DUI Washington Blog

I ran across a DUI thread on a travel site recently. In it, one of the guests wrote that they were quite concerned about filling out a visa application to China. Should they admit on the application that they had a criminal record because they had been convicted of a DUI?

Some of the participants on the forum advised dishonesty because China doesn’t have the same attitude toward DUI as some countries such as Canada do. Others claimed it didn’t matter because China doesn’t do a criminal background check when your apply for a visitor’s visa. One went so far as to suggest that anyone who was honest belonged to a minority group.

All such advice is ill advice. First, it is important to contact an attorney with experience in dealing with the country and their immigration policies.  In the past, we have found that honesty when dealing with a foreign country is always the best policy. We side with the guest who stated that he/she admitted to the two DUIs on record and included a brief explanation of what had happened. When the visa is approved, you can know that you have no worries that the discovery that you entered false information on your application will come back to cause problems in the future.

You never know where a first visit to a foreign country may lead. The guest with the two DUIs wanted to teach English in China for a year. China issued the visa, despite her DUIs.

While complete honesty about DUIs in your record could result in the denial of a travel visa to some countries, we maintain that honesty is the best policy. Of course, it is best when you enlist the aid of a DUI attorney as soon as possible after you are stopped for a suspected DUI. In many cases, you may be able to avoid a DUI record entirely.

Residents of Washington, especially the Seattle area may turn to Burg Criminal Defense for honest and compassionate DUI attorney services.

RCW 46.61.140 informs Washingtonians that there are rules to observe when a roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes. The law informs us that a vehicle needs to remain “as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane” and only move out of that lane when the driver has determined that it is safe to do so.

This is interesting wording. It suggests that the Washington State legislature knows that there are road conditions that will make it impossible for a driver to always keep his or her vehicle entirely within a single lane. This was highlighted a few years ago in the case of State v. Prado. Prado had crossed over a lane divider by the width of two tires on a highway off ramp. He was pulled over and arrested.

Washington State’s Court of Appeals  concluded that in Prado’s case, a brief incursion over the lane line did not justify the officer pulling him over for a traffic stop. The Court found that a momentary lapse is not a legitimate basis for a traffic stop.

At the same time, if the officer had noted other traffic violations at the same time or behavior suggesting that the driver was impaired, this would have been a legitimate reason for a traffic stop.

Repeated evidence of weaving back and forth within the single lane may still be considered sufficient reason for an officer to stop a vehicle, but if you briefly cross outside your own lane of travel, Washington’s Court of Appeals has ruled that an officer cannot use this as the sole reason for pulling you over.

If you suspect that you have been wrongfully pulled over for violation of Washington’s lane travel statute, contact an experienced DUI attorney as soon as possible. The attorneys at Burg Criminal Defense have the experience you need to represent you if you are facing a DUI charge.

A review of recent DUI news highlights one of the reasons it is so important to hire a DUI attorney when you are charged with a DUI. Getting charged with a DUI can close the doors to employment as a Forsyth, GA man learned. When he applied for an opening in the City of Macon Fire Department, he found that he needed a driver’s license for the position which included driving the fire truck and ambulances for the EMT unit.

The Decision to Hire a DUI Attorney Saved Job.

He had recently been charged with a DUI which would have stripped him of his driving privileges upon conviction of the charge. Fortunately, he had hired a DUI attorney to represent him. After negotiations with the D.A.’s office, his DUI attorney was able to get his charges reduced to reckless driving. He was able to fill the opening and now has a job.

Paying for a DUI attorney was a wise investment in his future. At Burg Criminal Defense, we invest in our client’s futures by seeking the best possible outcome. We don’t see DUI as proof that our clients are bad people who deserve anything the Courts can throw at them. Rather, we are here to facilitate good people getting past their DUI and getting on with productive lives.

There is hope after a DUI. Burg Criminal Defense is here to help our clients experience that hope.

An increasing number of states are looking at enhanced patrols as a means of reducing traffic accidents. Within Washington State, these patrols are often called Seatbelt Patrols. Since 2006, Washington State Patrol and other law enforcement entities routinely conduct nighttime patrols at exits leaving state highways and interstate freeways.

Catching DUI drivers not reason for nighttime seatbelt patrols

At least that is what Washington State Patrol claims. State Patrol gives a specific reason for nighttime enforcement efforts. Statistics show that when vehicle accidents happen at night the death rate is at least four times higher than the daytime rate. State patrol has discovered something else as well—a nighttime unbuckled motorist is more likely to have a criminal record, more likely to have traffic violations, and more likely to caught for a DUI. Those nighttime seatbelt patrols allow police officers to pull you over for failure to wear a seatbelt.

Be on your guard. Not only can you be ticketed for failure to wear your seatbelt, you could also be asked to perform sobriety tests if an officer suspects that you are driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs. If you are asked to perform one of these tests, or to take a breathalyzer test, ask to speak with an attorney first. A DUI attorney will advise you to not take any of these tests, except for the breath test once you reach the police station (which we typically suggest that people take). If the police officer tells you that your license could be revoked, or other frightening things, calmly let him/her know that you are following the advice of your DUI attorney. This is the best way to retain all of your rights.

Burg Criminal Defense’s DUI attorneys have many years experience with DUI law. Our practice is centered primarily in the greater Seattle metropolitan area, though we are licensed to practice law anywhere in the state of Washington.

DUI Attorney Advises Washington ILL Holders to Not Take Risk Renting Car Without Ignition Interlock.

A client of ours is required to have an ignition interlock license in Washington State. He is a resident of Washington State, but business travels take him around the country.  He recently asked this question:  Can I rent a car out of Washington State if I have an ignition interlock license issued by the State of Washington? Unfortunately, the answer is complicated, but worth sharing.  The current law in Washington State, RCW 46.20.720(3), in effect to December 31, 2010, reads as follows:

(3) The department shall require that, after any applicable period of suspension, revocation, or denial of driving privileges, a person may drive only a motor vehicle equipped with a functioning ignition interlock device if the person is convicted of an alcohol-related violation of RCW 46.61.502 or 46.61.504 or an equivalent local ordinance.

The department may waive the requirement for the use of such a device if it concludes that such devices are not reasonably available in the local area. The device is not necessary on vehicles owned by a person’s employer and driven as a requirement of employment during working hours. The person must provide the department with a declaration pursuant to RCW 9A.72.085 from his or her employer stating that the person’s employment requires the person to operate a vehicle owned by the employer during working hours.

Under this current law, I don’t think there is any exception for rental vehicles driven out of state for work.  It is my legal opinion that driving a rental car without an IID on it would be a violation of the law.  Some attorneys I know have argued that it is not a violation since it would fall under the work exception.  Remember, even the work exception requires a declaration from the employer saying that the vehicle is being driven for work.

The current law was amended in the last legislative session. SSHB2742 now specifically excludes having an ignition interlock system on vehicles rented for work.  This new law will take effect on January 1, 2011.   The language of this bill is:

… an ignition interlock device is not necessary on vehicles owned, leased, or rented by a person’s employer and on those vehicles whose care and/or maintenance is the temporary responsibility of the employer, and driven at the direction of a person’s employer as a requirement of employment during working hours. The person must provide the department with a declaration pursuant to RCW 9A.72.085 from his or her employer stating that the person’s employment requires the person to operate a vehicle owned by the employer or other persons during working hours.

When this law takes effect on January 1, 2011, people will be able to rent cars without an IID on them.

It is an entirely different question as to whether or not a rental company will rent a vehicle to someone with an ignition interlock license.  Again, under Washington State law anyone with an ignition interlock license can rent a vehicle beginning January 1, 2011.  However, because rental companies are private companies, each rental company has the right to determine whether or not to actually allow you to rent a vehicle.  I have not had a client tell me that they were unable to rent a car with an ignition interlock license, even under the current law (nor have I had a client tell me they could).    However, I just had a client who was turned down by Enterprise because she had a hole in her license (even though she had not yet been suspended).

As you know, the clerks and managers at the front desk of rental car companies all act differently. Car rental companies may have different policies at different branches. Without calling the specific branch, there is no way to tell whether your ignition interlock license will create difficulties or not.

When you call the car rental company, be sure to ask for the branch manager. Get the name and record the time of your call. This will help you if you find yourself facing an uncertain employee when the manager has stepped out.

Family Loyalty Lands Three Month Jail Sentence

Just a few days ago, a Sarasota, Florida man was sentenced to three months in jail for refusing to testify that his brother had been the driver in a DUI accident that resulted in the death of one of the passengers in the Ford Pickup truck he had allegedly been driving. He had already spent 10 days in jail for contempt of court.

The judge was not swayed by the testimony of numerous witnesses that the Sarasota man did not deserve to be sentenced for doing what he felt was right. One of the witnesses included the father of the man who died in the crash. She commended the man for his convictions and sentenced him to jail time anyway.

The Court is pressuring the man to speak against his brother because unless he does so, the state prosecutor cannot bring manslaughter charges. The state has to prove that the man who had BAC blood levels nearly 3 times than allowed by Florida law was the actual driver of the wrecked vehicle. Without his brother’s testimony, the state’s case is destroyed.

Another passenger in the truck at the time of the accident reports that he doesn’t remember who was driving. All he knows is that a deer jumped in front of the pick-up, and the driver lost control swerving to avoid it. The question remains, “Who was the driver?”

Washington State DUI Laws—Refusing to testify can mean jail time.

The law in Washington is similar. You can serve jail time for refusing to testify. And the prosecution must prove the identity of the driver in order to successfully prosecute a DUI manslaughter charge. If there is any question as to who the driver was, the DUI attorneys at the Law Offices of Geoffrey Burg will work to protect the rights of our clients.  We are dedicated to a vigorous defense of our client’s constitutional rights.  We do everything within the law and our ability to make sure that our clients get the best possible outcome for their DUI charges.  It is for this reason that we regularly speak at seminars, work with the legislature, and keep abreast of all changes in the law.

Burg Criminal Defense is often asked whether you can refuse to take field sobriety tests without it being used against you in court.   Yes, you definitely can – however, you must do this correctly and the correct way to do it is by asking for an attorney, not to just say that you don’t want to do the tests.  In the State of Washington, roadside sobriety tests are voluntary. This means you do have the right to decline taking them.

Speak with a DUI Attorney Instead of Performing Field Sobriety Tests

Instead of performing the field sobriety tests, it is better to ask to speak with a DUI attorney.  The police officer should then cease  all questioning. You can expect an arrest to follow. Then arrest you will be provided with an attorney.   The attorney will advise you not to perform the tests, reducing the ability of the prosecution to use the tests against you. You will be able to say that your attorney advised you not to take the DUI field sobriety tests. When a private attorney isn’t available, you should speak to a public defender.

However, many people don’t know this until after they have been arrested.  Unfortunately, if you fail to perform well on a field sobriety, this could be used against you. You may be reading this blog post because you already performed poorly on a Washington DUI roadside sobriety test. You didn’t know that it was your legal right to ask for an attorney.  Not to worry. This is very common and we can still help you if poor test performance is working against you.

Field sobriety exercises can be unreliable for many reasons.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) believes they have standardized these tests, but how do you standardize a test when so many variables can exist—different weights, varying athletic abilities, assorted medical conditions and diverse ages? These tests assume everyone can perform well when sober, which can be unfair.  They also vary in that not all officers administer the tests in the proper way.  If the officer did not follow the NHTSA standards than we can show that the tests are not valid.

Testing conditions are another issue with field sobriety tests.  Being pulled over on suspicion of a Washington DUI is an upsetting event for anyone. The resulting anxiety and nervousness can be misinterpreted as impairment.  Fatigue can impact performance on a roadside test as can low blood sugar. Traffic passing too close on the roadway can cause anxiety. The shoulder at the side of the road is often tilted, making standing on one leg or walking a straight line more difficult for most people. If it is raining, the road or sidewalk is often slippery. Most people aren’t familiar with the sobriety tests which can produce unreliable results.

NHTSA considers the horizontal gaze nystagmus or HGN test one of the most accurate field sobriety tests available for proving a Washington DUI. Prosecutors would like juries to believe that it is very accurate. It isn’t quite as perfect as they would like you to think. If lighting is poor, it affects an officer’s ability to conduct the test accurately. HGN can also occur for reasons that are not connected to alcohol consumption.

DUI Attorneys Offer Hope.

All of these things can invalidate roadside DUI evaluations based on field sobriety tests. As far as we are concerned  there is hope for everyone we meet with.  Over the years we have seen so many Washington State DUI cases resolved in ways that at first blush did not look possible.  So, please do not give up hope about your case.  We may be able to help you resolve it in a way you never thought possible.

In conclusion, if you have been stopped for an infraction in Washington State and it appears that the officer is doing a DUI investigation, the very best thing to do is to ask for an attorney and keep your mouth shut.  You may be arrested, but you will have helped yourself by maintaining all of your constitutional and state rights.

After a DUI Arrest, Towing is Common Practice

If you are arrested for a DUI, most police officers will order a tow truck to haul your car to the police impound. It’s standard practice to protect the city from liability if your car is vandalized or otherwise damaged while you are in custody.  Many of the officers will also do this to make sure that if they release you after processing you for the DUI that you do not drive later that night. Believe it or not, there are cases of people accused of DUI going back and driving their car after being processed for their DUI.  They then go and get a second DUI all within a few hours of the first.

You can ask the officer if your car can be left in a safe and legal location. If the office agrees, it will save you the cost of towing fees. Expect to sign a liability release for the privilege, but also realize that you are taking a risk. That is why the release is required.

Unless you know you are leaving your car in a safe place or that you have someone who can pick the car up promptly, paying for a tow could end up costing far less than the cost of a stolen or stripped vehicle.

Cleared of the DUI charge? Can You Recover the Towing Fees?

You may be wondering if you can recover those towing charges if you are cleared of the DUI charge. Getting charges dismissed does not automatically entitle you to receiving a reimbursement of the towing fees.  In fact, in all the years we have represented people accused of DUIs, we have never once seen of or heard of a person recovering towing fees.  Unfortunately, even if you are found not guilty or the case is dismissed it is unlikely that you will recover tow fees.

Recovering Your Car After a DUI

You will want to recover your car as soon as possible. Not only do you pay towing fees, you also pay storage fees when a car is impounded. These fees can vary depending on where your car is towed to. Some lots cost up to $24 a day plus tow fee.

First, you need to find out where your car is located. Then get a quote on what charges and fines you must pay to get your car released.

Call the impound lot to confirm that your car is actually there. Ask for what you need to bring with you—ID, police paperwork. Confirm what the bill will be up to 5 p.m. of the day you are picking up the car.

Get the cash, certified check or money order to pay your bill. The impound lot will not take checks.

Now, you are ready to arrange for a ride to the impound lot. Pay your bill, and you should be able to drive away with your car.

Recovering your car after a DUI is one of the unpleasant tasks that can be connected with a DUI charge. Attempting to represent yourself when you have been charged with a DUI is one unpleasant task you should never consider taking on. Speak with a Washington licensed DUI attorney if you are arrested for a DUI in Seattle. It can make the difference between a DUI on your record.

Washington state’s Supreme Court declared sobriety checkpoints unconstitutional in 1988, but this hasn’t stopped Gov. Christine Gregoire from asking the state Legislature to authorize police to start setting them up. She is asking residents of the state to trade away some of their driving rights in exchange for what she claims would make them “team players” in Washington’s fight to save lives.  This piece of legislation fortunately died on the way to her desk, preserving some of the rights under Washington’s State Constitution.

U.S. Supreme Court has upheld DUI checkpoints.

Washington state is one of only 11 states that still protects motorists from being pulled over if there is no suspicion of DUI. The state is listed as #40 on a report card Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) issued in November 2009. MADD bases its rankings upon the percent of 2006 driving fatalities that involved a drunk driver in Washington.

Would DUI sobriety checks be good for Washington state?

Sobriety checkpoints do more than deter drunken driving. They become dragnets for catching many other driving offenses. California reports that its checkpoints help them catch everything from unlicensed drivers and cars not covered by insurance to undocumented immigrants. Vehicles are impounded regularly.

But critics in that state point to the fact that more than half of the cars impounded are never claimed. Their owners just can’t afford to do so. Typical costs for towing and impoundment run up to $1200 to $4000.

Hidden DUI agenda?

Impound fees are a lucrative source of income for a city budget. Oxnard, CA raked $600,000 into their general fund in 2009 not including the impound fees generated by using checkpoints. Could city’s like Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia and Vancouver embrace a practice that strips drivers of their right to privacy as a source of income? That DUI checkpoint catches drivers who may be perfectly safe drivers who have forgotten to put their new proof of insurance in the car—a ticket that generate income for the city? We could give more examples, but you get the idea.

Do DUI sobriety checkpoints reduce alcohol related crashes?

Yes, according to MADD. They claim that the Centers for Disease Control reports that the states that use sobriety checkpoints have 20% fewer impaired driving crashes.

Does a reduced DUI accident rate justify loss of liberty?

In our opinion, it does not. Our freedom to travel freely is being challenged from many angles. This is another one. No matter how law-abiding you seek to be, being stopped at a checkpoint can be a nerve-wracking experience. Could your allergies be interpreted as signs of DUI? Could the tremor in your hands caused by your nerves be misinterpreted as well?

Let the police increase their use of DUI emphasis patrols. They have the clear authority to pull over drivers whose driving appears unsafe. Let the rest of us use the roads without fear of being stopped without reason.

Is King County Going To See Them in Court Again?

After over two years of refusing to accept breath-test evidence in King County District Court, the same three judges that first questioned the state crime labs’ ability to report accurate test results are prepared to reconsider allowing breathalyzer test results into evidence. Promises from King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg that problems with the lab have been resolved have prompted this willingness to hear arguments regarding the improvement at the laboratory.

Satterberg claims that the lab has been scrubbed from top to bottom. He expects to proved that the major overhaul has addressed every one of the concerns the judges expressed in 2008.

Prosecutor Wants Reinstatement of Breath Test Results.

With nearly 4,000 DUI cases to prosecute each year in King County, Satterberg has found that the inability to present breathalyzer test results in court has “hamstrung” prosecutors. As far as he is concerned he has not been allowed to get “the best evidence before the jury.”[1]

Have DUI Breath Test Problems Really Been Addressed?

The question we keep asking this: What check and balances are in place to prevent the same problems that resulted in banning DUI breathalyzer tests from occurring again?

Machine-calibration errors occurred. Checks on the machines were performed by individuals who didn’t have the authority to sign off on the checks.

The State Laboratory claims to have implemented a Quality Assurance Program to address inaccuracies and ethical concerns. What the lab cannot address is the fact that these machines are not 100 percent accurate. It is vital that juries understand that breath-test results do have a certain measure of uncertainty.

Easier Convictions Could Lead to Many More Unfair Convictions.

We aren’t surprised that King County’s prosecutor’s office is seeking reinstatement of breath-test results as admissible evidence in DUI cases. It would make the job of securing a DUI conviction easier. But would it make these DUI convictions fair? We remain skeptical. We believe that blood alcohol test results are the most dependable. And until the breath test lab meets all of the most current standards, we’re going to keep on seeking to keep them out of evidence and challenging them if they come into evidence.