How Much Will My DUI Cost Me?
January 30, 2008 | 1 Comment
So, you’ve received a DUI in Memphis or Mississippi! How much is your Memphis DUI or Mississippi DUI going to cost you? $500, $1,000 maybe $,1500?
If your arrested and convicted for a Mississippi DUI or Memphis DUI you’d be surprised at the cost. The penalty with a conviction for a Mississippi DUI or Memphis DUI will costs you for years to come. Here’s a look at the cost from CNBC.
Drunk Driving Could Cost $20,000
CNBC News. Dec. 14 - Twenty thousand dollars sounds like a lot to pay for a drink at a holiday party, but if that last cocktail puts you over the legal limit, that “one for the road” could easily cost you that or more.
One drink too many puts you at risk for not only an arrest, but also for fees, fines and costs that can run you thousands of dollars. While a DUI or DWI may be a misdemeanor charge in a number of jurisdictions, it’s a matter that most judges and district attorneys take very seriously. The financial toll of a conviction will play out for years to come, and in many states that can add up to $20,000 before everything is over. This includes bail, fines, legal fees, increased auto insurance premiums, loss of work income, court-ordered alcohol education programs and more.
Of course, if you get fired from your job as a result of the arrest, that dollar figure would skyrocket…
The Texas Department of Transportation says a June 2006 survey in that state showed the total costs of a DWI arrest and conviction - for a first time offender with no accident involved - would range from $9,000 to $24,000.
In many states today, you’re better off committing a felony burglary, for example, than a misdemeanor DUI. The difference between .07% and .08% alcohol in your blood could be the difference between a brief detention and a nightmare in the legal system with a $20,000 price tag.
‘Ever wonder why?
So the next time you decide to drink and drive think about the consequences. Not only will a Mississippi DUI or Memphis DUI cost you over $20,000 in higher insurance costs, court costs, and lost income, it could cost even more if you harm someone when you’re behind the wheel. Remember never drink and drive, but if you feel that you need a Memphis DUI attorney or Mississippi DUI attorney then give us a call.
(special thanks to Lawrence Taylor’s blog for alerting us to the CNBC article)
DUI Entrapment in Mississippi and Tennessee
January 30, 2008 | Leave a Comment
Although he’s not a Memphis DUI lawyer or a Mississippi DUI lawyer, dui attorney Lawrence Taylor is an expert in the dui defense field. He had an excellent post on DUI entrapment that takes a look at how police and the courts have looked at dui entrapment.
You can view his post on his site here or just read it below.
DUI Entrapment
Monday, December 13th, 2004
Suppose a police officer asks or orders an individual to drive a vehicle - and then arrests him for DUI when he complies?This situation comes up more often than you might think. Take, for example, the following case that eventually made its way to the New Jersey Supreme Court….
The defendant asked his brothers at a wedding reception to drive him home because he was too intoxicated to drive. In the parking lot, however, the brothers got into a fight, attracting the attention of local police. One of the officers struck a brother with his nightstick. The defendant asked the officer to quit hitting his brother. The officer replied by ordering him to leave the parking lot. When the defendant did not immediately comply, the officer repeated the order and then forcefully escorted him to his truck. The defendant obediently got into the vehicle, started the engine - and backed into a police car.
He was arrested for drunk driving.
At trial, the judge ruled that the defendant had failed to prove entrapment or duress as a defense, and he was convicted. On appeal, however, the conviction was reversed on grounds of quasi-entrapment - that is, the defendant should have been acquitted if he could show that but for the officer’s order to leave in the vehicle he would not have driven. The prosecution appealed this reversal to the state’s supreme court.
Incredibly, the supreme court reversed the lower court and reinstated the conviction. Its reasoning? “Obviously,” the court said, “if the law were to permit [drunk drivers] to offer as a defense that they drove only because they reasonably feared that telling the police that they were drunk might lead to arrest, the invitation to offer a pretext would be clear”. The court continued its twisted logic:
“No one ordered the defendant to get drunk and no one ordered defendant to drive drunk. The police did not coerce defendant into driving his vehicle through the use or threats of violence. The police officers merely ordered defendant to get in his truck and leave the scene of the fight….” (Emphasis added) State v. Fogarty, 607 A.2d 624 (N.J. 1992).
This “no win” scenario is fairly typical of what I have referred to in earlier posts as “the DUI exception to the Constitution”.
