Charged DUI Otsego County - Gaylord Drunk Driving Arrest - 87A District Court Michigan

​Navigating DUI Cases in the 87A District Court, Otsego County

​The 87A District Court in Otsego County, Michigan, under the judicious guidance of Honorable Michael K. Cooper, Probate/District Judge, handles a broad range of cases with a firm commitment to justice. One such category of cases is Driving Under the Influence (DUI) charges, where understanding the court's specific norms and anticipations is key to successful representation.

As with all Michigan courts, clients charged with drunk driving in the 87A District Court usually fit into one of two categories: pre-arraignment or post-arraignment. The distinction is important as it dictates the strategy we adopt in court.

If the client has not been arraigned, we proactively put our own bond conditions in place. This is done in anticipation of what Judge Cooper may order and demonstrates preparedness and respect for the court's expectations.

If the client has already been arraigned, the emphasis shifts to adherence to court-ordered bond conditions. Furthermore, we typically introduce additional proactive steps to mitigate risks and show a commitment to meeting the court's requirements.

When it comes to setting bond in drunk driving cases, the law in Michigan requires the arraigning magistrate or judge to consider both the risk of flight and the potential risk of harm to the public. Most DUI clients pose little flight risk, but the prospect of reoffending by consuming alcohol or drugs while out on bond is a valid concern for the court.

To allay these concerns, the bond conditions typically stipulated by Judge Cooper in the 87A District Court often require defendants to abstain from alcohol or drug use. Regular monitoring ensures compliance. Most clients arrested for a DUI can expect a personal bond or a reasonable 10 percent provision on a larger amount, given the absence of flight risk.

Judge Cooper typically assesses the following factors when setting bond:

The defendant's prior criminal record, including juvenile offenses
The defendant's history of appearances or non-appearances at court proceedings or flight to avoid prosecution
The defendant's history of substance abuse or addiction
The defendant's mental condition, character, and reputation for dangerousness
The seriousness of the charged offense, presence or absence of threats, the probability of conviction, and likely sentence
The defendant's employment status, financial history, and their ability to post bail
The availability of responsible community members who could vouch for or monitor the defendant
The defendant's ties to the community, including family relationships and length of residence
Any other facts relevant to the risk of non-appearance or danger to the public
In my experience with the 87A District Court, alcohol testing is often a central bond condition in DUI cases. If the court has not ordered alcohol testing, it is common practice for my clients to voluntarily engage in it. This proactive step underscores their commitment to sobriety and sends a positive message to the court. I guide my clients in selecting the most suitable method of testing that allows them to maintain a regular lifestyle outside the courthouse.

For clients, particularly professionals, who prefer to avoid standard court-ordered testing, alternative testing methods can be arranged. These options, which align with their schedules while still demonstrating sobriety, can include preliminary breath tests (PBTs), transdermal alcohol tethers, in-home breathalyzers, ignition interlock devices, and EtG or EtS alcohol testing.

In sum, successful representation in DUI cases at the 87A District Court in Otsego County demands a proactive approach, respectful adherence to the court's expectations, and a commitment to maintaining client sobriety and compliance with bond conditions.