Navigating DUI Cases in the 82nd District Court, Roscommon CountyThe 82nd District Court of Roscommon County, Michigan, presided over by the Honorable Robert Bennett, Chief Judge, and Honorable Mary Ann Beebe, District Judge, handles a diverse range of cases, including drunk driving offenses, with great respect for the state's legal procedures. Understanding this court's specific approaches and expectations when dealing with DUI cases plays a crucial role in effectively representing clients and achieving the best possible outcomes.
Typically, clients charged with drunk driving offenses come under two categories: pre-arraignment or post-arraignment. Each category has its unique considerations and approaches. When representing pre-arraignment clients, who have been arrested but not yet formally charged, I strive to be proactive. I set our own bond conditions ahead of the arraignment, anticipating what Judges Bennett or Beebe might require. This strategy displays preparedness and respect for the court's expectations, thus creating a positive impression. For post-arraignment clients who have been formally charged, our approach involves adhering to the court-ordered bond conditions and usually adding other proactive steps. This shows the judges that we are serious about meeting the court's expectations and reducing any potential risks. In DUI cases, Michigan law necessitates the arraigning magistrate or judge to assess the risk of flight and potential risk to the public when setting bond. Most DUI defendants don't pose significant flight risks, but the possibility of alcohol or drug consumption while on bond, leading to re-offending, is a major concern for the court. The typical bond conditions in the 82nd District Court, therefore, require defendants to abstain from using drugs or alcohol. The court also regularly monitors compliance with these conditions. Assuming a minimal risk of flight, most defendants can expect a personal or nominal bond. Factors that Judges Bennett and Beebe consider when setting the bond include: - The defendant's previous criminal record, including any juvenile offenses - The defendant's record of appearing or not appearing at court proceedings, or any attempt to evade prosecution - The defendant's history of substance abuse or addiction - The defendant's mental condition and any reputation for dangerousness - The seriousness of the charged offense, the presence or absence of threats, and the likelihood of conviction and likely sentence - The defendant's employment status and financial history, particularly as they relate to the ability to post bail - The availability of responsible community members who can vouch for or monitor the defendant - The defendant's ties to the community, such as family relationships and the length of residence - Any other facts relevant to the risk of non-appearance or danger to the public In the 82nd District Court, alcohol testing is usually a central bond condition for DUI cases. If such testing hasn't been ordered, I generally encourage my clients to voluntarily undergo alcohol testing as a show of commitment to sobriety and respect for the court's objectives. I also advise on the best course of action for testing, taking into consideration the client's lifestyle and convenience. Some clients, particularly professionals, prefer alternatives to standard court-ordered testing. In such cases, we can arrange for other methods that better suit their schedules while still achieving the court's goal of ensuring sobriety. The options include preliminary breath tests (PBTs), transdermal alcohol tethers, in-home breathalyzers, ignition interlock devices, and EtG or EtS alcohol testing. In summary, effectively managing DUI cases in the 82nd District Court of Roscommon County involves proactive preparation, respect for the court's expectations, and a commitment to the defendant's sobriety and adherence to bond conditions. DUI Cases at the 84th District Court, Wexford CountIn the 84th District Court, Wexford County, Michigan, presided over by the Honorable Audrey D. Van Alst, Chief Judge, cases related to drunk driving offenses are handled with due diligence and strict adherence to Michigan law. A strong understanding of the court’s procedures and anticipatory actions significantly impacts the results of these cases.
When representing clients in DUI cases, there are typically two categories they fall into: pre-arraignment or post-arraignment. Each of these scenarios involves a slightly different strategy. For clients who are pre-arraignment, meaning they've been arrested but not formally charged (usually due to awaiting chemical test results), I initiate our own bond conditions. This is in anticipation of what Judge Van Alst may order, demonstrating our proactive approach when we appear before her. If my client has already been arraigned, our strategy revolves around strictly adhering to the bond conditions set by the court, supplemented with proactive steps. This combined approach helps maintain a positive image of the client in the court’s perspective. Michigan law mandates that when setting bond in a DUI case, the arraigning magistrate or judge, in this case, Judge Van Alst, must consider the risk of flight and potential risk to the public. Although most DUI clients pose little flight risk, there exists a valid concern about their possible alcohol or drug consumption while on bond, which could lead to re-offending. This scenario is what the court is most keen to avoid. Hence, standard bond conditions often involve the defendant abstaining from drugs or alcohol, with regular monitoring to ensure compliance. These conditions, coupled with a minimal flight risk, often result in a personal or nominal bond. Factors considered by the 84th District Court when setting bond include: - Defendant's prior criminal record, including juvenile offenses - Defendant's record of appearance or non-appearance at court proceedings or attempts to avoid prosecution - Defendant's history of substance abuse or addiction - Defendant's mental condition, character, and reputation for dangerousness - The seriousness of the charged offense, presence or absence of threats, and the likelihood of conviction and probable sentence - Defendant's employment status, history, financial situation, as they relate to the ability to post bail - The availability of responsible community members who could vouch for or supervise the defendant - Defendant's ties to the community, including family relationships and length of residence - Any other relevant facts that bear on the risk of non-appearance or danger to the public Alcohol testing is commonly stipulated as a bond condition for DUI cases at the 84th District Court. When such testing has not been ordered, my clients often opt for proactive alcohol testing to demonstrate sobriety and create a positive impression in the eyes of Judge Van Alst. In helping my clients navigate this situation, I aim to guide them towards the most suitable testing method for their circumstances. Several clients prefer to avoid standard court-ordered testing due to its inconvenience. To accommodate their needs, alternative testing methods can be arranged that suit their schedules while still meeting the court's objectives. These include preliminary breath tests (PBTs), transdermal alcohol tethers, in-home breathalyzers, ignition interlock devices, and EtG or EtS alcohol tests. Every method offers unique advantages. While PBTs are common and affordable, they can be inconvenient due to their frequent need. Transdermal alcohol tethers provide continuous monitoring, in-home breathalyzers add flexibility with scheduling, ignition interlock devices ensure sobriety before driving, and EtG or EtS tests can detect alcohol consumption up to 72 hours prior, beneficial for clients with unusual schedules. In conclusion, navigating DUI cases at the 84th District Court, Wexford County, involves a thorough understanding of Judge Van Alst's expectations, Michigan law, and proactive measures that help portray the client's commitment to sobriety and adherence to court orders. Navigating DUI Cases at the 81st District Court, Oscoda CountyThe 81st District Court in Oscoda County, Michigan, overseen by the Honorable Casandra L. Morse-Bills, District Judge, and the Honorable Richard E. Vollbach, Jr., Chief Judge, plays a vital role in managing DUI cases. Each case follows a systematic procedure as determined by Michigan law.
Understanding DUI Proceedings at the 77th District Court, Osceola CountyThe 77th District Court in Osceola County, Michigan, is a pivotal arena for DUI cases. The Honorable Peter M. Jaklevic, District Judge, and the Honorable Tyler O. Thompson, Chief Judge, preside over these cases, firmly guiding them under the scope of Michigan law.
A typical client charged with drunk driving in this court usually comes under one of two situations: pre-arraignment or post-arraignment. This distinction is crucial as it guides my strategy as an attorney and our steps moving forward. In the case of pre-arraignment clients, who haven't yet been formally charged, I focus on proactive steps. These steps include setting our own bond conditions in anticipation of the likely orders from Judges Jaklevic or Thompson. This proactive behavior sets a positive tone for our court appearance, showing our willingness to cooperate and adhere to potential bond conditions. For clients already arraigned, our focus shifts to following the court's bond conditions. However, we usually add more proactive elements to create a favorable impression and showcase our commitment to sobriety. In DUI cases in Osceola County, when setting bond, the arraigning magistrate or judge must consider the risk of flight and the potential danger to the public. Though flight risk is typically low for most DUI clients, the risk of alcohol or drug consumption while on bond and the potential for re-offending is a significant concern for the judges. Bond conditions typically include abstinence from drugs and alcohol, monitored to ensure compliance. This monitoring can often justify a personal or nominal bond when there is a negligible flight risk. Judges assess bond based on a range of factors, such as: - Defendant's prior criminal record, including juvenile offenses - Defendant's record of appearance or nonappearance at court proceedings or flight to avoid prosecution - Defendant's history of substance abuse or addiction - Defendant's mental condition, including character and reputation for dangerousness - The seriousness of the offense charged, the presence or absence of threats, and the probability of conviction and likely sentence - Defendant's employment status and history and financial history insofar as these factors relate to the ability to post money bail - The availability of responsible members of the community who would vouch for or monitor the defendant - Facts indicating the defendant’s ties to the community, including family ties and relationships, and length of residence - Any other facts bearing on the risk of nonappearance or danger to the public Alcohol testing is often the primary bond condition for a drunk driving case in the 77th District Court. My clients usually engage in proactive alcohol testing to demonstrate sobriety, make a good impression on the court, and mitigate potential concerns. I work closely with my clients to decide the best testing method, allowing them to maintain as normal a life as possible. Many clients prefer to avoid standard court-ordered testing due to its inconvenience. For such clients, we arrange alternative testing methods that better fit their schedules while satisfying the court's requirements. Options include preliminary breath tests (PBTs), transdermal alcohol tethers, in-home breathalyzers, ignition interlock devices, and EtG or EtS alcohol testing. Each of these methods offers different advantages: PBTs are common but can be inconvenient due to their frequency, transdermal alcohol tethers offer around-the-clock monitoring, in-home breathalyzers provide flexibility for work and family schedules, ignition interlock devices ensure sobriety before driving, and EtG or EtS tests can detect consumption up to 72 hours prior and can be beneficial for clients with unusual schedules. In the end, navigating DUI cases in the 77th District Court of Osceola County means understanding the judges' expectations, the intricacies of Michigan law, and applying the best strategies to demonstrate the client's commitment to sobriety and compliance with the court's orders. Navigating a Drunk Driving Charge: Our Client's Journey in the 82nd District Court - OgemawIn the corridors of the 82nd District Court in Ogemaw, the echoes of judgment often mingle with the whispers of compassion. As a law firm, we find ourselves representing an individual whose life took an unfortunate turn resulting in a charge of drunk driving. The court is presided over by the distinguished Chief Judge Robert Bennett and District Judge Mary Ann Beebe, both known for their strict adherence to the law, yet imbued with a deep sense of justice and understanding.
Our client, much like others who have sought our services, approaches us with a sense of trepidation. They respect the law, but are now facing its stern visage, grappling with a daunting reality. The fear, embarrassment, and worry about the perceived "first impression" with the police, prosecutor, and the judges are palpable. However, our philosophy encourages us to turn this daunting situation into an opportunity for introspection and growth. As a former prosecutor in New York City and Michigan and with over a decade in criminal defense, I've shaped the ethos of our firm to empower clients to create their "true impression". It's not just about facing the charges or explaining away the circumstances. It's about showing the court, with sincerity, how they ended up on the wrong side of the law, the lessons learned, and how they are committed to a better future. The role we play in the courtroom of Judges Bennett and Beebe is twofold – we serve as attorneys and as coaches. We strive to facilitate our client's learning, development, and performance, bolstering their self-awareness and helping them identify the choices that led them to their current predicament. Through this approach of coaching, we enable our clients to devise their own solutions, develop their own skills, and reshape their attitudes and behaviors. It is a moment of profound satisfaction when we witness our client's transformation being acknowledged by the court. As the prosecutor and judges praise our client for demonstrating responsibility and determination to change, we find affirmation in our belief – that each of our clients has the potential to learn from their mistakes and build a better future. Our client's journey through the 82nd District Court - Ogemaw, under the prudent eyes of Judge Bennett and Judge Beebe, is a testament to our firm's commitment to empowering our clients. We believe our clients are not defined by their errors, but by their potential for growth and the steps they take towards betterment. Our clients are visitors to the criminal justice system, and our role is to provide them with a clear exit strategy that enables them to return to society stronger, wiser, and ready for a fresh start. DUI Cases in the 79th District Court: The Battle in Oceana CountyAs 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. Advocating with Empathy: Navigating DUI Charges in Michigan's 79th District CourtWhen an individual finds themselves facing the judges of the 79th District Court in Oceana County, Michigan, they can be overwhelmed. The atmosphere, charged with seriousness, reflects the gravity of the situation. Charged with a misdemeanor DUI, they stand before either Honorable John David Middlebrook, the District Judge, or Honorable Jeffrey C. Nellis, the Chief Judge.
Depending on the severity of the offense, the charge may vary from Impaired Driving to Operating While Intoxicated, Super Drunk, Operating With Presence of Drugs, Minor BAC Zero Tolerance, Child Endangerment, or even, in cases of repeated offenses, OWI 2nd Offense or 3rd Offense which would be a felony. With freedom, license, career, family reputation, and future on the line, these individuals fight not only against the DUI charge but also the personal implications it carries. This is when the role of an empathetic and compassionate attorney becomes invaluable, as outlined in the Michigan DUI Playbook. The human-centric approach offered by such an attorney can be pivotal in shifting the case dynamics. Here's how: Understanding the Client's Perspective: A skilled attorney will immerse themselves in their client's perspective, taking the time to understand the circumstances and feelings tied to the charge. By doing so, they tailor their defense strategy to cater to the client's specific needs and objectives, treating them not merely as another case but as a person in a challenging situation. Reducing the Stigma of a Drunk Driving Charge: The stigma surrounding a DUI charge can sometimes prove as detrimental as the charge itself, causing emotional turmoil and discouragement. By treating the client with genuine respect and empathy, the attorney can help mitigate this stigma, encouraging the client's active participation in their defense. Finding Solutions that Work for the Client: An empathetic attorney aims to find solutions that benefit the client beyond the courtroom. Exploring alternative sentencing options such as rehabilitation programs, community service, or other non-incarceration alternatives can help the client steer clear of harsher consequences while simultaneously promoting personal growth and community contribution. Building Trust with the Client: Empathy and compassion lay the foundation of trust between an attorney and their client. A client who feels cared for and understood is more likely to be candid about their situation, fostering a collaborative relationship that ultimately aids in crafting a strong defense strategy. Providing Emotional Support: The emotional strain accompanying a DUI charge can be enormous. Here, the attorney plays an important role beyond their professional responsibilities, offering emotional support throughout the legal process, answering questions, and helping the client navigate the complex legal terrain with patience and understanding. In conclusion, in the austere environment of Michigan's 79th District Court, an empathetic and compassionate attorney can be a beacon of hope for those charged with DUI offenses. By reducing the stigma, understanding the client's perspective, finding solutions that fit the client, building trust, and providing emotional support, the attorney can significantly influence the outcome of the case, ensuring that their client is treated with dignity and respect at every step of the process. At the Law Offices of Jonathan Paul, we offer compassionate and comprehensive representation for clients facing drunk driving charges at the 78th District Court in Newaygo County. Our experience extends to working with the Honorable Judges H. Kevin Drake, Robert D. Springstead, and David M. Glancy, and we are well-versed in the unique dynamics of their courtrooms.
Attorney Jonathan Paul, a seasoned former prosecutor and the author of the Michigan DUI Playbook, distinguishes himself with a client-centered, empathetic approach to drunk driving defense. Recognizing the emotional turmoil and stigma that a DUI charge can entail, Jonathan strives to treat his clients as partners in their cases rather than defendants. His philosophy centers around learning from past mistakes and utilizing these experiences for personal development. Jonathan leverages his rich background as a prosecutor to understand the nuances of each case fully, yet he never loses sight of the human element involved. He diligently listens to his clients, empathizes with their circumstances that led to the charge, and validates their feelings about their situation. Such understanding allows him to construct a bespoke defense strategy that aligns with each client's specific needs and aspirations. The Law Offices of Jonathan Paul is not merely about traversing the legal landscape; it's about helping clients rise above the stigma of a drunk driving charge. By championing empathy, understanding, and compassion, Jonathan restores his clients' self-esteem and encourages their active involvement in the defense process. His respectful and dignified treatment of clients often earns the admiration of prosecutors and judges, including those at the 78th District Court, speaking volumes about the value of his empathetic approach. We fervently believe in securing the best possible outcomes for our clients. Depending on the specificities of a case, we may seek alternative sentencing options such as rehabilitation programs, community service, or other alternatives to incarceration. Our objective is to help our clients sidestep the severe ramifications of a drunk driving conviction. Trust is a fundamental aspect of our client-attorney relationship. We cultivate this trust by consistently demonstrating empathy and compassion towards our clients. This atmosphere of trust enables our clients to feel comfortable sharing crucial details about their situations, which can significantly influence the shaping of their defense strategy. A drunk driving charge in Newaygo County can set off an emotional whirlwind. At the Law Offices of Jonathan Paul, we provide unwavering emotional support for our clients throughout this journey. From promptly addressing questions to guiding clients through the labyrinthine legal system, we accompany our clients at each step. In conclusion, if you're facing a drunk driving charge at the 78th District Court in Newaygo County, Jonathan Paul's empathetic and compassionate approach can drastically alter the trajectory of your case. By comprehending your perspective, mitigating the stigma, identifying suitable solutions, fostering trust, and offering emotional support, Jonathan Paul can help you secure the most favorable outcome in your case. For more information, we encourage you to visit our comprehensive drunk driving website at www.michiganduiplaybook.com. At the Law Offices of Jonathan Paul, we help clients who have been charged with drunk driving offenses at the 60th District Court in Muskegon County. Our firm has extensive experience working with the Honorable Judges Raymond J. Kostrzewa Jr., Maria Ladas Hoopes, Paula Baker Mathes, and Geoffrey Thomas Nolan, and we understand the unique dynamics and requirements of their courtrooms.
Attorney Jonathan Paul, the author of the Michigan DUI Playbook, stands apart from others in his field with his empathetic and proactive approach to drunk driving defense. Understanding that a DUI charge can be a deeply frightening and stigmatizing experience, Jonathan is committed to treating his clients as partners, not criminals. He believes that everyone has the capacity to learn from their mistakes and use those experiences for personal growth. Jonathan uses his decade of experience as a prosecutor to see the case from all angles, but he does not lose sight of his clients' humanity in the process. He listens to their stories, understands the circumstances that led to their charge, and respects their feelings and fears about the situation. This understanding allows him to create a defense strategy tailored specifically to each client's needs and goals. At the Law Offices of Jonathan Paul, we do more than simply navigate the legal system. We help our clients to step beyond the stigma associated with a drunk driving charge. We believe in the power of empathy, understanding, and compassion to restore self-confidence and encourage active participation in one's defense. Jonathan's approach often impresses prosecutors and judges, including those at the 60th District Court, which is a testament to the positive impact of treating clients with respect and dignity. We believe in solutions that benefit our clients. Depending on the case, we may explore alternative sentencing options such as rehabilitation programs, community service, or other alternatives to jail time. We aim to help our clients avoid the harsh consequences of a drunk driving conviction. Trust is a key component in our attorney-client relationships. We build this trust through our consistent demonstration of empathy and compassion. Our clients feel reassured and more willing to share details about their situations, which ultimately aids in shaping their defense strategy. Facing a drunk driving charge in Muskegon can be an emotional journey. At the Law Offices of Jonathan Paul, we provide emotional support for our clients throughout this process. From answering questions and addressing concerns to guiding clients through the complexities of the legal system, we are there every step of the way. In summary, if you are facing a drunk driving charge at the 60th District Court in Muskegon County, Jonathan Paul's empathetic and compassionate approach can make a significant difference in your case. By understanding your perspective, reducing the stigma, finding solutions that work for you, building trust, and providing emotional support, Jonathan Paul can help you achieve the best possible outcome in your case. We invite you to visit our comprehensive website on drunk driving at www.michiganduiplaybook.com to learn more. What to do if charged with a DUI in Midland County Michigan? 75th District Court Drunk Driving7/15/2023
Midland County DUI ArrestIt was a typical Saturday evening in Midland County when Alex Morgan, a 40-year-old business owner, was pulled over by the police after leaving a friend's party. Charged with Operating While Intoxicated (OWI), Alex found himself caught up in the gears of the Michigan legal system, his life suddenly at risk of being ripped apart by a single lapse in judgment.
Alex was familiar with the dire potential consequences of his charges. The fear of losing his freedom, his driver's license, the respect of his family and community, and even his career, haunted his every waking moment. Aware of the potential repercussions, he knew he needed the best legal representation he could get. After an exhaustive search, he came across Attorney Jonathan Paul's Michigan DUI Playbook and the impressive wealth of resources at www.michiganduiplaybook.com. Realizing that he could indeed navigate through this storm, Alex sought the counsel of Jonathan Paul, an attorney whose reputation for understanding his clients' perspectives and fighting for them was unrivaled. Jonathan Paul, with the 64B District Court as the battlefield, was set to confront the charges against Alex. Honorable Michael Carpenter, the District Judge, and Honorable Stephen P. Carras, the Chief Judge of the 75th District Court, would be arbiters of his fate. Upon their first meeting, Alex noticed Jonathan's exceptional approach to his case. He didn't simply gather facts or draft defenses; he understood Alex's perspective. He empathized with the fear, shame, and regret Alex felt, allowing him to create a tailored defense strategy that addressed his client's specific needs and goals. He treated Alex not as a case number, but as a human being with a story. Jonathan worked diligently to reduce the stigma associated with Alex's drunk driving charge, ensuring his client felt respected and acknowledged. His compassionate approach broke the barriers of shame, and Alex felt more at ease, participating actively in his defense. But Jonathan's empathy didn't stop at merely understanding his client or reducing the stigma; he worked tirelessly to find the best solutions for Alex. Exploring alternative sentencing options like rehabilitation programs and community service, Jonathan sought ways to mitigate the harsh consequences Alex was facing. Through this approach, trust was built between Alex and Jonathan. Alex felt heard, understood, and genuinely cared for, fostering an environment of transparency and collaboration. This trust allowed Alex to be honest about the circumstances of his charges, which was critical for his defense. Being charged with an OWI was a rollercoaster of emotions for Alex. Yet, Jonathan's consistent reassurance, availability to answer questions, and guidance throughout the complex legal system were his beacon of hope in navigating this tumultuous period. Facing a drunk driving charge in Michigan is daunting. However, with Attorney Jonathan Paul's empathetic and compassionate approach, defendants like Alex can navigate this trying time with less fear and more hope, aiming for the best possible outcome given their circumstances. And so the story unfolds, the verdict yet to be determined. But in the face of fear and uncertainty, Alex stands stronger, knowing he is not just a defendant but a human being understood, respected, and fought for. |
Click to Email Me Categories
All
|
Ann Arbor Office LocationPlymouth Office Location |
Representing DUI Clients in MichiganRepresenting clients charged with a DUI in Ann Arbor, Canton, Brighton, Howell, Saline, Adrian, Taylor, Plymouth, Northville, Westland, Ypsilanti, Pittsfield Towsnhip, Warren, Sterling Heights, Farmington, Pontiac, Romulus, Lansing, Novi, South Lyon, Southfield, Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, Royal Oak, Troy, Rochester, Jackson, East Lansing, Garden City, Livonia, Dearborn, Detroit, St Clair Shores, Hazel Park, Ferndale, Madison Heights, Waterford, Milford, Shelby Township Clarkston, Oak Park, Berkley, Fraser, Sterling Heights, Clinton Township and others throughout Washtenaw, Wayne, Monroe, Jackson, Genesee, Macomb, Ingham, Lenawee, Livingston and Oakland County.
|