Michigan DUI Playbook | Attorney Jonathan Paul
  • DUI Playbook
  • Survival Guides
    • Oakland County >
      • Novi
      • Troy Clawson
      • Farmington Hills
      • Bloomfield Hills
      • Rochester Hills Auburn Hills
      • Royal Oak/Berkley
      • Southfield
      • Clarkston
      • Oak Park
      • Waterford
    • Wayne County >
      • Plymouth Canton Northville
      • Livonia
      • Westland
      • Dearborn
      • Woodhaven Brownstown Twp Trenton
      • Romulus Van Burn Twp Belleville
      • Wyandotte Riverview
      • Dearborn Heights
      • Taylor
    • Macomb County >
      • Clinton Township
      • Shelby Township
      • Warren
      • St. Clair Shores
      • Sterling Heights
      • Fraser Roseville
      • Chesterfield New Baltimore
      • Romeo
    • Washtenaw County >
      • Ann Arbor
      • Saline
      • Chelsea
      • Pittsfield Twp
      • Ypsilanti
      • Ypsilanti Twp
    • Lenawee County
    • Genesee County
    • Monroe County
    • Jackson County
    • Livingston County
  • Offenses
    • Operating While Impaired
    • Super Drunk | High BAC
    • Operating Presence Drugs
    • Operating While Intoxicated
    • Minor BAC | Zero Tolerance
    • DUI Expungement
    • OWI Child Endangerment
    • Felony DUI Third Offense
    • DUI Videos
  • Growth Mindset
  • Common Issues
    • Making Substantial Changes
    • Experience Change Model
    • Trial Videos
    • Can the prosecutor prove I was driving?
    • What are my bond conditions?
    • Out of State License
    • Surviving the Implied Consent Law
    • CDL Concerns
    • Field Sobriety / PBT
    • How to beat the blood draw
    • How to beat the Datamaster
  • 5-Star Defense
  • Contact Me
    • Our Team
    • Client Application
  • DUI Expungement
  • Prosecutor Confessions
    • Why I became a Defense Lawyer
    • OWI First Offense
    • OWI Second Offense
    • OWI Third Offense
    • Field Sobriety Tests
    • Implied Consent
    • Hardship Appeal
    • Chemical Tests
    • Sobriety Court
  • Courts
    • Oakland County >
      • More Courts >
        • Oak Park
        • Madison Heights
        • Hazel Park
        • Ferndale
        • Pontiac
        • Waterford
      • Novi 52-1
      • Clarkston 52-2
      • Rochester Hills 52-3
      • Troy 52-4
      • Royal Oak 44th
      • Southfield 46th
      • Farmington Hills
      • Bloomfield 48th
    • Washtenaw County >
      • Ann Arbor
      • Pittsfield Twp 14A1
      • Ypsilanti 14-A
      • Ypsilanti 14-B
      • Chelsea 14A3
      • Saline 14A4
    • Wayne County >
      • More Courts >
        • Redford
        • Lincoln Park
        • 25th District Court Ecorse
        • Wyandotte
        • Southgate
        • 30th District Court Highland
        • Hamtramck
        • Dearborn Heights
        • 32nd District Court Harper Woods
      • Livonia
      • Plymouth 35th
      • Allen Park
      • Romulus
      • Grosse Pointe
      • Woodhaven
      • Dearborn
      • Detroit
      • Garden City
      • Westland
    • Macomb County >
      • Center Line District Court
      • Clinton Township
      • Eastpointe District Court
      • Fraser | Roseville
      • Shelby Township
      • Sterling Heights
      • St Clair Shores
      • New Baltimore | Chesterfield
      • Warren
    • Livingston County
    • Genesee County
    • Jackson County
    • Monroe County
    • Lenawee County
  • Leading with Empathy
  • Reviews
dui attorney michigan arrest

Michigan Implied Consent Hearing - What you need to know and what you should expect - Hiring the Right Attorney to Save Your License 

5/4/2016

 
In Michigan, when you operate a motor vehicle, you consent to certain rules.  The rule book in Michigan, specifically under 2014 PA 315, provides that a person who operates a motor vehicle on a public highway or other place open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles within this state, including an area designated for the parking of vehicles, is considered to have given consent to chemical tests of his or her blood, breath, or urine to determine the amount of alcohol, controlled substance, or another intoxicating substance, or any combination of them, if the person is arrested for one of the enumerated crimes in the statute, including the principal drunk driving offenses along with several other major driving offenses, and the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the driver was operating a vehicle in violation of section 625 of the Michigan Vehicle Code.

What does all that mean? It means when you drive and you refuse you provide a chemical test sample, the officer can seek a warrant and force you to provide a sample, which is typically a blood draw at the hospital.  This law is in place so people can’t escape providing important evidence in their DUI case; without a chemical test, prosecutions of drunk driving cases would be a lot less effective.

If arrested for a DUI in Michigan, the officer must read the Defendant his/her chemical test rights, and be asked to take a chemical test; this test can be blood, breath or urine.  This test can look for alcohol, drugs or both.  Along with this mandated test, the Defendant may request his/her own test.  

If the Defendant refuses the test, they will be forced to have blood drawn via court order, and have an automatic one year suspension of their driver’s license along with six points added to their driving record.  This happens no matter the outcome of the criminal case.  

The Secretary of State has their own power to do this to your license merely based on the refusal.  The only way to possibly prevent this suspension is by requesting an implied consent hearing within 14 days.  

The request information and form are attached to the temporary license provided by the police officer at the time of release from jail.  The officer will be subpoenaed to this hearing where the hearing officer will evaluate four issues; the rules of evidence do not apply, and the criminal standard of reasonable doubt is not in place.  

Here are the four issues which can be explored at this hearing.  You only need to win on one to win the hearing.  Anytime a client finds themselves in this position we file the hearing request and prepare to win.  Unfortunately many clients contact me when it’s too late, and do not realize the consequences of the situation.  

(a) Whether the peace officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person had committed a crime described in [MCL 257.625c(1)].
(b) Whether the person was placed under arrest for a crime described in [MCL 257.625c(1)].
(c) If the person refused to submit to the test upon the request of the officer, whether the refusal was reasonable.
(d) Whether the person was advised of the rights under [MCL 257.625a(6)].

The burden is on the police officer to show compliance with all four issues.  While that appears to be a favorable occurrence, the standard of proof is a lot lower than criminal cases.  The standard of proof at the hearing is a preponderance of the evidence (51 vs 49 percent).  If the officer doesn’t show within 20 minutes of the scheduled time, the matter is dismissed; if the client does not show, the suspension goes into place on default.  

So how do I approach implied consent hearings? Well the first part is obtaining all of the evidence; the videos, audio, dispatch, police reports, accident reports etc.  Sometimes an implied consent hearing happens before a client is even charged, because blood was drawn, which could take months to get results for the prosecutor to charge with, but the Secretary of State goes forward with the hearing.  We’re looking to attack all four issues if possible, but typically you’re lucky to find an issue with one rather than all four.  

The first issue is “whether the peace officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person had committed a crime described in” MCL 257.625c(1) of the Michigan Vehicle Code.  This doesn’t mean a crime actually had to be committed, but rather than officer had a reasonable believe that one had been committed; a pretty low standard.  

Typically the officer will provide enough testimony to win on this issue.  One situation where my client can win on this issue is if the officer had very little to base his arrest on.  If the officer’s testimony is thin, there’s a chance of prevailing on this issue, but it’s usually not the most fruitful.
The second issue that the police officer must prove at an implied consent hearing is that the person was placed under arrest for one of the crimes specified in MCL 257.625c(1).  What I am looking for on this issue is the officer to testify to the crime of arrest; simply stating an arrest was made is not enough, because there are many reasons to arrest that are not under the implied consent law.  

If you’re arrested for reckless driving this is not under the implied consent law.  Further, the person who refuses the chemical test must actually be under arrest when asked; if they are not yet under arrest then the law doesn’t apply.  This situation is possible to identify by watching the videos and listening to the audio.  Further, the arrest must be valid; if through cross-examination we can exploit an illegal arrest, a client can prevail on this issue.  

The statute states that the third issue that must be proved at an implied consent hearing is if the person refused to submit to the test upon the request of the officer, whether the refusal was reasonable.” MCL 257.625f(4)(c).   

This is fact specific, and could involve someone outright refusing or someone who attempts to take the test, but either the machine or the operator determine that the Defendant is not making a sincere effort to blow into the machine.  An interesting situation arises when a client refuses but shortly thereafter says they will indeed take the test.  

Most officers will allow it as it is a lot easier to do a breath test vs going to a hospital for a blood test and to acquire a warrant in the middle of the night for a judge.  This is called curing the refusal and the hearing officer will hear all sides of the story to determine the reasonableness of the refusal if the officer doesn’t allow the curing.  

Some common themes that arise with the third is choice of test.  Under current Michigan law, the Defendant cannot choose which test to take.  So if a Defendant says, yes I agree, but I will only take a urine test, that will be a refusal if the officer wants to do blood or breath.  The choice is with the officer only.  Another theme is right to counsel; Michigan courts have long held that the defendant has no right to counsel before or during a police-administered chemical test inasmuch as the testing procedure is not considered a critical stage in the criminal proceedings.

Although this seems like a closed issue; courts have said that if a Defendant requests to call a lawyer as long as it’s a reasonable request and does not delay the process, a phone call is allowed; if that is denied then the refusal may not be reasonable and the case can be tossed out.  Ultimately, the issue is whether the driver’s refusal was reasonable based on the totality of circumstances existing at the time of the refusal.

If a client has hemophilia, diabetes or a condition requiring the use of an anticoagulant under the direction of a doctor then the Defendant does not need to consent to the withdrawal of blood.  It would be reasonable under the law for this person to refuse, and the sanctions would not apply.  
The fourth and last issue the police must prove at an implied consent hearing is that the Defendant was advised of the chemical test rights stated in MCL 257.625a(6)(b), which provides that a person arrested for one of the crimes enumerated in MCL 257.625c(1) must be advised of all of the following:

(i) If he or she takes a chemical test of his or her blood, urine, or breath administered at the request of a peace officer, he or she has the right to demand that a person of his or her own choosing administer 1 of the chemical tests.
(ii) The results of the test are admissible in a judicial proceeding as provided under this act and will be considered with other admissible evidence in determining the defendant’s innocence or guilt.
(iii) He or she is responsible for obtaining a chemical analysis of a test sample obtained at his or her own request.
(iv) If he or she refuses the request of a peace officer to take a test described in subparagraph (i), a test shall not be given without a court order, but the peace officer may seek to obtain a court order.
(v) Refusing a peace officer’s request to take a test described in subparagraph (i) will result in the suspension of his or her operator’s or chauffeur’s license and vehicle group designation or operating privilege and in the addition of 6 points to his or her driver record.

These instructions are listed on the back of the Officer’s Report of Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test and Michigan Temporary Driving Permit, which is handed to you.  An officer will typically read it word for word and let you look at it; the officer will usually put his initials on the paperwork to indicate it was read.  When I am reviewing this issue, I review the form itself, and the audio and video, which may have recorded the reading of the rights.  

What I’m looking for in this situation is for the video or audio to show that the instructions were not read properly or the conversation between my client and the police officer contained inconsistent or improper information.  
​

Sometimes a Defendant asks for additional information or advice; the officer is trained to not engage in these requests, and just stick to the script, but many officers don’t do that.  If the officer says the wrong thing or misleads or confuses my client outside the chemical test rights then we may have a winner on issue four. ​

Comments are closed.
    Picture
    second offense drunk driving lawyer 2nd offense
    Jonathan Andrew PaulReviewsout of 170 reviews
    Jonathan Andrew PaulClients’ ChoiceAward 2024
    felony drunk driving 3rd offense
    super drunk michigan attorney
    owi lawyer michigan

    Click to Email Me
    Call Me:
    248-924-9458

    dui attorney michigan

    Categories

    All
    911 Tipster
    Accountants
    Acid Reflux Disease
    Alcohol Testing
    Alphabet Test
    Arraignment
    Arrest
    Avoiding Probation
    Avoid Jail
    Bench Trial
    Blood Draw
    Boating Under The Influence
    Body Temperature
    Car Accident
    Career Consequences
    Careless Driving
    CDL
    Challenge Blood Test
    Challenge Jurisdiction
    Challenge Prior Conviction
    Challenge The Arrest
    Challenge The Datamaster
    Chemical Tests
    Child Custody Concerns
    Civil Liability
    Closing Argument
    Cocaine
    Cross Examination
    DAAD Appeal
    Datamaster
    Discovery
    Disorderly Conduct
    Dispatch Logs
    Driver Responsibility Fees
    Driver's License
    Driveway
    Drugged Driving
    Drug Testing
    DUI Causing Death
    DUI Causing Injury
    DUI Dismissal
    DUI Second Offense
    DUI Trial Process
    DUI Warrant
    Educational Consequences
    Feeling Better About Life
    Felony Drunk Driving
    Field Sobriety Tests
    FOIA
    Gas Chromatography
    GERD
    Hair Testing
    Hardship Appeal
    Hardship License
    Heroin
    HGN
    Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus
    Hypoglycemia
    Ignition Interlock
    Implied Consent
    Independent Blood Test
    Infrared Spectroscopy
    Jury Trial
    Losing My Job
    Marijuana
    Medical Conditions
    Medical Marijuana
    Medicaton
    Mental Health Court
    Minor BAC
    Miranda Rights
    Motion To Dismiss
    Mouth Alcohol
    Observation 15 Minutes
    One Legged Stand
    Opening Statement
    Operating Presence Drugs
    Operating While Impaired
    Operating While Intoxicated
    Operation Issues
    Out Of State Convictions
    Out-of-State Convictions
    PBT
    Posting Bond
    Proactive Defense
    Probable Cause To Arrest
    Probation
    Probation Violation
    Prosecutor
    Public Health Code
    Radio Frequency
    Radio Interference
    Reasonable Time Rule
    Reckless Driving
    Refusing Datamaster
    Restitution
    Restricted License
    Right To Counsel
    Rising Blood
    Sentencing
    Sleeping In Car
    Sobriety Court
    Statements
    Subpoena
    Super Drunk
    Super Drunk Arrest
    THC Levels
    Third Offense DUI
    Touching Nose
    Traffic Stop
    Traveling To Canada
    Travel Restrictions
    Urine Testing
    Vehicle Immobilization
    Veteran's Court
    Videos
    Voir Dire Process
    VOP
    Walk And Turn
    Warrants
    Weaving
    Zero Tolerance DUI

Ann Arbor Office Location

Plymouth Office Location

Email Me Now
Picture

Representing DUI Clients in Michigan

Representing 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. ​
  • DUI Playbook
  • Survival Guides
    • Oakland County >
      • Novi
      • Troy Clawson
      • Farmington Hills
      • Bloomfield Hills
      • Rochester Hills Auburn Hills
      • Royal Oak/Berkley
      • Southfield
      • Clarkston
      • Oak Park
      • Waterford
    • Wayne County >
      • Plymouth Canton Northville
      • Livonia
      • Westland
      • Dearborn
      • Woodhaven Brownstown Twp Trenton
      • Romulus Van Burn Twp Belleville
      • Wyandotte Riverview
      • Dearborn Heights
      • Taylor
    • Macomb County >
      • Clinton Township
      • Shelby Township
      • Warren
      • St. Clair Shores
      • Sterling Heights
      • Fraser Roseville
      • Chesterfield New Baltimore
      • Romeo
    • Washtenaw County >
      • Ann Arbor
      • Saline
      • Chelsea
      • Pittsfield Twp
      • Ypsilanti
      • Ypsilanti Twp
    • Lenawee County
    • Genesee County
    • Monroe County
    • Jackson County
    • Livingston County
  • Offenses
    • Operating While Impaired
    • Super Drunk | High BAC
    • Operating Presence Drugs
    • Operating While Intoxicated
    • Minor BAC | Zero Tolerance
    • DUI Expungement
    • OWI Child Endangerment
    • Felony DUI Third Offense
    • DUI Videos
  • Growth Mindset
  • Common Issues
    • Making Substantial Changes
    • Experience Change Model
    • Trial Videos
    • Can the prosecutor prove I was driving?
    • What are my bond conditions?
    • Out of State License
    • Surviving the Implied Consent Law
    • CDL Concerns
    • Field Sobriety / PBT
    • How to beat the blood draw
    • How to beat the Datamaster
  • 5-Star Defense
  • Contact Me
    • Our Team
    • Client Application
  • DUI Expungement
  • Prosecutor Confessions
    • Why I became a Defense Lawyer
    • OWI First Offense
    • OWI Second Offense
    • OWI Third Offense
    • Field Sobriety Tests
    • Implied Consent
    • Hardship Appeal
    • Chemical Tests
    • Sobriety Court
  • Courts
    • Oakland County >
      • More Courts >
        • Oak Park
        • Madison Heights
        • Hazel Park
        • Ferndale
        • Pontiac
        • Waterford
      • Novi 52-1
      • Clarkston 52-2
      • Rochester Hills 52-3
      • Troy 52-4
      • Royal Oak 44th
      • Southfield 46th
      • Farmington Hills
      • Bloomfield 48th
    • Washtenaw County >
      • Ann Arbor
      • Pittsfield Twp 14A1
      • Ypsilanti 14-A
      • Ypsilanti 14-B
      • Chelsea 14A3
      • Saline 14A4
    • Wayne County >
      • More Courts >
        • Redford
        • Lincoln Park
        • 25th District Court Ecorse
        • Wyandotte
        • Southgate
        • 30th District Court Highland
        • Hamtramck
        • Dearborn Heights
        • 32nd District Court Harper Woods
      • Livonia
      • Plymouth 35th
      • Allen Park
      • Romulus
      • Grosse Pointe
      • Woodhaven
      • Dearborn
      • Detroit
      • Garden City
      • Westland
    • Macomb County >
      • Center Line District Court
      • Clinton Township
      • Eastpointe District Court
      • Fraser | Roseville
      • Shelby Township
      • Sterling Heights
      • St Clair Shores
      • New Baltimore | Chesterfield
      • Warren
    • Livingston County
    • Genesee County
    • Jackson County
    • Monroe County
    • Lenawee County
  • Leading with Empathy
  • Reviews