Michigan Drunk Driving Defense Cases

The following is a brief listing of some of the cases that Joe Cross has challenged.

In every case, he represented his clients fairly, honestly, and zealously. In many of the cases, he achieved results that were beyond the wildest expectations of client.

These results are made possible by Joe's:

  • Attention to detail
  • Commitment to achieving the best possible result for his client on every case
  • Thorough investigation of all the evidence

If you're facing drunk driving charges, and if you'd like results like these, then contact Joe Cross today or complete our free online case review.

Bloomfield Hills, Michigan DUI

After a night out with friends, Joe's client had pulled into a parking lot. She was found by the police asleep behind the wheel with the engine running.

After submitting to field sobriety tests, she was given a breath test. The breath test revealed a BAC of 0.21. She was placed under arrest and charged with DUI.

Sadly for Joe's client, she had a prior alcohol conviction, so a conviction here would result in jail-time.

After a detailed analysis of all the evidence in the case, Joe filed a motion to suppress some it. After no fewer than 7 court hearings and extensive negotiations with the prosecutor, the matter was set for jury trial.

The day before the trial, a final negotiation took place and Joe again pointed out the weaknesses in the prosecution's case. As a result of these negotiations, the prosecution offered to make a deal.

The charge of DUI was reduced to Reckless Driving.

Rochester, Michigan DUI

Joe's client was arrested and charged with DUI after she had been found asleep behind the wheel (with the engine running) in the parking lot outside a party store.

The police asked her to perform field sobriety tests and to submit to a breath test. She failed the field sobriety tests, refused the breath test, and was arrested. She was charged with DUI when a blood test revealed a BAC of 0.22.

Joe's analysis of the evidence revealed that there was some doubt as to who had actually driven the vehicle to the party store. After investigating this detail more closely, Joe was able to find a witness whose testimony would be favorable to the prosecution.

With a suitably strong case, Joe was able to meet with the prosecutor to discuss a reduction in the charges. After lengthy negotiations, Joe was able to secure a deal.

The charge of DUI was reduced to the non-alcohol offence of Reckless Driving.

Clarkston, Michigan DUI

Joe's client was driving home from the bar after having a few drinks with some friends.

At one point his car veered over the line that marked the edge of the road. A police officer, having spotted him doing this, immediately pulled him over. The officer conducted field sobriety tests and then a breath test. Joe's client blew a 0.09, was placed under arrest, and was ultimately charged with DUI.

Joe investigated the case thoroughly, obtaining video tape evidence and reviewing all the details of the stop and the subsequent arrest. This investigation identified a couple of weaknesses in the prosecution's case, so when Joe's client was offered the reduced charge of impaired, he advised his client to decline and proceed to trial.

In the lead-up to the trial, Joe was regularly in contact with the prosecutor. Finally, after extensive negotiations, the prosecutor offered to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving. Joe explained to his client that this was a very good deal because it was a "non-alcohol" offence, because it would be better for his insurance, and because it would not cause him problems with his work.

Joe's client, delighted to be avoiding a drunk driving conviction, accepted the reduced charge of Reckless Driving.

Farmington Hills, Michigan DUI

While driving home from the bar, Joe's client ran off the road and crashed her car.

The local police arrived on the scene quickly and they were soon joined by some state troopers. After performing field sobriety tests and submitting to a breath test which revealed her BAC to be 0.12, Joe's client was placed under arrest and charged with DUI.

After carefully examining all of the evidence, Joe was able to determine that field sobriety tests had not been properly conducted due to the road conditions. It was only a minor flaw in the prosecution's case, but with this weakness identified, Joe was able to secure a plea bargain that resulted in the DUI charge being reduced to Reckless Driving.

Detroit, Michigan Felony DUI

Joe's client was charged with his fourth offence of DUI. Because it was his fourth offence, it automatically became felony drunk driving.

The penalties for felony drunk driving include hefty fines and jail time. Naturally Joe's client was keen to avoid both if possible.

Joe's investigation into the evidence was thorough and turned up several promising possibilities for defending his client. Most important, it uncovered the critical information that a key police witness at the trial would be unavailable.

Joe immediately insisted on a preliminary exam, completely confident that the witness' unavailability would result in a favorable outcome for his client.

It did!

The felony DUI charges were dismissed and Joe's client went home to his family.

Farmington Hills, Michigan DUI

After running a red light, Joe's client was stopped by the police. He admitted to having had a couple of drinks earlier in the evening and was put through various field sobriety tests and finally a breath test. The breath test revealed a BAC of 0.09. He was arrested and charged with DUI.

After a thorough review of all the evidence, including a rigorous examination of the video tape, Joe was able to identify several inconsistencies between the formal police report and the events depicted on the tape. Most importantly, Joe noticed a cigarette butt smoking just next to the driver's door. Joe spoke to his client about it, and it turned out that he'd be smoking it when he was pulled over, and the police had not waited an appropriate amount of time before giving him a breath test.

Joe immediately filed a motion to suppress the breath test. The motion was granted, and even the prosecutor conceded that the suppression was necessary.

With the inconsistencies in the prosecution's case and the exclusion of important evidence against his client, Joe was able to negotiate a very favorable deal for his client.

The charge of DUI was reduced to Careless Driving, a four-point Civil Infraction.

Hazel Park, Michigan DUI

Joe's client was driving on a suspended license when he was pulled over making an illegal turn on red. When a breath test indicated a BAC of 0.10, Joe's client was arrested. He was charged with both OWI and Driving While License Suspended (DWLS), and he was also ticketed for the illegal turn.

Although the situation looked grim for Joe's client, Joe's investigation was able to uncover that his client suffered from a particular medical condition. This medical condition had the potential to affect the client's performance on the field sobriety tests and the BAC indicated by the breath test.

Armed with this information, Joe was able to win a motion to dismiss the DUI charge before the trial began. Further negotiations with the prosecutor resulted in the DWLS charge being reduced to "no operator's permit on person".

Roseville, Michigan DUI

When Joe's client was charged with DUI 3rd Offence, he was desperate to spend as little time in jail as possible.

Joe's analysis of the evidence exposed several weaknesses in the prosecution's case. While Joe was investigating the case he arranged for his client to receive substance abuse treatment and establish a "treatment plan".

With the weaknesses in the case that Joe identified and the client's excellent progress in treatment, Joe was able to secure a favorable deal for his client that resulted in no jail-time for his DUI 3rd offence.

Ferndale, Michigan DUI

Joe's client was charged with DUI after having blown 0.18 on a breath test.

Joe, as always, investigated the case thoroughly and reviewed all the evidence. His thoroughness turned up a crucial piece of evidence: the prosecution could not prove the client's BAC at the time he had actually been driving the vehicle.

Although this would not have been enough to secure an acquittal at trial, Joe was able to use it as leverage during his extensive negotiations with the prosecutor. Finally, much to the delight of Joe's client, the prosecutor offered to reduce the DUI charge to the non-alcohol offence of Reckless Driving.

Lansing, Michigan DUI

Joe's client was pulled over by the police for running a red light. He was asked to perform field sobriety tests and was then given a breath test. When the breath test revealed a BAC of 0.10, Joe's client was arrested and charged with DUI.

As part of his investigation, Joe routinely requests the police video tape of the arrest. While analyzing this tape, Joe was able to determine that his client may not have actually run the red light as the police maintained.

The doubt raised by the tape proved helpful during the lengthy negotiations that took place with the prosecutor, and Joe was able to secure a deal.

The charge of DUI was reduced to the non-alcohol offence of Reckless Driving.

Adrian, Michigan DUI Acquittal

Mr. Cross represented a gentleman who registered a .16 on a blood test after having an accident and ending up in a ditch on the side of the road. He had registered a .11 on a Preliminary Breath Test at the scene of the accident. The case went to trial after the prosecutor refused to reduce the DUI charges.

As part of his strategy, Mr. Cross made the arresting officer perform field sobriety tests in front of the jury. By police standards, the officer failed.

Mr. Cross then argued that the field sobriety test performance of his client did not show that he was intoxicated. A chart was then drafted that suggested that the client's blood alcohol level was rising throughout the night, and Mr. Cross argued that there was reasonable doubt as to whether the client was actually intoxicated above the legal limit at the time of driving.

RESULT: 6 minute NOT GUILTY VERDICT. The client went home to his wife and children free of the burden of a conviction.

Traverse City, Michigan DUI Second Offense

Mr. Cross represented a woman charged with DUI 2nd Offense. She had registered an unusually high blood alcohol level (.21) on the DataMaster instrument used to test her breath.

The woman had been at a local bar with friends when they left to attend the casino. On the way to the casino, the client was stopped for passing too close to a police vehicle at the side of the road, and for not slowing down.

Mr. Cross located a witness that could attest to the fact that the client had applied her brakes when passing the police vehicle. A motion was filed and an evidentiary hearing was conducted where Mr. Cross cross-examined the sheriff's deputy on the witness stand. The deputy reluctantly acknowledged that he was unable to determine the client's speed as she passed his vehicle. Mr. Cross also brought to the Court's attention that based on the width of the client's vehicle and nature of the roadway, she was not required to change lanes.

Based on the deputy's unreasonable stop of the client's vehicle, Mr. Cross moved for suppression of the stop and all evidence flowing therefrom. The motion was granted.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED. PROSECUTOR APPEALED: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL, CASE DISMISSED.

Bellaire, Michigan DUI Dismissal

Mr. Cross represented a gentleman who drove his car off the road. He had been drinking earlier in the evening. The client left the scene of the accident. A nearby resident telephoned the police, and the client was later questioned by his police at his residence.

The police arrested the client and took him to jail where he was required to provide a breath sample for alcohol testing. He blew over the legal limit and was charged with DUI.

Mr. Cross filed a motion to suppress the blood alcohol evidence based on the delay between driving and the testing of his client's breath.

RESULT: DUI DISMISSED. Prior to the court rendering a ruling, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the charge of DUI based on Mr. Cross's legal brief in exchange for a plea to a non-alcohol related charge of "failure to report accident." No appeal could be taken by the prosecutor.

Michigan OUID Dismissed

Menominee, Michigan

Mr. Cross represented a gentleman charged with Operating Under the Influence of Drugs, or OUID.

The arresting trooper believed the client was under the influence of marijuana and heroine. Mr. Cross requested extensive evidence from the prosecutor with regard to the testing procedures and blood evidence obtained from the client.

The results were ultimately produced by the Michigan State Police Crime lab and Mr. Cross moved for dismissal of the charges based on questionable test procedures and insufficient trace amounts of drugs in the clients system to justify an allegation that the drugs affected the client's ability to drive.

RESULT: OUID DISMISSED. CHARGE REDUCED TO $100 CIVIL PENALTY FOR TRAFFIC VIOLATION.

Michigan DUI Dismissed

Clare, Michigan

Mr. Cross represented a gentleman charged with DUI after being stopped by police, allegedly failing field sobriety tests, and ultimately registering a .14 based on a blood test.

The client had refused to submit to a breathalyzer. Mr. Cross understood that the client would likely lose his license for 1 year for refusing to submit to a breathalyzer test. Mr. Cross, however, used this information to his client's advantage.

Mr. Cross negotiated with the prosecutor to reduce the DUI charge to a non-alcohol related charge that would eventually drop off the client's record. In exchange for the reduction, Mr. Cross offered to have his client accept responsibility for the breath test refusal and lose his license for one year.

Mr. Cross then convinced the prosecutor that the penalty to his client of losing his license would be severe in light of the fact that his client owned a business and several vehicles that required him to drive. The prosecutor agreed and reduced the charge to the non-alcohol related offense of reckless driving.

Upon securing this agreement, Mr. Cross filed a motion with the Circuit Court asking for a hardship license under the Implied Consent statute. An order was then signed by the Court allowing the client to drive to and from work and in the course of employment.

RESULT: DUI DISMISSED AND REDUCED TO NON-ALCOHOL OFFENSE; CLIENT OBTAINED HARDSHIP LICENSE FOR IMPLIED CONSENT VIOLATION.

Michigan DUI Second Offense Dismissed

Jackson, Michigan

Mr. Cross represented a woman who was charged with DUI 2nd Offense.

She had been stopped by officers while she was driving away from a bar, and was forced to perform field sobriety tests. The officers told her she failed, and she was promptly arrested and charged with DUI 2nd Offense after also failing a breathalyzer test.

The woman retained an attorney who advised her to accept a plea to the reduced charge of DUI 1st Offense.

Not satisfied with this advice, she called Mr. Cross for a second opinion.

Mr. Cross advised her that pleading to an DUI First Offense would still result in a loss of license for at least one year. Due to her work, she could not afford such a license sanction. Mr. Cross accepted her case and agreed to take the case to trial.

Prior to trial, Mr. Cross investigated the case and learned that his client had been wearing high-heeled shoes at the time of the stop. The police had not offered her the chance to remove her shoes during the field sobriety tests.

Mr. Cross also questioned the motive of the police for stopping her vehicle. The police had claimed that an object appeared to be obstructing her rear view mirror. Mr. Cross determined that the obstruction (an object hanging from the mirror) was insufficient to justify the stop, and he prepared a motion asking the Court to suppress the stop and throw out the case.

The prosecutor reviewed the motion, and agreed that the stop and field sobriety tests may have violated the law.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED. No reduction necessary, full dismissal without appeal.

No Felony Conviction for an DUI Third Offense and Resisting and Obstructing

Traverse City, Michigan

Mr. Cross represented a client charged with DUI 3rd Offense and Resisting and Obstructing. In all probability, the client was facing significant prison time.

The client's goal was simple: avoid a felony conviction on his record, avoid prison, and minimize jail time to less than one year.

No reductions or plea bargains were offered by the prosecutor, and the Traverse City court remains one of the toughest in the state on sentencing.

The case was bound over (or transferred) to the circuit court level on the felony, and Mr. Cross filed a motion to suppress the stop and dismiss the case.

Prior to arguing his motion in court, the prosecutor offered to reduce the DUI 3rd Offense to a 2nd Offense, and to dismiss the other charges.

Mr. Cross explained to his client that the reduction would result in the case being transferred back to the district court level, which meant the client could not be found guilty of a felony. Sentencing would also be limited to 1 year or less, and no prison time could be imposed. The client opted to accept the plea bargain, and the case was transferred back to district court.

Once transferred, Mr. Cross asked the district court judge to accept his client into "treatment court," which is normally forfeited if not entered into at the inception of the case. The court granted Mr. Cross's request, and the client entered treatment court. (The advantage to that treatment court is that the client can only be sentenced to a maximum of 21 days in jail.)

At sentencing, Mr. Cross offered a strong argument to limit the 21 days to 10 days jail with work release. The court again granted the request and offered compliments to Mr. Cross on the record for achieving such a favorable result for the client and society on a 3rd offense felony DUI charge.

RESULT: 10 days jail with work release on a DUI 3rd Offense and Resisting and Obstructing charge.

No Jail on a Third Offense Michigan DUI

Bay City, Michigan

Mr. Cross represented a gentleman charged with DUI 3rd Offense and Resisting and Obstructing.

Similar to the above case, Mr. Cross determined that his client's ultimate goal was to avoid jail and a felony conviction.

Mr. Cross met with the prosecutors and negotiated a reduction to a DUI second offense. The client jumped at the opportunity to limit the conviction by pleading guilty to the second offense.

After Mr. Cross secured agreement to the reduction, and after the case was contained at the district court level, Mr. Cross requested that the defendant be made eligible for a treatment court program. He met with probation officers on several occasions and secured the agreement of probation to recommend treatment court despite the client's background on alcohol-related cases.

RESULT: NO JAIL ON A 3RD OFFENSE REDUCED TO A 2ND OFFENSE. 1 YEAR PROBATION.

© Copyright 2005-2017 S. Joseph Cross, P.C.

Copyright © 2008 Cross Defense - All Rights Reserved
Website by Inspire Consulting