If you’re into TMZ, and other gossip sites you undoubtedly will hear of some famous athlete or celebrity get arrested for a DUI.  In many cases it always seems like they just end up pleading guilty as charged to the DUI.  A recent example is Michael Phelps, the greatest Olympian of all time.  Why is that?  Why would someone like Michael Phelps who seemingly has endless resources just decide to plead guilty as charged when if they wanted they could fight the DUI charge.

In my opinion as a DUI Attorney here in Seattle there are typically several reasons why these individuals decide to resolve their case that way.

First it is a PR move.  Think about it.  If you’re famous then any bad publicity or public mistake can damage your reputation.  I’m willing to be these famous people have publicists who say let’s just resolve this rather than drag it on for several years.  Take responsibility and move on.  The sooner it is over with the sooner the public will forget.

Secondly they don’t have the time to fight the case.  If you follow this blog at all then you may be familiar with how long it takes to resolve a DUI.  In Seattle for example if everything goes smoothly then a DUI can last anywhere from 4-6 months.  However if things end up going to trial that process can take up to 2 years.  Obviously with a trial there are many more court dates.  I just finished a DUI trial in Seattle a few weeks ago and I bet my client and myself showed up to Court at least 30 times.  If you’re a celebrity or a professional athlete you simply cannot do that if you’re on the road.

Lastly a DUI conviction may not have the negative impact for a celebrity or athlete.  What will a DUI conviction really do for a movie star.  It’s not like they will lose their license to act in movies or an athlete will lose their license to play football.  A DUI conviction simply does not affect them like it does for the rest of us.  Normal people need their license to drive too and from work or pick up their kids.  Normal people will lose their job with a criminal conviction.  Additionally normal people simply cannot afford the fines and penalties a DUI carries.

Now these are just my opinions.  Obviously everybody’s situation is different.  Whether you’re famous, or a regular guy every DUI case is different.

_
About the author:  Matthew Leyba is a DUI lawyer in Seattle, WA.  He has been named one of the best Seattle DUI Attorneys by the Seattle Met Magazine.  He is also rated a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com, a lawyer rating service.

On December 18, 2014 the Washington State Supreme Court finally issued a ruling in State v. Quaale. I apologize for my late review of this case, as it is very important to DUI case law here in Washington State. But I was out of town. Here is a quick run down of the case and how it impacts Seattle DUI arrests.

The Washington State Court found “the arresting trooper in this DUI (driving under the influence) trial testified that he had “no doubt” that the defendant was impaired based solely on a horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test. We hold that the testimony was an improper opinion on guilt and affirm the Court of Appeals.”

Here are the facts that led to this ruling.

Quaale was charged with attempting to elude a police vehicle and with felony DUI. The DUI was charged as a felony because Quaale had been previously convicted of vehicular homicide while under the influence. RCW 46.61.502(6)(b)(i).

Quaale was tried twice. At the first trial, the jury convicted him of attempting to elude but could not agree on a verdict for the DUI charge. During a second trial on the DUI charge, the State concluded its direct examination of Trooper Stone with the following questions:

Q. In this case, based on the HGN test alone, did you form an opinion based on your training and experience as to whether or not Mr. Quaale’s ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired.

Q. ․ Did you form an opinion?

A. Absolutely. There was no doubt he was impaired.

In closing, the State argued that the odor of intoxicants and Quaale’s erratic driving supported its theory of driving while impaired by alcohol, but the State primarily relied on the HGN test. During its rebuttal, in response to the defense explanation for the odor of intoxicants, the State said, “The horizontal gaze nystagmus is not caused by alcohol that he may have spilled on his clothes; it is what is inside your body. The eyes in this case are more than the window to the soul; they are the window to his intoxication level.”

In its holding the Court held this testimony was improper for two reasons. First, the trooper cast his testimony in a way that gave it an aura of scientific certainty. By testifying that he had “no doubt,” the trooper implied that the HGN test may reveal that someone is intoxicated and “impaired” on alcohol when the test simply shows physical signs consistent with alcohol consumption. Although an officer may testify that the test revealed signs consistent with alcohol consumption, the officer here cast his conclusion in absolute terms and improperly gave the appearance that the HGN test may produce scientifically certain results. Secondly, the trooper testified to a specific level of intoxication when he testified that the defendant was “impaired.” Thus implying the defendant was actually over the legal limit.

As a practicing Seattle DUI Attorney this was an important case that many fellow Attorneys had been watching closely. More and more it seems our constitutional rights are being eroded especially when it comes to DUI related cases. It almost seems some of the higher courts are making DUI related issues more prosecution and law enforcement friendly in an effort to curb drinking and driving. Which in my opinion is a slippery slope. On one hand drinking and driving should not be condoned, but taking away rights and creating more prosecutor friendly issues to increase DUI convictions is not the way to go.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI Lawyer in Seattle. He is the owner of Leyba Defense PLLC, a DUI law firm located in Seattle, WA.

Recently I tried a DUI case in King County. It resulted in a hung jury. Meaning the jury could not reach a unanimous decision whether my client was guilty or not guilty of the DUI. So today I wanted to discuss what a hung jury is and what happens afterwards to the criminal case.

Blacks law dictionary has a pretty good definition of what a hung jury is. It states a hung jury or a deadlocked jury that cannot be the voting threshold agree upon a verdict. In other words some of the jurors want to find the defendant guilty while other jurors believe the defendant is not guilty.

Often times when a jury is deadlocked like this a Judge can do three things:

First call the jury into the courtroom and ask them to continue to deliberate and attempt to reach a verdict. This is usually the first step rather than just accepting the hung jury.

Second the Judge can call the foreman in and ask whether they believe a verdict can be reached. The Judge can also poll each individual juror and ask whether they believe a verdict can be obtained in a reasonable amount of time. There is no set time that is considered reasonable that would be up to the individual juror to decide.

Lastly the Judge can declare a mistrial. A mistrial is just like a sounds. It’s a courtroom trial that has been terminated prior to reaching a verdict. So what happens following a hung jury if the Judge declares a mistrial.

When a mistrial occurs then one of three things can happen:

First the Prosecution can elect retry the case. There is no set precedent on when this happens. It varies depending on the type of case, the Prosecutions policy, etc. The second option is to dismiss the case. The last option is to offer some sort of plea deal that was not offered before just to prevent the case from going to trial again.

As a Seattle DUI defense attorney a hung jury is a pretty good outcome on a DUI case. It means there were some proof problems with the case and the Prosecution ultimately could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant’s guilt. What happens next is anybody’s guess, but nevertheless anytime a client is not found outright guilty is a good day for the client.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a Seattle DUI Attorney. He is the owner of Leyba Defense PLLC a DUI law firm located in downtown Seattle.

I was out of town last week for Thanksgiving so I apologize for the late blog on this. But starting 11/25/14 law enforcement agencies throughout Washington State are conducting DUI emphasis patrols through the beginning of the new year. So please be careful out there and try to avoid having a single drink and then drive during this Holiday season.

As a Seattle DUI Attorney I see people get charged with DUI everyday for simply consuming a single drink and then driving. Heck I say it almost weekly on this blog. There is no such thing as a legal limit anymore in King County, WA when it comes to DUI cases. If you have a single drink and then drive you will get arrested if you get stopped by a law enforcement officer. It is that simple.

The cops don’t care whether your alcohol level if below the legal limit of 0.08. The Prosecutors don’t care whether your alcohol level is below 0.08. And in most cases the Judge’s don’t care either. This is a sign of the times here in King County. So the best advice I can provide as someone who is in court every single day here in Seattle watching these DUI cases happen is very simple. Just don’t take the risk.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI Attorney in Seattle. He has been repeatedly recognized as a Rising Star in the area of DUI defense by both the Seattle Met Magazine, and the Super Lawyers Magazine, an honor less than 2.5% of all lawyers receive. He is also rated a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com, a lawyer rating service.

I recently read an article from the Seattle Times that discusses how a team at Washington State University is in the process of developing a hand held device that would be used to detect Marijuana on a subject’s breath (such a Coug thing to do). The article states the device would use a technique called ion mobility spectrometry to detect THC in someone’s breath. It’s an interesting article if you want to check it out here you go. Here is my take on it.

Now that marijuana is legalized in several states it is inevitable that there will be an increase in marijuana related DUIs in Seattle or anywhere for that matter. And it is only a matter of time before someone creates some kind of device or portable blood test that law enforcement will be able to use during their investigation for a marijuana DUI.

The problem is the device better be able to provide some sort of level of marijuana in the subjects system. And here is where I think this device described in the article misses. The first line of the article states, “A team at Washington State University is working to develop a breath test that could quickly determine whether a driver is under the influence of marijuana.” Well that is incorrect.

What is described about this device and my understanding is it will only be able to detect whether Marijuana is in the subject’s system. That is great and all, but there are other tests that law enforcement can use to determine whether Marijuana is in somebody’s system. For example the odor of marijuana is a pretty good indicator that Marijuana MAY be in the system.

So here is the problem with a device that only can detect whether marijuana may be in the system. It is not illegal to use marijuana and then drive. Marijuana is legal now in Washington State so there is a legal limit. The fact that this device may be able to detect whether there is marijuana in the system is irrelevant in my opinion and wouldn’t be worth the cost to implement this device out in the field.

Unless it can show a level or even whether the marijuana is active then this will never be put to use when investigating DUIs. Again the article misses the point, technically it is not showing whether a driver is under the influence of marijuana when it comes to a DUI, it is only showing it may be in their system. I do not believe that sole observation would meet any sort of acceptable reliability to justify placing a subject under arrest for a marijuana DUI. Again in Washington State is not illegal to use marijuana and drive.

But when that day comes when a device is created that can provide a level then “ching ching,” there will be some serious dough involved for the inventors. Sign me up as an investor!

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a DUI lawyer in Seattle. He is rated a 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com among Seattle DUI Lawyers. He has also been named one of the best DUI lawyers in Seattle by the Seattle Met Magazine, an honor less than 2.5% of all lawyers receive.

If you’re currently facing a DUI charge in King County District Court then there is probably a good chance the case will end up being set for a jury trial. However when that case will actually go to trial is another story. How is that possible you ask? When a case is set for trial aren’t all the parties given a court date with the expectation to appear in court and start the trial. Well not necessarily.

You see here in King County criminal cases in particular DUI cases in Seattle are being set for trial left and right. Due to the increase in cases being set for trial the Courts have become back logged with trials. Any given trial week there can be 15-20 different cases set for trial. With only 2-3 cases actually going forward during that week. So what happens to those other 17+ cases?

Good question. After all isn’t there such a thing as a speedy trial period. You know the right that every defendant has to be brought to trial within a certain period of time. If you’re in custody 60 days, if you’re out of custody 90 days. Well those rights don’t exist in King County anymore.

Due to the number of cases that can’t be brought to trial within their speedy trial period, the Courts are implementing a little known local criminal rule which allows a Judge to continue a case 28 days past the speedy trial expiration as long as they can make up some B.S. excuse about court congestion and how they can’t try the case any place else, and as long as there is no prejudice to the defendant than boom. Good bye speedy trial period and welcome to what is called the “cure” period. Basically some term that Courts can use to keep a criminal case in limbo until they can make time to try the case.

It really is unfortunate and this is a direct cause of the lack of plea bargaining that takes place in King County DUI cases. Prior to all this I remember having a trial set and it actually going on the date it was set for. Imagine that. As a Seattle DUI Attorney actually being able to block out a date in my calendar to be in trial was so nice. The client knew what date exactly to take off work. Heck even the police officer knew exactly when to be in court and for how long.

Well it is not like that anymore and it has become an incredible inconvenient to everyone involved not named the Prosecutor. So if you have a criminal case set for trial in King County, I can tell you with almost 100% certainty that case will not be going to trial on that date chosen. In fact you might have to come to Court another dozen or so times only to be told to come back the following week. It’s like groundhog day.

_
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a Seattle DUI Attorney. He has been recognized as a Rising Star in the area of DUI Defense by the Seattle Met Magazine, an honor less than 2.5% of all attorneys receive in their respective practice area. Additionally he is rated a perfect 10 out of 10 by Avvo.com