he did not notice anything unusual in defendant’s demeanor or smell the odor of intoxicants, he also stated that he had only a brief conversation with defendant and did not pay close attention to him. Defendant appears to contend that because the other witnesses who encountered him after the accident also did not notice anything unusual in his demeanor or smell the odor of intoxicants, Officer Prough was either mistaken or lying. However, one witness testified that he was too far away to form an opinion about whether defendant was intoxicated, Elbert Sylvester had lost his sense of smell, and his wife stated that she was not really paying attention to defendant. Officer Prough noticed the odor and determined that it came from defendant. He stated that defendant’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy and, after having defendant perform several field sobriety tests, concluded that defendant was under the influence of alcohol. The jury was able to view a police video of defendant’s interaction with Officer Prough and performance during the sobriety tests. Defendant’s blood alcohol content was .09 approximately one hour after the accident. Defendant testified regarding his version of events.”

Click here to read the entire opinion.

DUI cases in Michigan begin at the trial court level and can be appealed once as a matter of right to the Michigan Court of Appeals, which can uphold or reverse the trial court’s ruling, or it can remand the case (send it back) to the trial court with instructions. The defendant can then petition the Michigan Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals’ ruling, meaning there is no automatic right to have the Michigan Supreme Court hear an appeal. Finally, the highest court that can review a Michigan DUI case is the United States Supreme Court, though again, the defendant must first petition the Court to hear the appeal. However, the U.S. Supreme Court will only review a case in limited circumstances — final judgments that involve a question of federal statutory or constitutional law. Most DUI cases that are appealed will not go any further than the Court of Appeals.