As a temporary service, we now offer the option of video conference consults in lieu of in person meetings.|More Info

WE’LL FIGHT FOR YOU

Category: Kona DUI

How Do Kona DUI Lawyers Attack FST Evidence?

In many cases, especially drugged driving prosecutions, the state relies almost exclusively on the three approved Field Sobriety Tests to establish guilt. So, a Kona DUI lawyer must undermine this evidence in order to successfully resolve the case. That’s also true in Breathalyzer cases. If the defendant does not appear intoxicated in the field tests, many jurors doubt the accuracy of a chemical test.

There is a lot at stake. A DWI might cost up to $25,000 when including direct and indirect expenses. Other losses, such as possible employment and family law effects, are not quantifiable in dollars and cents.

Apropos of nothing, defendants have the right to refuse to perform field tests under the Fifth Amendment. This refusal cannot be used against them in court.

Romberg’s Balance Test

This test, which was developed by German scientist Moritz Romberg in the 1800s, measures balance ability. Subjects must stand straight with their arms extended, their heads back, and their eyes closed. Officers sometimes add additional requirements, such as touching fingertips to the nose.

In some cases, a Kona DUI lawyer might be able to get these results thrown out of court without much effort. The Romberg test, although it is a staple of many police stops, is not approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Since it has no scientific basis, it is arguably useless in court as a way to determine intoxication.

In other cases, however, it might be better to allow prosecutors to introduce these test results. Essentially, that’s like giving them enough rope to hang themselves. Many officers, and many Kona DUI lawyers as well, are unfamiliar with the test’s theory. Romberg’s Test deprives the subject of the three things needed for balance, which are:

  • Vestibular function (knowing the position of one’s head in space),
  • Proprioception (knowing one’s body position), and
  • Vision.

If an officer cannot adequately explain these complex concepts to jurors, they often get the idea that the state is manufacturing evidence against the defendant.

Kona DUI Lawyers and the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test

The DUI eye test does not have much scientific basis either. This test does accurately detect nystagmus, a condition also known as lazy eye. But intoxication is not the only cause, or even the leading cause, of nystagmus. IN fact, many people have a lazy eye. They just do not know it, since the symptoms are so mild. So, many people could not pass an HGN test whether they were drunk or sober.

Additionally, roadside HGN test conditions are uncontrolled. Squad car lights flash in the background, and cars whiz by at high speeds. Most officers fail to account for these variables when they score the test.

Because of these deficiencies, many Hawaii County judges only admit HGN test results for limited purposes. If that happens, Kona DUI lawyers might only need to worry about the last two. Anda again, a lawyer only needs to create reasonable doubt.

The Walk and Turn Test

The heel-to-toe walk test also suffers from a number of environmental problems. Footwear is one example. Obviously, it’s almost impossible to walk heel to toe in flip flops, heels, or cowboy boots. Officers usually give these defendants the option to remove these shoes. Unfortunately, it’s just as difficult to walk heel to toe barefoot.

During this test, which usually involves walking about fifteen steps heel to toe forward and backward, officers look for a number of intoxication clues, such as:

  • Beginning the test before the officer says “start,”
  • Leading with the wrong foot,
  • Stumbling,
  • Swaying,
  • Taking the incorrect number of steps,
  • Using arms or hands for balance, and
  • Ending the test before the officer says “stop.”

Nearly everyone “fails” this test, because no one can do all these things flawlessly. Fortunately, the officer’s conclusion is only an opinion. Jurors decide for themselves whether the defendant passed or failed, and their conclusion is the only one that counts.

The One Leg Stand Test

By the time defendants get to the OLS, they are mentally and physically fatigued. However, officers usually never account for this fatigue when they score the test.

Much like the WAT, the OLS is a divided attention test that measures physical dexterity and mental alertness. If the defendant has any mobility impairments, it’s nearly impossible to stand on one leg for more than a few seconds.

Our Skilled Kona DUI Attorneys Will Protect Your Rights

DUI charges can be difficult to defend as they are based on the first-hand observations of a police officer and determined, to a great extent, by the results of various field sobriety tests. A DUI charge can result in several penalties that can directly impact your reputation, finances, career, personal life, and more. However, help is at hand. If you or your loved one was involved in a DUI in Kona, seek strong legal representation as soon as possible. Call our experienced Kona DUI attorneys at 808-331-3113 in Kona for legal consultation today!

Kona DUI Lawyers and Common DUI Defenses

Generally, the primary defense in a DUI involves creating a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s intoxication. Generally, drivers are intoxicated if they have lost the normal use of their mental or physical faculties, or they have a BAC above the legal limit, which is usually .08. This approach could mean challenging the field sobriety test results, attacking the validity of a chemical sample, or both.

Frequently, however, other defenses are available as well. DUI prosecutions have a lot of moving parts. That’s especially true in DUI collision cases and a few other situations. If a Kona DUI lawyer can create reasonable doubt on one element of the offense, it’s easier to successfully resolve the case. That resolution could be a dismissal of charges, a plea to a lesser included offense, or a not guilty verdict at trial.

What is Reasonable Doubt?

Hawaii law defines reasonable doubt as a doubt based on reason and common sense. An appeals court in another state said this definition was essentially useless since it was like saying “A white horse is a horse that is white.”

Another way of looking at this definition is to approach it from the perspective of the presumption of innocence. Assume that NPR’s version of a political story is presumably true. To overcome this presumption, the Fox News version must be so convincing that you disregard the NPR story. Additionally, the NPR story must be free of obvious errors, so it stands on its own.

In other words, the state’s proof must be so overwhelming that the prosecutor’s version of events is the only reasonable narrative. Moreover, the state’s case must be almost completely airtight.

Kona DUI Lawyers and Some Non-Intoxication Defenses

Alcohol or drug intoxication is only one element of a DUI case. Sometimes, it’s the only issue. But that’s normally not the case.

1. Driving the Car

As mentioned, this element is often an issue in collision cases. Normally, the state must produce a witness who saw the defendant behind the wheel at or near the time of the collision. If the defendant told officers or witnesses s/he was driving, a Kona DUI lawyer might be able to exclude that statement.

The “reasonable doubt” angle comes into play here. If Sarah was the vehicle’s only occupant, it’s reasonable to assume she was driving, even if there was no direct evidence on this point. If both Sarah and Michael were in the vehicle, the Sarah-was-driving assumption is a little shaky.

On another note, “driving” in this context has a different meaning. Let’s return to the previous example and change the facts. Now assume Sarah was dozing behind the wheel when officers arrived. Even though she was not driving the car in the ordinary sense of the word, she was legally operating it. Therefore, DUI charges could be held up in court.

That’s assuming the keys were in the ignition and the car was fully drivable. If the keys were in Sarah’s purse and/or the car had mechanical problems, the state’s case is weaker. If Sarah didn’t have the keys and/or the car was not drivable at all, a Kona DUI lawyer could probably get the charges dismissed.

2. Public Place

Hawaii has many mini-malls, apartment complexes, large shopping malls, and private roads or waterways. These locations are never public places, even if they have street names and traffic control devices.

Sarah’s example could come up as well. If Sarah was in her driveway, she was not in a public place. If Sarah’s car was parked on the street next to her driveway, that’s a gray area.

3. Wrong County

This issue does not come up in very many DUI cases, but it could affect a BUI (boating under the influence) prosecution. The DUI law applies to boats, motorcycles, scooters, helicopters, and any other motor vehicles. It usually also applies to horses, bicycles, and other non-motorized vehicles.

Local prosecutors only have jurisdiction in their own counties. When boats are between the islands, at some point, they cross the line between different counties. The state has the burden of proof to show that the offense occurred in Hawaii County or wherever.

If the charges are filed in the wrong county, a Kona DUI lawyer can quash the case. That means the state’s lawyers can refile it in the correct county. However, instead of going through all that, many prosecutors agree to favorable plea deals.

Kona DUI Attorneys Will Help You to Get Out From Common DUI Charges

DUI cases are common, and so are some of the most effective defenses used to fight the charges. Creating reasonable doubt and presenting non-intoxication defenses are a few of these. The bottom line is, regardless of the facts, almost all criminal cases are defensible in some way. Many times, prosecutors agree to favorable plea deals. Call Olson & Sons, L.C. at 808-331-3113 for a consultation with an experienced Kona DUI lawyer. We routinely handle matters in Hawaii County and nearby jurisdiction.

(Image_Source)

Does Heightened Police Enforcement Affect a Kona DUI Lawyer’s Strategy?

In the late twentieth century, most Hawaiians supported heavy-handed police tactics. Many jurors had parents or grandparents who lived during World War II. These jurors saw a cause-and-effect relationship between oppressive policing and public safety.

But things are different now. The Second World War feels as remote as the Franco-Prussian War, and Hawaii is one of the bluest of blue states. Overall, public confidence in police officers recently hit a 22-year low.

What does all this mean to Kona DUI lawyers? Hawaii County prosecutors could once count on sympathetic jurors who would support things like STEP campaigns and DUI roadblocks. Now, that support is waning. As a result, prosecutors make better pretrial offers than they made before. Furthermore, Kona lawyers can be more aggressive in their pretrial tactics.

What is at Stake?

In terms of their severity, Hawaii’s DUI laws are pretty much in the middle of the road. They are not overly harsh, and they are by no means lenient. A first-time conviction could mean:

1. Six months in jail (mandatory forty-eight-hour minimum),
2. $1,000 fine,
3. One year drivers’ license suspension, and
4. Substance abuse program.

Let’s look at the drivers’ license suspension a bit more closely. Any Kona attorney will tell you that if the defendant obtains an Ignition Interlock Device, limited driving may be allowed during the suspension. IIDs are basically portable Breathalyzers attached to the vehicle’s ignition. If the driver’s BAC is above a certain level, usually .04, the vehicle will not start.

On a related note, DUI offenders must generally obtain SR-22 auto insurance and keep it for at least three years. This high-risk insurance could easily double, triple, or even quadruple premiums. These higher rates make up most of the average $10,000 cost of a first-time DUI.

Kona DUI Lawyers and Selective Traffic Enforcement Programs

STEP campaigns are essentially police dragnets. The stated intent of a STEP campaign is to make as many arrests as possible for a designated offense. These efforts often have catchy nicknames, like “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over” and “Click It or Ticket.” Some marketing interns probably stayed up all night thinking of these names.

Exact program specifications vary. But generally, the department receives a state or federal grant. This money primarily goes to police overtime. Officers have pulled off their regular duties and reassigned to a particular area of town and instructed to arrest as many DUI offenders as possible. In other words, STEP campaigns create biased officers, which creates an opportunity for Kona lawyers.

The pressure to make arrests often causes officers to take illegal shortcuts. Frequently, they may lack probable cause to request a chemical sample. Furthermore, the nature of a STEP campaign makes suspicious jurors even more suspicious. So, when a Kona DUI lawyer asks questions like “Were you on your normal route that night?” The answers may set up a police officer bias defense.

DUI Roadblocks

STEP campaigns have no legal requirements, so police departments have much flexibility. Experienced Kona attorneys are aware that that’s not true with regard to DUI checkpoints. Since roadblocks allow officers to circumvent the Fourth Amendment, they must meet certain specifications, such as:

1. A department supervisor, normally a police captain or police chief, must authorize the checkpoint and set up most operational details,
2. These operational details must include a neutral formula, such as every third or fourth vehicle, for stopping motorists,
3. All checkpoints must include signage and traffic cones which inform motorists of the nature of the checkpoint and give them the opportunity to  turn around before traffic backs up,
4. That traffic delay, which includes the time waiting in line and the time at the checkpoint itself, must not be more than about thirty seconds, and
5. Officers must respect individual rights, such as the right to remain silent (motorists should be able to flash documents and pull through the checkpoint without interfacing with officers).

These requirements come from a line of Supreme Court cases, most notably the 1990’s Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz.

Even if the checkpoint meets all requirements, Kona DUI lawyers can focus on the perception problem. Many jurors see roadblocks as enhanced speed traps which are deliberately designed to ensnare unsuspecting motorists. That’s especially true if the DUI checkpoint was in a part of town not normally associated with drinking and driving and/or officers made a number of unrelated arrests.

Police credibility matters because prosecutors must establish facts beyond a reasonable doubt. If jurors question officer integrity, their credibility is reduced. And, DUI prosecutions are often one-witness cases.

Contact an Experienced Kona DUI Attorney for Help

Poor police officer’s perception often affects trial strategies. However, with a skillful Kona lawyer by your side, you have no reason to worry. For a confidential consultation with an experienced Kona DUI lawyer, contact Olson & Sons, L.C. Call us for sound legal counsel in your case at 808-745-1565. We have offices in Kona and Kamuela.

(Image_Source)

How do Kona DUI Lawyers Challenge Chemical Test Evidence?

Even if you are arrested for DUI, you are still presumed innocent until proven guilty. There are a number of ways to make this presumption hold up in court. For example, the prosecutor often lacks evidence on the driving element of DUI. That’s especially common in collision cases. By the time officers arrive on the scene, the defendant has exited the vehicle. So, it might be hard to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was driving.

But in most cases, intoxication, or the lack thereof, is the only real issue. The test compliance rate varies by jurisdiction. But generally, about 80 percent of drivers provide a breath or blood sample.

Contrary to the popular myth, people who provide chemical samples are not automatically guilty of DUI. Very few scientific tests are 100 percent reliable. Both the breath and blood tests have some flaws, and a good Kona DUI lawyer might be able to successfully challenge test results.

Types of Chemical Tests Used in a DUI Arrest

1. Beating the Breathalyzer

These tests are inadmissible unless a Hawaii County prosecutor verifies the Breathalyzer’s accuracy. To do this, the state usually calls Breathalyzer technicians to the stand. These police officers try to dazzle the jury with tales of fuel cells and electrochemical conversions. Their description makes the Breathalyzer sound like a cutting edge, sophisticated device.

But in reality, the Breathalyzer is basically a 1930s Drunk-o-Meter. Both the Breathalyzer and the DOM count the number of ethanol particles in the defendant’s breath and calculate the defendant’s BAC level based on that count. True, today’s Breathalyzer is more accurate and has many more bells and whistles. But it uses the same basic technology.

Once jurors understand that the Breathalyzer uses technical principles which were discovered before their grandparents were born, they are more likely to look closely at some specific flaws, like:

1. Ketone Levels: Diabetics, smokers, and some other people have high levels of ketones in their bodies. Breathalyzers register these particles as ethanol. So, in these cases, the BAC estimate may be artificially high.

2. Unabsorbed Alcohol: If the defendant has been drinking in the last couple of hours, the BAC estimate may be artificially high as well. Most alcohol does not go from the stomach to the blood. It goes from the stomach to the liver to the blood. So, alcohol may be on the defendant’s breath, but not in the defendant’s bloodstream.

3. Mouth Alcohol: Hawaii’s DUI law requires officers to monitor defendants for at least fifteen minutes before they take a Breathalyzer test. But courts have watered down this requirement so that the monitoring period is now more like a waiting period. As a result, the officer may not know if the defendant burped or belched. These things inflate the number of ethanol particles in the defendant’s mouth.

Kona DUI lawyers can most effectively use these flaws in borderline test cases, like a .08 or.09 BAC level. So, to better explain these flaws to the jury, many Kona DUI lawyers partner with degreed chemists. These scientists have more credibility with the jury than the state’s Breathalyzer technician. These individuals usually learned everything they know about the Breathalyzer at a police-sponsored seminar.

Currently, Breathalyzer testing is only available for alcohol-related DUIs. But in August 2019, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh unveiled a breathalyzer which measures marijuana particles. So, a Breathalyzer drug test may be coming soon.

2. Kona DUI Lawyers and Blood Test Results

Admittedly, blood tests are more difficult to challenge in court, especially on scientific grounds. However, many Kona DUI lawyers order retests in these cases. Quite frequently, this independent retest yields different results from the ones that a police technician claims to have found.

Scientific tests are also important in other drug cases, such as drug possession matters. For example, Georgia police officers recently arrested a man for possession of cocaine. That “cocaine” turned out to be bird poop.

Procedural defenses are often successful as well. The Supreme Court recently ruled that officers must obtain search warrants before they forcibly extract blood samples. Typically, judges approve these warrants over the phone. But a judge’s seal of approval is not a magic wand. Officers must still have probable cause. In many situations, unless the defendant clearly failed one or more field sobriety tests, probable cause is difficult to establish.

Blood tests also may have a chain of custody issues. These little vials do a lot of traveling. They must go from a hospital or clinic to a police lab to an evidence room to a courtroom. A gap in the chain of custody casts a cloud over the evidence’s reliability. Sometimes, that cloud is enough for a Kona DUI lawyer to create reasonable doubt.

Additionally, the samples must be stored under certain conditions. Once again, a lack of proof in this area could affect the sample’s reliability.

Challenge Chemical Test Results with the Help of a Kona DUI Lawyer

Chemical evidence of intoxication does not always hold up in court and can result in wrongful convictions and excessive criminal penalties. Don’t let this happen to you. For a confidential consultation with an experienced Kona DUI lawyer, contact Olson & Sons, L.C. Call us at 808-745-1565 to speak with us about your case. Home and jail visits are available.

How Kona DUI Lawyers Can Beat 5 Field Sobriety Tests

Drivers have a limited right to refuse a chemical intoxication test. A refusal to submit to a Breathalyzer is admissible in court. That fact, along with the threat of lengthy license suspension, often convinces the driver to provide breath samples. A Kona DUI lawyer can reduce or eliminate both these effects, but that’s the subject of another blog.

On the other hand, drivers have an absolute right to refuse Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs). The Fifth Amendment gives defendants the right to remain silent. That includes the right to perform most activities, like field sobriety tests.

This right is critical in DUI cases. Officers must have probable cause to administer Breathalyzer tests, and typically, the FSTs furnish that probable cause. Furthermore, in chemical test refusal cases, the FSTs usually provide most or all of the evidence of intoxication.

So, in both test and refusal matters, attacking the FST results is a critical part of a Kona DUI lawyer’s approach to these cases.

Finger-to-Nose Test in DUI Cases

On the witness stand, officers say this test measures balance. Drivers must stand with their arms extended and alternatively touch their index fingertips to their noses. During the test, officers deduct points if the driver sways or does not touch a finger to nose.

The real purpose of this test is to fatigue the defendant. Test results are usually either highly questionable or entirely inadmissible because this test is not in the three-test National Highway Traffic Safety Administration battery.

Romberg Balance Test

German neurologist Moritz Romberg, who obviously had lots of free time, invented this balancing test in the 19th century. Test subjects must stand with their heads back and eyes closed. According to Romberg and other test advocates, this position deprives the test subject of all three ways to maintain balance, which are:

  1. Vestibular function (knowing the position of one’s head),
  2. Vision, and
  3. Proprioception (knowing one’s body position in space).

Because of that three-pronged deprival, intoxicated individuals should almost literally fall over drunk during the Romberg test.

This test has no scientific basis, and for that reason, judges often exclude it at trial. However, for strategic reasons, a Kona DUI lawyer often allows officers to testify about the Romberg test. If they cannot explain abstruse principles like proprioception and vestibular function, which is usually the case, some jurors may think the officer was not qualified to administer the FSTs or interpret their results.

Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus to Nail DUI

The DUI eye test is the first FST in the three-test NHTSA battery. It is also the most controversial of the three.

Nystagmus is a vision disorder which is also called the lazy eye. Nystagmus causes involuntary pupil movements at certain viewing angles. Alcohol causes nystagmus, but it is not the only cause. In fact, it is not even the leading cause of nystagmus. A childhood brain injury or a genetic defect causes many more nystagmus cases than alcohol.

Additionally, there are also issues with test conditions. The HGN test is usually accurate if administered under controlled conditions, but roadside HGN tests do not occur under controlled conditions. The sky is dark, overhead squad car lights flash in the distance, and cars whiz past with their headlights on.

Heel-to-Toe Walk

The HTW, which is also known as the Walk and Turn or the walking-a-straight-line test, is probably the most reliable of all FSTs. It is a divided attention test which measures physical dexterity and mental acuity. Defendants must walk a straight line forward and backward, walking the only heel to toe. During the test, officers look for intoxication includes, which include:

  • Beginning the test before the officer says “start,”
  • Leading with the wrong foot,
  • Failure to walk heel to toe on any step,
  • Using arms for balance,
  • Moving off the line,
  • Unsteady balance, and
  • Ending the test before the officer says “stop.”

It is almost impossible to successfully complete the HTW while wearing flip-flops, cowboy boots, or anything other than athletic shoes. It’s even more difficult to pass this test if the officer requires the defendant to walk an imaginary line instead of an actual line.

Additionally, in court, Hawaii County prosecutors must establish that the defendant failed the test because s/he was intoxicated, and not because s/he was tired, nervous, disabled, or clumsy.

One Leg Stand to Establish DUI

In many ways, the OLS is a lot like the HTW. They are both divided attention tests. And, they are both controversial.
Many officers focus on minor technicalities when they evaluate the OLS. For example, they may testify that the defendant “failed” the test if he elevated the wrong leg, even if he performed everything else perfectly.

Jurors look at video footage of these tests and decide for themselves if the defendant passed or failed them. And, the jury’s opinion is the only one that counts.

Contact an Assertive Kone DUI Attorney

DUI FSTs are by no means conclusive evidence of guilt. For a confidential consultation with an experienced Kona DUI lawyer, contact Olson & Sons, L.C. We routinely handle matters in Hawaii County and nearby jurisdictions.

(Image_Source)

10 Possibilities for Drunk Driving Offenders

Nationwide, the average cost of a DUI is about $15,000, when adding up both direct and indirect consequences. These costs are probably higher in Hawaii. Everything except pineapples and flowers is very expensive here. And, the Rainbow State has some of the harshest DUI laws in the country.

An effective Kona DUI lawyer can reduce or eliminate these consequences. Chemical tests, including the Breathalyzer, are not 100 percent accurate. In fact, in many cases, they aren’t even close to that accurate. Additionally, field sobriety tests, like the DUI eye test, are extremely subjective.

There may be some non-intoxication defenses as well. For example, many police officers arrest people for DUI while they are on private property, like a shopping mall or apartment complex parking lot. Additionally, unless the driver was fully alert and in full control of the vehicle, Hawaii County prosecutors may be unable to establish the “operating” element of an OVUII (operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant).

These defenses could result in a complete dismissal of charges, favorable pretrial settlement, or a not-guilty verdict at trial.

Arrest May be Unavoidable

Prior to the mid-1990s, most officers treated DUIs like speeding tickets. If the driver was not passed-out drunk and promised to go straight home, many officers just issued warnings. Today, once an officer suspects intoxication, an arrest is practically inevitable. That’s especially true if the stop happens during a STEP campaign or another heightened enforcement period. So, do not think that if you pass a Breathalyzer test that officers will let you go. That’s not going to happen.

Drunk Driving Charges Invite Court Appearances

Most Hawaii County judges require defendants to appear at all court dates, even if they are only procedural. Asking for time off from work every month is embarrassing, to say the least. Moreover, many bosses are not very patient in this area. After two or three months, they may pressure you to “get it over with.” Such an ultimatum could put a Kona DUI lawyer in a very bad position.

You May Serve Jail Time

Hawaii has a mandatory confinement law. People who are convicted of a first-time DUI must spend between 48 hours and 120 hours (five days) in jail. If the judge assesses the minimum, most people have enough time served to satisfy the requirement. But if the judge imposes the maximum, the defendant must usually do some additional time. Minimum confinement periods increase substantially for repeat offenders.

Drunk Driving Leads to Fine Payment

The maximum first-time DUI fine is $1,000. Defendants must also pay court costs, which are usually several hundred dollars. And, if an enhancement applies, like a DUI-child passenger, the fine and costs could be even higher. Some courts allow defendants to pay this money in installments, but many do not.

Probation Penalty for Drunk Driving

The financial penalties keep coming. Probationers must normally pay community supervision costs once a month. And, they must also personally report to probation officers once a month. Failure to fulfill these conditions could mean probation revocation. The same thing could happen if the defendant violates any other condition, such as getting in trouble with the law again or failing to work or go to school full time.

Attend and Complete Driving School

DUI driving school is not anything like driving school for teenagers or defensive driving for adults. Drunk driving school usually includes victim impact panels, long lectures about driving safety, and alcohol evaluation. This test could be questions about drinking habits. Or, it could be a full medical and psychological evaluation.

Alcohol Treatment May be Suggested

If the aforementioned alcohol evaluation indicates the defendant has a drinking problem, the defendant must normally complete all requirements to be eligible for drivers’ license reinstatement. Sometimes, these requirements are not terribly burdensome. Other times, requirements could include inpatient alcohol treatment, which the defendant must pay for.

Ignition Interlock Device to Curb Drunk Driving

As an additional condition of drivers’ license reinstatement, most offenders must drive with an IID. This device is basically a portable Breathalyzer which is attached to the ignition. If the defendant’s BAC level is higher than .04, the vehicle will not start. Most IIDs also have digital cameras to ensure that the person providing the breath sample is also the person who is driving the car.

Higher Auto Insurance for Drunk Driving Offenders

Remember that $15,000 figure quoted above? Increased insurance premiums usually make up most of that cost. Persons with DUIs must obtain high-risk insurance and keep it for at least three years. An SR-22 may increase monthly premiums by 40 percent or more.

Contact a Thorough Kona DUI Attorney

Drunk driving could have some serious consequences, and an experienced Kona DUI lawyer helps you avoid them. For a confidential case evaluation, contact Olson & Sons, L.C. at (808) 745-1565. Home and jail visits are available.

(Image_Source)

Should a Kona DUI Lawyer Represent Me at the ALR Hearing?

Hawaii is an implied consent state. Whether they know it or not, drivers give police officers permission to administer chemical tests, including the Breathalyzer, when they sign their drivers’ licenses. They may revoke that permission later, but this revocation has consequences, in the form of drivers’ license suspension. Continue reading “Should a Kona DUI Lawyer Represent Me at the ALR Hearing?”