Arrested for Drunk Driving Oceana County - Charged with DUI 79th District Court Michigan

​DUI Cases in the 79th District Court: The Battle in Oceana County

​As an attorney, I often encounter clients under two different circumstances, having been charged with drunk driving in Michigan's 79th District Court in Oceana County. The two presiding judges, Honorable John David Middlebrook and Chief Judge Jeffrey C. Nellis, hold these proceedings under Michigan law with a clear focus on public safety and the prevention of re-offending.

Each DUI case begins either pre-arraignment or post-arraignment. If a client is pre-arraignment, I implement proactive bond conditions to anticipate the judges' requirements. For post-arraignment clients, adhering to and enhancing bond conditions is the approach we usually take.

Regardless of the circumstances, bond setting in a DUI case involves careful deliberation. The judges must consider the risk of flight and potential harm to the public. However, most DUI defendants pose no flight risk. The larger concern is the potential for alcohol or drug consumption while on bond, and the possibility of re-offending, the worst-case scenario for the court.

To alleviate these concerns, bond conditions typically require the defendant to abstain from drugs or alcohol. Monitoring compliance helps justify a personal or nominal bond when flight risk isn't a factor. Judges or magistrates assess the following key elements:

The defendant's criminal record, including juvenile offenses
The defendant's appearance record at court proceedings
The defendant's history of substance abuse or addiction
The defendant's mental condition and reputation for dangerousness
The severity of the offense and the likelihood of conviction
The defendant's employment and financial history
The availability of community members who would vouch for the defendant
The defendant's ties to the community, such as family ties and length of residence
Any other facts bearing on the risk of nonappearance or danger to the public
In this court, alcohol testing during the case is typically the most significant bond condition for a DUI case. For clients, proactive alcohol testing serves to impress the court and demonstrate sobriety. We endeavor to find the best testing method for our clients to minimize disruption to their lives.

For professional clients seeking a less intrusive testing method, alternatives such as transdermal alcohol tethers, in-home breathalyzers, ignition interlock devices, or EtG or EtS alcohol testing can be arranged.

Preliminary breath tests (PBTs) are common, though they can be inconvenient for defendants due to the need for frequent testing. Transdermal alcohol tethers provide 24-hour monitoring, offering convenience for defendants and peace of mind for judges.

In-home breathalyzers allow for increased flexibility with work and family scheduling, while ignition interlock devices require a breath test to start a vehicle, ensuring the driver's sobriety. EtG or EtS alcohol testing can detect alcohol consumed up to 72 hours prior, proving beneficial for defendants with odd work hours or travel schedules.

Successfully navigating a DUI case in the 79th District Court in Oceana County requires understanding the legal landscape and knowing how to effectively meet the judges' requirements. It's not just about understanding the law; it's about creating a plan of action that reassures the court and allows the defendant to maintain their lifestyle as much as possible while they face these charges.