Tag Archives: dui in king county

Should there be alternatives for pretrial ignition interlock conditions in DUI cases?

If you have been arrested for a DUI in the Seattle area then you face the possibility of a Judge imposing pretrial conditions at your arraignment.  This means the Judge has the authority to require a defendant to follow certain conditions while the case is pending.  Typically on DUI cases this involves no drinking and driving, no driving without a valid license and insurance, and no refusal of a breath test.  However in some cases a Judge can require a defendant to post bail or install an ignition interlock device until there is a resolution in the DUI.

In Seattle for example if you have a DUI arraignment in the Seattle Municipal Court then there is probably a very good chance you might be required to install an ignition interlock device even on a first offense DUI.  This is just how they roll down there nowadays.  If you don’t have a car, or the means to get an ignition interlock device installed then you can sign a declaration under penalty of perjury that you will not drive a motor vehicle.  If you get caught driving a motor vehicle after you have signed this declaration then chances are you will go to jail unless you can come up with a significant bail amount.

I recently read an article in the Seattle Times about this very issue.  The gist of the article was how Washington State lawmakers are proposing a bill that would allow drivers facing DUI charges to avoid a mandatory pretrial condition of ignition interlock by swearing they won’t drive.  It sounds like this is modeled after what the Seattle Municipal Court has been doing for years.

To be honest I’m surprised something like this is being proposed, however I think it is an excellent idea and I hope it passes.  Often times people cannot come up with the money for an ignition interlock device or they don’t own a car.  In those situations Prosecutors will ask the Judge to have the driver sit in jail while the case is going on or make them come up with the money for electronic home monitoring.  As a practicing Seattle DUI Attorney I think these current alternative options are just ludicrous.

Look I get it.  There really is no way to ensure a person is not going to drive again by signing a declaration.  In today’s day and age it is fairly easy to get your hands on a car.  Either from a friend, family member, etc.  But there has to be an alternative options for those individuals that cannot get an ignition interlock device.  Jail is too expensive for the tax payers, and too over populated with more serious offenses.  I hope this bill is considered to provide alternative options for individuals in this situation.

If you’re interested in reading the article and checking out the proposed bill, here you go.

_
About the author:  Matthew Leyba is a DUI Attorney in Seattle, WA.  He is the firm owner of Leyba Defense PLLC, a criminal defense law firm focusing on DUI defense in the Puget Sound area.

Is it possible to get a DUI on a Washington State ferry?

If you live in Western Washington than chances are you have taken a ferry in your life.  Whether you live on one of the islands and you needed to come to Seattle, or you just want to take a day trip.  The Washington State ferry system is incredibly convenient and can be like a mini vacation.  Which brings me to the question I posed in the title, “Can you get a DUI on a Washington State ferry?”

There are probably two instances when they may come up.  Either an individual drives onto the ferry and they have consumed alcohol or a driver decides to have a few drinks while on the ferry and then gets into their car when it ports.  Can either one of these scenarios result in a DUI arrest?  The answer is absolutely yes it can.

How is that possibly you ask?  The Ferry is on water, doesn’t a DUI have to occur on a roadway.  Yes, typically a DUI does occur on a roadway.  However the Prosecution can get around the two scenarios I provided above fairly easily in order to provide a DUI or DUI related offense.

For example let’s say one of the traffic control workers directing traffic onto the ferry witnesses some poor driving indicative of alcohol impairment.  The traffic controller witnesses this driving as the vehicle is boarding the ferry.  Simply seeing the driver on the road as the vehicle boards the ferry would be enough to prove the driving occurred on a road.

Secondly let’s say a driver gets onto the ferry.  While the ferry is on the water they head up to the top deck and have a couple of drinks.  A ferry worker observes the driver pounding a few too many beers, stumbling around, and gets inside their vehicle.  The ferry worker could contact the State patrol and have the driver contacted as soon as the ferry docks.  Arguably this would be enough evidence for that driver to be arrested for DUI/Physical control simply for sitting in the vehicle and being in physical control if it meaning they had the capability to operate the vehicle.

So what happens if a ferry worker doesn’t see the vehicle board the ferry.  But after the vehicle is on the ferry as the driver is being directed where to park signs of impairment is exhibited (i.e., a collision occurs). Could this person be arrested for a DUI?  After all these observations were made on the water not a an actual roadway.  Unfortunately the Washington State legislature is determined that all State ferry routes are part of the highway system under RCW 47.39.020.  So a Prosecutor could argue under that statute this driving occurred under the highway system and therefore a DUI can occur.

Now these are a just a few examples I could think of off the top of my head for purposes of this blog post.  It doesn’t mean a driver would be convicted of a DUI or there aren’t any legal defenses that could be asserted such a safely off the roadway, etc.  If you find yourself in one of the above scenarios it would be best to contact an experienced DUI attorney for advice.

_
About the author:  Matthew Leyba is a Seattle DUI Attorney.  He has been named one of the top 40 under 40 criminal defense lawyers in Washington State by the American Society of Legal Scholars.  Additionally he has been repeatedly named a Rising Star in the area of DUI Defense by the Seattle Met Magazine, an honor less than 2.5% of all lawyers receive.

What happens if you refuse the breath test following a DUI arrest

thumb.php_-300x233A few days ago I blogged about what happens if a person arrested for a DUI in Washington State takes the breath test at the police station. To follow up on that. I now answer the question what happens if you refuse to take the breath test following a DUI arrest. In my opinion as a DUI Attorney in Seattle some good will happen, and some bad will happen.  So here you go.

If you get arrested for DUI first and foremost ask to speak with a lawyer immediately. The law is constantly in flux regarding DUI cases here in Washington State.  And this can vary from County to County to Court to Court. For example last fall if you refused the breath test following a DUI arrest in King County there was probably a good chance evidence of that refusal could have been thrown out in Court. A DUI Attorney would have known than and could have advised the driver arrested for DUI of that particular issue.

So what happens if you refuse the breath test. First you face a minimum of a 1 year drivers license suspension or loss of privilege to drive in WA by the Department of Licensing. Just like if you take the breath test and you’re over the legal limit. If you refuse to take the breath test then you face an administrative action from the DOL. Regardless of what your actual alcohol level was.

Secondly you face a minimum of a 2 year drivers license suspension or loss of privilege to drive in WA if you actually get convicted of the DUI or Physical Control criminal case. This particular suspension can vary depending on whether this is a first offense DUI or not.  For example if you have prior DUI offense and you refuse the breath test on the new DUI and you get convicted then you face a 2 year license suspension.

Additionally if you refuse the breath test and end up going to trial to fight the DUI then in some cases the Prosecutor could use that refusal against you. The theory behind this is the driver would not have refused the breath test if they didn’t believe they were going to be above the legal limit. It can be a very effective argument during trial and it makes jurors really think.

Lastly if you decline the breath test then you might face a mandatory blood draw at a hospital.  For example let’s say you refuse the breath test following the DUI arrest. The police officer then contacts a Judge.  Explains why they believe you’re under the influence, and that you declined the breath test. If the Judge grants a search warrant then the police officer can drive you to the nearest hospital and force a need in your arm to draw blood.

Obviously this is not good because on one hand the DUI still has that refusal element to it when it comes to a license suspension, and being used in a criminal trial. But the police now have actual blood test results to use as the scientific evidence.  Nowadays refusing a breath test in King County and in particular Seattle means most likely the police officer is going to get a warrant for the blood test.  So beware.

About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI lawyer in Seattle, WA.  He is rated a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com, and has been repeatedly named a Rising Star in the area of DUI Defense by the Seattle Met Magazine’s annual Best Lawyers in WA publication.

Can hiring a good DUI Attorney ever backfire?

Recently I was in a local court in King County when I happened to catch the tail end of a heated conversation between a fellow Seattle DUI Attorney (who is well respected among defense attorneys) and a Prosecutor. Afterwards I was just shooting the bull with this particular Prosecutor when they told me something interesting. They told me everybody in their office dislikes that DUI Attorney and they will never give any of their clients a break because of it.

Now this got me thinking. Here is a DUI Attorney who has a very good reputation among the defense bar. However because of how that Attorney practices law and how they deal with Prosecutors all of that Attorney’s clients will suffer because of it. It’s an unfortunate set of circumstances but that particular DUI Lawyer has nobody to blame but themselves.

So where does that leave their clients. They have no idea this particular DUI Defense Lawyer has pissed off an entire office and in the end they will suffer. So if you’re looking for a DUI lawyer how do you go about making sure the lawyer you hire will not backfire due to their reputation.

Personally I don’t know how a client would figure that out. Probably the easiest way to determine the relationship between a Prosecutor and a DUI Attorney is to flat out ask. Although I’m not sure a defense attorney would admit to having a strained relationship with a particular Prosecutor. So how do you find out.

The best way I could think of would be to look at two things: How many trials is the DUI Lawyer doing compared to the number of favorable plea deals they are getting. For example if you look at 10 cases and the DUI Attorney has gotten reduced charges on 7 or 8 and went to trial on the remaining that is a pretty good record. However if they go to trial on 7 or 8 and only gotten plea deals on 2 or 3. That should tell you something.

Now don’t get me wrong. If a DUI lawyer is going to trial 7 or 8 times out of 10. That is really commendable. That means the lawyer is not just pleading people guilty. However the question to ask is why are they going to trial so much, how come they can’t get their clients deals. Have they ruined their relationship with Prosecutors to the point they get “blacklisted?” In the case of the DUI Attorney I described above it sounds like that is whats happening to them and subsequently it is unfairly affecting their clients. And that’s a shame.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI Lawyer in Seattle. He has been repeatedly named a Rising Star in the field of DUI Defense by the Seattle Met Magazine, an honor only 2.5% of all Lawyers receive. Additionally he is rated a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com and listed as a Superb DUI Lawyer.

State v. Mecham – what does this mean for DUI cases in WA

A few days ago the Division One Court of Appeals in WA State recently came down with a ruling that was not favorable to defendants facing a DUI charge in WA. In my opinion this ruling will result in one more unfair advantage Prosecutors will have at their disposal to use in the conviction of people charged with DUI. I anticipate this being appealed to the State Supreme Court, but as of now the refusal of field sobriety testing can be used to show a consciousness of guilt.

So what does that exactly mean? A consciousness of guilt. This is not novel or new as DUI Defense Attorneys have been dealing with this with theory in regards to breath and blood testing. Essentially when it came to the refusal of breath or blood testing during a trial a Prosecutor could argue to a jury that the reason a defendant declined a breath or blood test was because they had a “guilty conscious” or in other words they knew their blood alcohol level was going to be higher than the legal limit so they declined that test because they were going to fail.

Now prior to this recent ruling this argument could only be made when it came to breath or blood tests. So if a person declined the field sobriety tests during a DUI investigation although that evidence of the refusal could be admitted it was not allowed to show the “consciousness of guilt” theory. In other words the Prosecutor couldn’t argue the driver declined the field sobriety tests because they knew they were going to fail. But now that is not the case and a Prosecutor can argue they didn’t take the test because they knew they were guilty.

Here is my issue with this ruling. Although introducing “consciousness of guilt” on a breath or blood test refusal sucks, I kind of get it. Heck when a driver in WA gets their drivers license there is an implied consent that they will take the test and if they don’t that refusal will be used against them in trial. The driver is informed of this prior to making that decision and they make that decision knowing and intelligently based on that understanding.

However when it comes to field sobriety testing it is completely voluntary. Heck their admissibility depends on the tests being taking voluntarily. And from what I hear the police are not going to be advising people the refusal of these tests can be used against them in a criminal trial. So now if a person exercises their right to decline these voluntary tests and they go to trial. The Prosecutor can turn around and say they declined these tests despite being voluntary because they were drunk and they knew they would fail. I think this is a flawed reasoning and it should be interesting to see what happens at the Supreme Court level.

So what is my advice as a Seattle DUI Attorney? If you’re being investigated for a DUI in WA and the investigating officer asks you to take these field sobriety tests. You should still politely decline them. Although what I would suggest is perhaps changing how you do that.

I have always preached that prior to answering any questions or doing any tests you inform the investigating officer you wish to speak with an attorney prior. 99.9% of the time they will say you’re not under arrest and they are not going to put you in contact with an attorney. So just inform the Officer that you don’t feel comfortable doing anything without first speaking with a lawyer. At least this way if you end up in a trial and the Prosecutor tries to play the “consciousness of guilt” card it may not have the same effect.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI Lawyer in Seattle, WA. He is rated as a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com when it comes to DUI Defense. He has also been repeatedly named a Rising Star in the field of DUI Defense by the Seattle Met Magazine, an honor only 2.5% of all lawyers receive.

Senate panel weighs new felony DUI bill in Washington State

A Senate panel is weighing a measure that would make it a felony charge to drive under the influence when the driver has three prior offenses within 10 years. The Senate Law & Justice heard testimony on Senate Bill 6090 on Monday, and will likely take a vote on it in the coming days.

Under the existing law, a DUI is a felony only if there are four or more prior offenses within 10 years. Last year the idea was originally proposed but eventually was cut due to the estimated cost. However the same work group is at it again and Governor Inslee as well as some other higher ups have put their full weight behind it again.

I’m really torn about how I feel about this. As a Seattle DUI Attorney this is something that will directly affect my practice and my clients. Although 99% of my clients have no criminal history when they get arrested for a DUI in the King County area. So it’s not like the majority of people will feel the full brunt of this change if it were to occur.

However when you look at the difference in penalties from a gross misdemeanor to a felony this proposed change is kind of a big deal. Instead of 90 days in jail a defendant would be facing prison time in addition to all the collateral consequences that comes with a felony conviction.

I suspect if the budget is better this year than we will see this change. Despite the horrendous vehicular homicide and vehicular assault cases 2013 had. They didn’t seem to stop as the year went on. And it seems like every time you watch the news or read the paper another repeat DUI offender has gotten arrested in Seattle.

In fact I saw a tweet from the WSP that there were something like 16 people arrested for DUI in King County following the Seahawks game. Which was more than double what happened the past 2 weeks combined. The proponents of this bill will just continue to point to these numbers and DUI arrests in Seattle to support their position. And unfortunately for the opponents of this bill there is not a lot to say other than pointing out the cost and the increase in prison population for these nonviolent offenders.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI Lawyer in the Seattle Bellevue area of Western Washington. His has been rated a 10/10 Superb Seattle DUI Lawyer by Avvo.com. He was also nominated as a Rising Star by the Seattle Met Magazine in the field of DUI Defense, an honor less than 2.5% of all Attorneys receive.