Can I Keep My License From Being Suspended in a DWI?

I get this question all the time:

Can I keep my license from being suspended in a DWI?  I thought the license suspension was automatic.

The answer is, YES, you can keep your license from being suspended.  I previously explained the ALR process (Administrative License Revocation) in a past post.

I get very frustrated about ALR's, especially because there are a lot of lawyers giving absolutely horrible advice out there.  Many lawyers tell prospective clients that you cannot win ALR  hearings.  This is simply not true.  MOST LAWYERS WHO TELL PEOPLE YOU CANNOT WIN EITHER ARE TOO IGNORANT TO FIGHT FOR THEIR CLIENTS, TOO LAZY TO FIGHT, OR SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO WIN THESE HEARINGS.

The statement that you cannot win, so don't try usually comes from some attorney who gains most of his income from bailing people out of jail at 4:00 AM.  Yes, there are some attorneys who do this who are great attorneys, but many simply need the business because a of lack of referrals or repeat business.

I am often asked about how often we win.  This past weekend I spent time going through all of our past results on ALR cases.

In 2007, the Sunset Commission did a study on ALR hearings.  DPS issued 100.472 notices of suspensions.  Of those, only 6,980 were able to keep their driving privileges.  This means, Statewide, only 6.9% of people keep their driving privledges.

Our firm, since 2006, kept accurate records on every DWI case we handled an ALR hearing.  Of those cases, 51.6% of our clients kept their driving privledges. 

So is it possible to win these hearings and keep your driving privileges?  Yes!  But remember, you only have 15 days to request a hearing on your license suspension.  If you miss that window, the license suspension will be automatic.

New DWI Bill #5 - SB 3123

A new bill proposed in the Senate by Senator Whitmire seems to be the same as that of HB 1906.

The bill deals with lowering the surcharge for someone who successfully completes the DWI/Drug Court program.  As I stated before, this only  helps someone that completes the course, which can be 2 years or more later.  This means that the bill does not really save the person much.  It would be a better bill if the savings were upon entering the DWI court program.  I would even be in support if those savings were only temporary and became permanent after successful completion.  I think that would be a better idea.

 

Below is the text of the entire bill:

 

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the amount of a surcharge assessed on conviction of certain intoxicated driver offenses on the driver's license of certain persons who complete a drug court program.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Chapter 469, Health and Safety Code, is amended by adding Section 469.010 to read as follows:

Sec. 469.010.  REDUCTION IN AMOUNT OF ANNUAL SURCHARGE ON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF DRUG COURT PROGRAM. (a) A judge or magistrate administering a drug court program under this chapter may order the Department of Public Safety to reduce the amount of the annual surcharge assessed under Section 708.102, Transportation Code, on the license of a person finally convicted of an offense relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated to an amount that may not be less than 20 percent of the amount specified by that section, if the judge or magistrate enters a written finding in the papers in the case indicating that the person:

(1)  successfully completed a drug court program under this chapter; and

(2)  has not been arrested for an offense under Section 49.04, 49.045, 49.05, 49.06, 49.065, 49.07, or 49.08, Penal Code, during the 180 days after the date of the program completion.

(b)  On a timely request by the defendant, the judge or magistrate shall enter the written findings under Subsection (a) and promptly send a copy of those findings to the Department of Public Safety accompanied by the court's order to reduce the amount of the annual surcharge assessed under Section 708.102, Transportation Code. On receipt of a copy of the written findings under this subsection, the Department of Public Safety shall reduce the amount of the surcharge assessed to the amount specified in the court's order.

SECTION 2.  The change in law made by this Act applies to a person who, on or after the effective date of this Act, enters a drug court program under Chapter 469, Health and Safety Code, regardless of whether the person committed the offense for which the person enters the program before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.

SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

 

Tags:

New DWI Bill #4- HB 3733

A new House Bill proposed by Representative Coleman affects the surcharges assessed on those convicted of DWI.  Right now, if you are convicted of DWI first, you owe the state $3,000 over 3 years just to keep your driving privledges.

The bill seems to say that the 3,000 is now a maximum surcharge, instead of it being the automatic surcharge.  It would be based now on the "seriousness of the charge, the amount necessary to deter future violations, and an amount that maximizes collection."

I like the idea of this, except it doesnt seem to really say who determines how much the amount is, and why!  Nor does it seem to give you any kind of due process, like a hearing to present to a judge or magistrate why you think your surcharge should be less.  Basically it seems like a proposal with no teeth.

The bill also makes some changes to the plea bargaining process. It provides that anyone pleaing guilty must be given notice about the surcharge.  I like this idea, but it is mostly for people who are hiring non-DWI lawyers.  Any DWI lawyer worth their salt is going to be informing their clients about the surcharge.  At our firm, we speak about it during the initial consultation along with paperwork about the potential surcharge.  And in any plea of guilty or not guilty, we ALWAYS discuss the ramifications of the potential surcharge.

Below is the entire text of the bill:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the administration of the driver responsibility program.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Subchapter A, Chapter 708, Transportation Code, is amended by adding Section 708.004 to read as follows:

Sec. 708.004.  DEPARTMENT'S DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT OF SURCHARGE. The department by rule shall set the amount of a surcharge to be assessed under this chapter on a person's license. The amount may not exceed the maximum amount allowed by this chapter for a surcharge based on points or a conviction, as applicable. The amount shall be based on:

(1)  the seriousness of the violation, including the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation;

(2)  the amount necessary to deter a future violation; and

(3)  the amount that maximizes the collection of surcharges by the department.

SECTION 2.  Section 708.054, Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 708.054.  AMOUNT OF POINTS SURCHARGE.  The amount of a surcharge under this chapter may not exceed [is] $100 for the first six points and may not exceed $25 for each additional point.

SECTION 3.  Section 708.102(c), Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows:

(c)  The amount of a surcharge under this section may not exceed [is] $1,000 per year, except that the amount of the surcharge may not exceed [is]:

(1)  $1,500 per year for a second or subsequent conviction within a 36-month period; and

(2)  $2,000 for a first or subsequent conviction if it is shown on the trial of the offense that an analysis of a specimen of the person's blood, breath, or urine showed an alcohol concentration level of 0.16 or more at the time the analysis was performed.

SECTION 4.  Section 708.103(b), Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows:

(b)  The amount of a surcharge under this section may not exceed [is] $250 per year.

SECTION 5.  Section 708.104(b), Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows:

(b)  The amount of a surcharge under this section may not exceed [is] $100 per year.

SECTION 6.  Section 708.105, Transportation Code, is amended by adding Subsections (c) and (d) to read as follows:

(c)  Before accepting a plea other than a plea under Article 27.14(d), Code of Criminal Procedure, the court must provide a defendant charged with an offense described by Section 708.102, 708.103, or 708.104 the following statement and require the defendant to sign the statement:

"A conviction for the offense charged will result in the assessment of a surcharge that will be imposed annually for a period of 36 months under the Driver Responsibility Program."

(d)  The statement provided to a defendant under Subsection (c) must also state the maximum amount of the annual surcharge as provided by Section 708.102, 708.103, or 708.104. The copy of the statement signed by the defendant shall be retained by the court.

SECTION 7.  Section 708.157, Transportation Code, is amended by amending Subsection (c) and adding Subsection (d) to read as follows:

(c)  The department by rule shall [may] establish an indigency program to reduce the surcharge on a person's license if the department determines that the person is indigent [for holders of a driver's license on which a surcharge has been assessed for certain offenses, as determined by the department]. The department shall require a person to submit proof of indigency.

(d)  For purposes of this section, a person is indigent if the person's income is not more than 100 percent of the applicable income level established by the federal poverty guidelines.

SECTION 8.  (a) Not later than October 1, 2010, the Department of Public Safety shall adopt initial rules determining the amount of a surcharge on a person's driver's license under Chapter 708, Transportation Code, as amended by this Act. Not later than October 1 of each subsequent year, the Department of Public Safety shall review its rules and determine whether the amount of a surcharge should be increased or decreased.

(b)  A surcharge imposed under Chapter 708, Transportation Code, before the effective date of the initial rules adopted by the Department of Public Safety under Subsection (a) of this section is governed by that chapter as it existed on the date the surcharge was imposed, and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose.

SECTION 9.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

Tags:

New DWI Bill #3 - HB 1906

A third new DWI bill proposed by Representative Guillen deals with the DWI surcharge for those convicted of DWI, but completed the DWI/Drug Court program.  I have spoken about the DWI/Drug Court program in the past.  In Collin County, the only DWI /Drug Court is in Judge Ray Wheless' County Court #4.

This bill would allow the surcharge to be reduced by up to 80%.  Right now, anyone convicted of DWI 1st must pay 3,000 to the state over three years.  If you are convicted of DWI 2nd, it is 4,500 over 3 years, and if you blow over .16, it is $6,000 over three years.

I think this bill is a great idea, because it gives some incentives for someone to really turn their lives around.  The Drug court is usually reserved for those on DWI 2nd, so it is an important time in those offenders' lives.

I do see some problems with this bill, though.  It only rewards those "sucessfully completing" the program.  Instead, it should reward those entering the program.  It is possible to be in the DWI court for 2  years or longer.  By then, this bill wouldn't be of much help.  

Below is the entire test of the bill:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the amount of a surcharge assessed on conviction of certain intoxicated driver offenses on the driver's license of certain persons who complete a drug court program.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Chapter 469, Health and Safety Code, is amended by adding Section 469.010 to read as follows:

Sec. 469.010.  REDUCTION IN AMOUNT OF ANNUAL SURCHARGE ON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF DRUG COURT PROGRAM. (a) A judge or magistrate administering a drug court program under this chapter may order the Department of Public Safety to reduce the amount of the annual surcharge assessed under Section 708.102, Transportation Code, on the license of a person finally convicted of an offense relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated to an amount that may not be less than 20 percent of the amount specified by that section, if the judge or magistrate enters a written finding in the papers in the case indicating that the person:

(1)  successfully completed a drug court program under this chapter; and

(2)  has not been arrested for an offense under Section 49.04, 49.045, 49.05, 49.06, 49.065, 49.07, or 49.08, Penal Code, during the 180 days after the date of the program completion.

(b)  On a timely request by the defendant, the judge or magistrate shall enter the written findings under Subsection (a) and promptly send a copy of those findings to the Department of Public Safety accompanied by the court's order to reduce the amount of the annual surcharge assessed under Section 708.102, Transportation Code. On receipt of a copy of the written findings under this subsection, the Department of Public Safety shall reduce the amount of the surcharge assessed to the amount specified in the court's order.

SECTION 2.  The change in law made by this Act applies to a person who, on or after the effective date of this Act, enters a drug court program under Chapter 469, Health and Safety Code, regardless of whether the person committed the offense for which the person enters the program before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.

SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

 

Tags:

New DWI Bill #2 - HB 591

The second bill relating to DWI Defense has been proposed by Representative Dutton.  I think it is a fantastic idea.

The crux of the bill changes Sec 42.12, which is the community supervision (probation) section of the code.  Right now, there are certain crimes that if convicted and placed on probation, you are not allowed early release off.  They are mostly major aggravated crimes involving weapons or sex offenses.  The worst of the worst.  But strangely enough, DWI was added to it.  This means if you get 2 years probation, you cannot get off early.

Not being able to get off probation early ties the hands of the judges and the prosecutors for people who have been sucessful on probation.  It takes away a lot of discretion for those in the know, that are put in their positions by the people that elect them.  This bill would remove the "DWI restriction" and allow somone on DWI probation to be released early.  It doesn't make any other changes, such as making it not a final conviction, or removing from their record -- simply letting them get off probation early.  Judges/Prosecutors usually only allow this if you have already completed all the terms and condtions of probation (commuity service, DWI classes, etc.).

Below is the entire text of the bill:

 

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the reduction or termination of the period of community supervision imposed on a defendant convicted of certain intoxication offenses.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Section 20(b), Article 42.12, Code of Criminal Procedure, is amended to read as follows:

(b)  This section does not apply to:

(1)  a defendant convicted of an offense [under Sections 49.04-49.08, Penal Code, a defendant convicted of an offense] for which on conviction registration as a sex offender is required under Chapter 62; [,] or

(2)  a defendant convicted of a felony described by Section 3g.

SECTION 2.  The change in law made by this Act applies to a defendant who is placed on community supervision before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.

SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

 

Tags:

New DWI Bill #1 - HB 509I

I noticed that in the past few days, a few new DWI bills have been proposed.  I found 5 imparticular that may be of consequence to the DWI defense world.

The first, proposed by Texas Rep Riddle.  From what I can see, it related to who can pull blood from a person suspeced of DWI.  It amends the transportation code, which already has a list of "approved" people to pull blood.  This bill seems to add in an EMT or paramedic.  EMT's and paramedics were specifically excluded from those allowed to pull blood from suspects.

Below is the entire proposed text of the bill:

 

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

relating to the persons authorized to draw a blood specimen from a vehicle operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating substances.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1.  Section 724.017, Transportation Code, is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 724.017.  TAKING OF BLOOD SPECIMEN. (a) Only the following [a physician, qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed vocational nurse] may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a peace officer under this chapter:

(1)  a physician;

(2)  a qualified technician;

(3)  a registered professional nurse;

(4)  a licensed vocational nurse; or

(5)  a licensed or certified emergency medical technician-intermediate or emergency medical technician-paramedic.

(b)  A [The] blood specimen must be taken according to recognized medical procedures [in a sanitary place].

[(b)]  The person who takes a [the] blood specimen under this chapter, or a [the] hospital where a [the] blood specimen is taken, is not liable for damages arising from the request or order of the peace officer to take the blood specimen as provided by this chapter if the blood specimen was taken according to recognized medical procedures. This subsection does not relieve a person from liability for negligence in the taking of a blood specimen.

[(c) In this section, "qualified technician" does not include emergency medical services personnel.]

SECTION 2.  This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

Tags: