Chicago DUI lawyer warns that a felony Chicago DUI does not require an accident

Can I be charged with a felony for a Chicago DUI?

The short answer is yes.  That means you could face a minimum of one year in prison if convicted of a felony DUI. Also, any felony conviction, even if you do not go to prision, will result in a revocation of your driving privileges.  Unfortunately, many people mistakenly believe that you have to have prior DUI's in your background in order to be charged with a felony DUI. 

If that was true, this Chicago Police Officer would not have been charged with Aggravated DUI, a felony in Illinois:

May 12, Chicago, Il

The Chicago police detective accused of driving drunk in a crash on the Dan Ryan Expressway last month that killed two people was indicted today on several felony charges. 

Joseph Frugoli, who has been free after posting $50,000 bail, appeared in the Cook County Criminal Courthouse where Cook County Assistant State's Atty. John Dillon announced his indictment on two counts each of reckless homicide and aggravated DUI, plus one count of leaving the scene of a fatal crash.

In Illinois, you can be charged with a felony DUI even if there isn't an accident and it is your first offense. No, you don't have to have a big tragedy like the Chicago Police Officer where people died.  Nor do you have to have a BAC(Blood/Breath Alcohol Contene) that is two to three times above the legal limit of .08.  In Illinois, you can be charged with a felony DUI for driving without a valid license (it does not matter whether you never had a license, it is suspended, or expired) or driving without insurance.  That's right being charged with a DUI + no license or no insurance is enough to be facing felony charges in Illinois.

Do you think that penalty is too high?

Chicago DUI lawyer wonders if you are worried about DUI's becoming the Scarlet Letter Crime

On the one hand we often think of southern states as those who really don't want the government meddling in the lives and rights of folks, but then you get struck by the reality of just how far southern states want their government to control and label citizens.  Right now, there is legislation pending in Tennessee that would require all convicted DUI offenders to purchase a special "Scarlet Letter" license plate.

Tennessee House Bill 1837

Bill Summary

This bill requires a judge to order a person convicted of DUI to obtain, from the department of revenue, a yellow license plate for the offender's vehicle that bears the words "DUI OFFENDER" in red letters. The license plate would have to remain on the offender's vehicle for:

(1) If the person's driver license is suspended or revoked because of the DUI and the offender is issued a restricted license, the entire period the offender is driving on a restricted license and for one year following the date the offender's driver license is reinstated;
(2) If the offender's license is not suspended or revoked, for one year following the person's conviction.

I wonder what Hester Prynne and little Pearl would think? How could Nathaniel Hawthorne been such a seer of our modern times in the 21st-century?

Chicago DUI lawyer elated over Roxana Saberi's release

Dear Friends,

Last Friday I posted about former Chicago Bear Bob Avellini's DUI acquittal. In that post I mentioned how many of us have been deeply disturbed by Roxana Saberi's lack of a fair trial in Iran.  

I am so happy to report that Roxana Saberi has been released. Sometimes, fairness is universal in all criminal charges and all over the world!

Chicago DUI lawyer answer the question: What happens if I miss my Chicago DUI court date?

Last week, I posted on former Chicago Bear Bob Avellini's acquittal on his DUI charge.  There were comments suggesting that he got off because he used to play for the Chicago Bears. I beg to differ, just look what happened to former Chicago Bear Todd Sauerbrun:

May 1, Niles, IL

Todd Sauerbrun, a former punter for the Chicago Bears, was arrested at his home in Niles on April 30, 2009, on a warrant for missing a court hearing on his 2008 DUI arrest. Sauerbrun was arrested by Cook County sheriff's police at about 7:15 p.m. and was released after posting $295 cash bond, said sheriff's spokesman Steve Patterson.

Last Friday afternoon, I watched two different judges order defendants into custody for missing their court dates. What separates those defendants from Todd Sauerbrun? They came to court in an attempt to rectify the matter by asking the judges to quash the warrants for their arrests.  

A court appearance for  a Chicago DUI is very important.  You cannot choose to miss it because you have no one to watch your children or your boss will not let you off from work.  I can tell you this much - your boss will not prevent the sheriffs from picking you up from your job with a warrant for your arrest. 

Chicago DUI lawyer revisits government seizures of citizens' vehicles

Last week, I posted on how an Illinois DUI arrest could cause the government to take your car.   I really didn't think they would take your car and give it to a government worker:

April 30, Springfield, IL

The Illinois State Police had a gem on its hands after a January 2007 traffic stop. 

Troopers seized a gleaming muscle car: a 2006 Dodge Charger, boasting a “Hemi” V-8 engine that blasts from zero to 60 in five seconds before topping out at 165 mph, with fewer than 12,000 miles. 

But instead of using the car to snare lead-footed drivers or selling it to raise money for the state budget, officials assigned it to the director of the State Police Merit Board, according to interviews and a review of records by The Associated Press. 

Merit Board director Ronald Cooley isn’t a cop and doesn’t chase bad guys. 

Cooley, 56, took over the $98,220 job in January 2008. He said he asked the state police last summer if they had an extra vehicle because the board’s 1995 van broke down. Cooley had previously driven a 2001 Chevrolet Blazer, which the agency still uses. 

He drives the Charger between his office and Petersburg home, for local work assignments and for a handful of out-of-town state business trips. The state pays for gas, he said, but money is deducted from his check quarterly for income taxes for the car, a taxable fringe benefit. He said he does not use it for personal errands.

The Charger was seized under a 2006 law targeting repeat drunken drivers. Many vehicles are ultimately returned to the owner or lien-holder, and most of those forfeited to the state police are auctioned. 

Well, there you have it. Do you think the best use of your tax-paying dollars is to permit this government worker to drive the vehicle? 

Chicago Police aren't the only ones who need video cameras for DUI arrests

Recently, I posted about Chicago DUI cops needing to have cameras in their cars, heck there is even supposed to be Federal Stimulus money available to equip over 200 cars in the city.  As a Chicago DUI lawyer I welcome video of stops and arrests.  Every time I have video in a case it makes my job easier.  It looks like the DUI cops in Maryland are also in need of cameras for their arrests as well:

May 6, Gaithersburg, MD

A Montgomery County Police officer faces a perjury investigation after she testified in April that she found a man arrested for driving under the influence behind the wheel of a parked car. A recording from a security camera showed he was in the back seat, lying down, with his feet out the open passenger side door when she approached him.

At his Montgomery County District Court trial, Officer II Dina Hoffman testified 11 times that she found Zaliev in the front driver's seat. She said shook him awake and he was not cooperative in doing field sobriety tests.

Zaliev's attorney, Paul E. Mack of Columbia, used a laptop computer to show a video from a security camera at Sarkissian that recorded the arrest.

The security tape, reviewed by The Gazette, shows Hoffman arrived and immediately walked up to Zaliev lying in the back seat.

After Judge Dennis A. McHugh viewed the tape, he ruled the arrest lacked probable cause. The judge found Zaliev not guilty.

n her testimony at the April 2 trial, Hoffman claimed she arrived and approached Zaliev on the left side of the car where he sat behind the wheel asleep. She described shaking his shoulder to wake him.

"He was just sitting in the front seat, kind of sitting there sleeping," Hoffman testified.

At several points Mack asked the officer if she was certain Zaliev was in the front and not the back.

"Do you recall him being in the back seat on the passenger side?" Mack asked on cross examination.

"No, not when I first got there, no," Hoffman replied.

"Are you absolutely sure?" Mack asked again.

"Yes," Hoffman testified. "I did have him sit there while I waited for another officer to come."

After the recording was played in the courtroom, Hoffman was asked whether she was wrong about Zaliev's position in the car.

"Yeah, I must have been," Hoffman testified. "My apologies. It's been over a year. I deal with a lot of these cases every day so my apologies."

But Hoffman then said Zaliev "must've admitted to me that he was driving the vehicle at some point."

On further questioning, Hoffman testified she had not told that to either the prosecutors or to Mack before.

"You were wrong about him giving you his license while he was in the front seat?" Mack asked.

"Yes," she said. "He gave me his license, but I guess he was in the back seat."

If Zaliev had been convicted, he would have faced a maximum sentence of $1,000 fine and a year in jail.

"If it was determined there's perjury in this case, this is the kind of case that would undermine the authority of police and the perception of good officers out there doing their job," said Christopher Heffernan, chairman of the Maryland State Bar Association's litigation committee. "This would damage the police officers who are doing a good job out there to protect us. This is disturbing to everyone who looks up to the police and relies on them to protect us from the bad guys."

Do I really need to say anything else? Watch the video and let me know what you think.

Chicago DUI lawyer on why it is okay for there to be "not guilty" findings for DUI's

Former Chicago Bears quarterback Bob Avellini was acquitted after his third DUI arrest. 

What makes this story of interest is not what happened in the courtroom, but what some folks think about the acquittal.

Bob Avellini Acquittal

dw on May 6, 2009 4:30 PM

So the real lesson here is that it's OK to drive drunk; just refuse the field-sobriety test and the prosecution doesn't have a case.

Bill on May 6, 2009 5:02 PM

What's that expression again? Ah, yes - the rich are different from you and me. (And it obviously doesn't hurt to have once been a professional athlete, either.)

LK on May 6, 2009 8:58 PM

The judge could have inferred from Avellini's refusal to take a sobriety test that he was drinking. These judges are gutless.

You can read the other comments yourself , but I think these three comments are representative of the comments in response to the Avellini's acquittal. So why is it okay for there to be a "not guilty" in a DUI?  The answer is simple, but I think many well-meaning people, like those who wrote the comments above, forget that this country has a democracy and one of the best systems of law in the world.  That does not mean that it is perfect, but here in America, if you cannot prove someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that person will be found not guilty.   As Benjamin Franklin said, "That it is better one hundred guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer." 

It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with being rich or famous, but it is the foundation of this country. Just a reminder: right now there has been a lot of attention paid by Americans to what we perceive as the lack of fairness in the Roxana Saberi case in Iran.  If what the police officer says is all that is necessary to be found guilty of a DUI, then we don't need judges or prosecutors, or defense attorneys. Once the police officer completes his arrest the defendant goes directly to jail.  Is that what you think an American democracy is about?