Articles Posted in DWI Defense Lawyer

Manejar un vehículo de motor bajo los efectos de bebidas embriagantes

¿Se enfrenta usted a una alegación de conducir un vehículo en estado de embriaguez? Existen varios detalles que usted debe saber sobre las penalidades y multas de un DWI.  ¡De ser arrestado por un DWI se enfrenta a la suspensión de su licencia de conducir, pero der ser encontrado culpable de manejar bajo efectos embriagantes, usted podría enfrentarse hasta 10 anos de prisión! 

¿Enfrentarse a tal acusación crea miedo, no? 

If my license is suspended for DWI, can I still drive to work? 

If you are facing a charge for DWI and your license is suspended, you may be eligible for what is known as an Occupational Driver’s License or ODL for short. This type of license allows a person to drive a non-commercial vehicle if their license is suspended, revoked, or denied because of DWI. 

Eligibility. 

I meet a lot of people during consults. A lot of people who are going through the trauma of being arrested for a felony DWI case. They are ashamed, scared, sad, angry at themselves, and now facing the possibility of prison time. Whether it’s their 3rd, 4th, or 5th DWI, or a DWI with child, or an intoxication assault, they are all scared and wondering what to do next. I tell these potential clients to seek help immediately for possible substance abuse. I recommend they complete the most intense rehabilitation program that they can, and seek the advice of their PCP as well. Why?

You’ve got time before we go to court, you need to use it

We usually have a lot of time between a felony DWI arrest and going to court. Felony DWI cases almost always go before the grand jury before they are filed. You can waive a grand jury, but it’s rare. In Kaufman County it’s not uncommon for 4-6 months to pass between an arrest for felony DWI and an indictment. The State has to wait on blood results from the lab, and that can take a few months. If there is an accident, then they may need to gather medical records and the accident reconstruction can take time. Which means my client, who is looking at prison time since it’s a felony, can use their time to start treatment and rehab now.

Texans love guns. We love booze. We live in a state with crappy public transportation. The result? A lot of people with concealed handgun licenses (CHL) get arrested for DWI in Texas. And a lot of people who want to get a CHL have a DWI conviction on their record.

The answer is no, you can’t get a CHL after a DWI conviction, at least for a while.

A misdemeanor DWI conviction will disqualify you from getting a CHL for a period of 5 years. Don’t take my word for it. Here is a DPS statement on the subject

If charged with an offense and want to hire an attorney but can’t afford one you may qualify for a court appointed attorney.

In some situations, you may not be happy with the court appointed attorney. But, it is unlikely that the court will appoint someone else. Unless you want to hire your own attorney, you are pretty much stuck with whoever the court appoints.

What if the attorney isn’t telling me what I want to hear?

Good news in the world of DWI’s has emerged from the 85th Texas Legislature. If certain criteria are met, now, it may be possible to file a petition for non-disclosure on DWI convictions. Texas House Bill 3016, Government Code 411.0731, defines the procedure and criteria. Section 411.0716(a) explains that this new act will apply to DWI’s committed before, on, or after September 1, 2017.

Does my DWI conviction qualify?

This new section will only apply to a person who has successfully completed a term of community supervision. This means that your community supervision was not revoked, you successfully served any jail time given and you paid all court costs, fines, and any other restitution imposed as part of the conviction.

Potential Rockwall DWI clients are usually surprised to learn that they havd the right to refuse to participate in their DWI investigation. All you are required to do is provide your license and insurance. If you’ve been drinking at the Harbor and get pulled over you’re going to jail anyway. It’s just going to happen. Not getting arrested isn’t the goal, the goal is to not give the State fake junk science evidence (field balancing tests) they will use to convict of DWI (and DWI is the most expensive misdemeanor conviction in Texas).

That’s right, in Texas you do not have to answer any questions, including the most common DWI questions such as

– where you are going

One reason we needed the Michael Morton Act (which improved on our State’s horrible discovery rules in criminal cases) is that the State was hiding evidence which convicted innocent people. One problem with the Michael Morton Act, and the prior discovery rules is that there is no penalty if the State fails to turn over evidence, and then chooses to surprise the defense at trial with secret evidence. Let’s contrast this situation to the standard that we hold defendants, in which they are penalized at every stage of a proceeding for the slightest error. Defendant has work and misses a court date? Warrant! Defendant objects to the wrong subarticle of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that issue is waived on appeal! They created a new board certification for criminal appeals in Texas. But you don’t have to be an appellate genius to guess the outcome of any criminal appeal. 95% of the time whatever violations of the evidence rules, code of criminal procedure, or Constitution will be overlooked if the court of appeals can uphold a conviction. That’s the purpose of appellate courts in Texas, to uphold criminal convictions, and to reverse judgments for damages against Defendants in civil cases.

This leads me to our case of the day- Laura Sanders vs State of Texas

What happened?

Here’s a story from WFAA about problems with the DPD field sobriety testing program. Apparently too many officers were failing, and it’s taken on a racial angle of sorts.

Dallas police sobriety testing training practices called into question | wfaa.com Dallas – Fort Worth.

Here’s what you to know.

If there is one thing law enforcement hates, it’s the 4th Amendment’s requirement to get a warrant before searching. The reason? Warrants require an officer to have probable cause, and to explain said probable cause (in writing) before getting what they want (searching your house, stealing your blood etc). Warrants provide some degree of accountability for LEO, a very minor check on the almost limitless power of the State. Today let’s talk about searching your body, specifically your veins. In our DWI police state your blood is merely another piece of evidence for the State to gather, and they will hold you down GITMO style to do so.

The Supreme Court recently decided a case called McNeely vs. Missouri, which upheld the controversial position that holding down a DWI suspect and taking his blood without consent is a search, and a warrant is required unless there is some kind of emergency. I say this in controversial because a) prosecutors and law enforcement hate this idea and b) the Constitution usually doesn’t apply to DWI suspects.

So the Supreme Court rules on this blood search issue and now it’s up to Texas’ appellate courts to uphold this Constitutional safeguard. The problem is our appellate courts are largely pro-conviction police-state judicial activists who want the Government to win on appeal. Don’t believe me, today’s case of the day is Reeder Vs State from the Texarkana Court of Appeals.

Contact Information