DUI Information

Driving Under The Influence / Physical Control

 
The Law

The Evidence

DUI / Physical Control - The Law

The law on alchohol related offenses is complex. There are specific statutes concerning these offenses, and there are appellate court decisions interpreting those statutes, and the defenses and penalties associated with them. 

The following is basic information on the law and what to expect in the way of penalties, conditions of sentence, including collateral consequences, as well as any DOL administrative action.  

We have also included information on the types of evidence typically seen in a DUI related offense.
For a Free Consultation with a DUI Lawyer, Call Us Today
South King & Pierce County (253) 859-8840 | Eastside (425) 454-9959 | Seattle (206) 901-9984

The Elements of a DUI / Physical Control - Minor DUI

The elements of DUI related crimes such as DUI/DWI, Physical Control and Minor Operating a Motor Vehicle After Consuming Alcohol are set forth in the Revised Code of Washington.  

Be aware that theses statutes may have been interpreted by courts in a number of significant decisions that may or may not be relevant to the circumstances surrounding your specific case.  

For a complete discussion of the elements, and specifically how the law relates to your case, it is important to consult with a lawyer. The lawyers at Stewart MacNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., are available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week to answer your questions, and the first call and consultation are free.
Driving Under the Influence

•Under the Revised Code of Washington, Section 46.61.502,

(1) A person is guilty of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person drives a vehicle within this state:

(a) And the person has, within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person's breath or blood; or

(b) The person has, within two hours after driving, a THC concentration of 5.00 or higher as shown by analysis of the person's blood;

(b) While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug; or

(c) While the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor and any drug.
Being in Physical Control While Under the Influence

•Under the Revised Code of Washington, Section 46.61.504,

(1) A person is guilty of being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person has actual physical control of a vehicle within this state:

(a) And the person has, within two hours after being in actual physical control of the vehicle, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person's breath or blood; or

(b) The person has, within two hours after after being in physical control of the vehicle, a THC concentration of 5.00 or higher as shown by analysis of the person's blood;

(b) While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug; or

(c) While the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor and any drug.

(2) No person may be convicted under this section if, prior to being pursued by a law enforcement officer, the person has moved the vehicle safely off the roadway.
Driving Under Twenty-One Consuming Alcohol or Marijuana

•Under the Revised Code of Washington, Section 46.61.503,

(1) A person is guilty of driving or being in physical control of a motor vehicle after consuming alcohol if the person operates or is in physical control of a motor vehicle within this state and the person:

(a) Is under the age of twenty-one;

(b) And the person has, within two hours after operating or being in physical control of the motor vehicle, either:

(i) an alcohol concentration of at least 0.02, as shown by analysis of the person's breath or blood; or

(ii) a THC concentration above 0.00 but less than the concentration specified in R.C.W. 46.61.502, as shown by analysis of the person's blood.
Penalties and Consequences

The penalties that may result from a conviction for a DUI related offense are set forth in the Revised Code of Washington. Keep in mind that these statutes have been interpreted by the appellate courts in a number of significant decisions that may or may not be relevant to the circumstances surrounding your specific case. Also, the specific judge or prosecutor that is handling your case may their own ideas as to an appropriate sanction for a DUI related conviction.

There are also mandatory minimum penalties that the court must impose for convictions of certain alcohol related offenses, including Driving Under the Influence and Physical Control.

A person should expect that if he or she is convicted of an alcohol related driving offense the court will sentence them to the maximum penalty, and then suspend some portion of the sentence on the condition that they comply with the conditions set by the court. For instance, on a first offense DUI, the court might sentence to 364 days in jail with 363 days suspended, and a $5000.00 fine with $4650.00 suspended. What this means is that the person serve one day in jail and pay a $350.00 fine, plus costs and assessments, and the remainder of the jail and fine is "hung over their head" for up to five years. Part of that jail and fine can be imposed by the court should they fail to comply with any of the conditions of your sentence.

For a complete discussion of the penalties, and specifically what penalties and other related consequences should expect should there be a conviction in your case, it is important to consult with a lawyer. The lawyers at Stewart MacNichols & Harmell, Inc., P.S., are available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week to answer your questions, and the first call and consultation are free.

Jail/Fine/License Suspension

Under Washington law, the majority of Driving Under the Influence and Physical Control charges are prosecuted as Gross Misdemeanors. The severity of the jail, fine and license suspension and other penalties and/or requirements of a sentence will depend upon the particular facts of the case, and the defendant’s history of "prior offenses." The penalties and other requirement for a first, second and third or subsequent conviction are set forth at R.C.W. 56.61.5055 and include, amongst others:

-the maximum and minimum jail time, and electronic home monitoring,
-the maximum and minimum fines,
-the period of driver's license suspension,
-the requirement of an ignition interlock device, and/or other monitoring of alcohol use,
-the requirement of an alcohol drug evaluation, 
-additional penalties for persons with juveniles in their vehicle under the age of 16, and
-conditions of sentence, the violation of which results in mandatory addtional jail and license suspension.

A person with four or more "prior offenses" within the last ten years, or persons who have ever previously been convicted of vehicular homicide or vehicular assault while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug may be prosecuted and sentenced on a Driving Under the Influence or Physical Control charge as a Felony.

Minor DUI - Jail/Fine

Driving or being in physical control of a motor vehicle while under the age of 21 and after consuming alcohol is a simple misdemeanor punishable by up to ninety days in jail and a $1000.00 fine.
Examples of Other Potential Consequences / Conditions 

SR-22 Insurance

If a person's license is suspended as a result of DUI or Physical Control conviction or suspension resulting from an administrative hearing, it will be necessary for his or her insurance company to file proof of insurance (SR-22) with the Department of Licensing before his or her license will be reinstated.

Ignition Interlock Device

A conviction for DUI and/or Physical Control, and some convictions for reckless Driving and NEgligent Driving in the FIrst Degree will result in a requirement that a driver not operate a motor vehicle without a functioning ignition interlock deveice.  An ignition interlock device is an instrument that a driver blows into before he or she can start their vehicle.  They will only be able to start their vehicle if their breath alcohol content reading is under .025.

DOL Administrative Suspension 

When someone is arrested for a Driving Under the Influence or Physical Control in Washington and has either given a breath sample that is over the legal limit, or have refused to take a breath test, the Department of Licensing (DOL) will take actions to administratively suspend his or her license. 

The length of any administrative suspension will depend upon the facts alleged in the case, and your prior history of DUI related administrative suspensions and are set forth at 46.20.3101.

Scheduling a Hearing

Because the arrest triggers specific time requirements with regard to requesting a hearing to challenge the Department of Licensing Administrative Suspension, often the first thing that must be addressed following a Driving Under the Influence or Physical Control arrest is the scheduling a Department of Licensing Implied Consent Hearing. As such, a person who has been arrested should speak to an attorney as soon as possible for assistance in scheduling this hearing.

The arresting officer should have punched a hole in the driver's license of the arrested person and provide him or her with a form to request a hearing. To request a hearing the person completes the top of the form and sends it to the DOL along with a fee or a waiver of fee based upon indigency. These forms are also avaiable on-line. Again, be aware that there is a very limited window of time of following the arrest to request this hearing. 

 If a person fails to timely request this hearing, he or she will lose the right to challenge any DOL action to administratively suspend your license.

The arrested person is also expected to cut off the bottom portion of the form and carry it with his or her driver's license. This serves as a temporary license and is valid for a limited number of days from the date of arrest, or until the DOL reaches a decision following a hearing if one is requested.    

If the arresting officer fails to punch a hole in an arrested person's license and/or provide him or her with the hearing request form, it is still likely that their license is in a temporary status and valid only for a limited number of days. It is also still likely that the person must request a hearing with the Department of Licensing to avoid an administrative suspension. Either way, it is important to speak with an attorney about protecting your driver’s license.

Once the DOL receives the hearing request, the case is assigned to a hearing officer and a hearing date will be set. The person requesting the hearing, or his or her attorney, will receive a copy of the police report from the Department of Licensing. A hearing date will be set within sixty days of your arrest. In some cases, your hearing may be continued for strategic or other purposes. To accommodate such continuances, the temporary license can remain in effect for up to 150 days, or until the hearing examiner reaches his or her decision.

At the Hearing

The administrative hearing itself will generally consist of a phone hearing conducted by the assigned hearing officer. The arresting officer may be subpoenaed for this hearing.  

These hearings differ from criminal trials because unlike a prosecutor in a criminal case who must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the DOL only has to prove its issues by “a preponderance of the evidence.” 

The issues to be decided are set forth on the hearing request form and are as follows:

1. Whether you were under arrest.

2. Whether an officer had reasonable grounds to believe you had been driving or were in actual physical control of a motor vehicle in this state while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, or whether an officer had reasonable grounds to believe you had been driving or were in actual physical control of a motor vehicle within this state while having alcohol in your system of .02 or more and were under the age of twenty-one, her you were under lawful arrest.

3. Whether you were advised of your rights and warnings as required by RCW 46.20.308(2).

4. Whether you refused to submit to the test, or if the test was administered, whether the test indicated an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more if you were age twenty-one or over, or 0.02 or more if you were under twenty-one.

Following the Hearing

The hearing officer may either immediately issue a ruling, or he or she may take the case under advisement. If the ruling is in favor of the driver, there is no license suspension. Where the ruling is in favor of the Department of Licensing, there is an Administrative License Suspension consistent with R.C.W. 46.20.3101. The person whose license has been suspended has four options:

1. Appeal the finding. You have 30 days from the date of the hearing officer's decision to file an appeal in the superior court. As a general rule, the suspension remains in effect during the appeal process.

2. Not Drive. You may simply choose not to drive. This is, of course, always an option and, for some, based upon their individual circumstances, may make sense.

2. Obtain an Ignition Interlock License. There is a strong chance that you will be eligible for an ignition interlock license (IIL) which allows you to drive during the period of the suspension. 

To obtain an IIL be required to have your vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock device (IID) and obtain SR-22 insurance, but once those conditions were met and the DOL approves your IIL application, you will be eligible to drive during the period of suspension.

The IIL is not currently available to those who appeal the hearing officer's ruling.

3. Deferred Prosecution. If you are considering petitioning the court for a Deferred Prosecution, you may have the suspension stayed until the time that the court officially grants your deferred prosecution. 

HTO Ramifications

DUI and Physical Control are major criminal traffic offenses included under RCW 46.65.030. A person convicted of three of these major offenses within a five year period is labeled an "habitual offender." RCW 46.65.020. An habitual offender's license is suspended for a period of seven years, although there are provisions in the statute for possible reinstatement. RCW 46.65.0070, RCW 46.65.080.

A person convicted of Driving While an Habitual Offender is facing 364 days in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. In addition, his or her license will be suspended for an additional one year.

Of more immediate significance, a conviction for driving while an habitual offender carries a mandatory minimum ten (10) day jail sentence for a first offense, ninety (90) day jail sentence for a second offense, and one hundred and eighty (180) day jail sentence for a third or subsequent offense.

For a Free Consultation with a DUI Lawyer, Call Us Today
South King & Pierce County (253) 859-8840 | Eastside (425) 454-9959 | Seattle (206) 901-9984

The Evidence


The Officer's Initial Observations of Driving

For instance, was the driver stopped for weaving, bad tabs, a defective license plate light?

Bad tabs and a defective license plate light are, obviously, not indicative of impaired driving. There may also be explanations for weaving or lane travel other than intoxication.

The Stop

How did the driver respond to the officer turning on his lights? Did he or she pull to the right hand shoulder, continue driving, or stop in the middle of the road?

Where a defendant has been observed weaving, but responds appropriately to an officer's emergency lights, that may be indicative of tired driving, and not intoxicated driving. (When those lights come on, a tired driver wakes up, but an intoxicated driver doesn't sober up)

The Officer's Observations

Odor of Intoxicants - Most experts and officer's will testify that an odor of alcohol is consistent with someone having consumed alcohol, but not necessarily intoxication.

Bloodshot Watery Eyes - Possibly indicative of intoxication, but also could simply mean that a driver is tired, upset (he or she has, after all, just been pulled over by the police), or numerous other explanations.

Slurred Speech- Slurred speech can mean a lot of things, but it does not necessarily mean that a person is intoxicated. Also, it is a rare occasion where an officer can testify that he or she has any knowledge of an arrested person's speech independent of the night of the arrest. An experienced defense counsel's cross-examination of the officer on this latter point might look something like this:

Defense Counsel: Officer, you have testified that Mr. Jones had slurred speech, correct?

Officer: That's correct.

Defense Counsel: However, you have no knowledge of the way Mr. Jones speaks independent of the arrest, correct?

Officer: That is correct.

Defense Counsel: So what you observed that night may just be the way that Mr. Jones speaks?

Officer: I guess that's true.

Coordination - The arresting officer might note that the the person that has been arrested walked with a sway, or stumbled. 

An experienced DUI defense attorney will emphasize what was done well. For instance, was the arrested person produce his or her license without difficulty? (Law enforcement is trained that the production of a driver's license is indicative of good finger dexterity, which is inconsistent with intoxication) Or, was the arrested person able to get out of his or her vehicle without having to use the door to to stabilize himself or herself?

Attitude - The arresting officer will note if the arrested person has mood swings, or was inappropriately rude. Some judges limit this testimony, noting that it is not unlawful not to like the police, or the judge may rule that the probative value of an arrested person being rude, is outweighed by its prejudicial effect.

The Field Sobriety Tests 

One of the first things that an experienced DUI defense attorney will do on the morning of trial is to file a motion to prevent the prosecution from referring to these tests as "sobriety tests." The success of this motion depends upon the judge.

Portable Breath Test (PBT) - as a general rule this test is not admissible at any trial. However, where done appropriately, it can be used by an officer to establish probable cause to arrest.
NHTSA Tests - there are three tests that have been approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). These Include:

Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus- Law enforcement has been trained that people who are under the influence of alcohol or drugs will display an involuntary jerking movement in their eyes when following an object/stimulus. The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test (HGN) is an attempt to prove that a person has consumed alcohol/drugs and/or impairment by showing that this involuntary jerking movement exists in a person who has been arrested for DUI.

In this test the officer most often uses his or her finger, or a pen, as a stimulus to check the arrested person’s eye movements. The officer asks the suspected DUI driver to follow the stimulus with his or her eyes as it is moved it back and forth in a horizontal and/or vertical manner while the officer checks for the involuntary jerking movement.

An experienced DUI lawyer will try to suppress any reference to the HGN test. Where this is not possible he or she will work to limit the tests admissibility to the issue of whether the DUI suspect consumed alcohol, and not whether he or she is impaired.

It is also important that a defendant advise his or her lawyer of any neurological conditions or head injuries as these can also effect nystagmus. Additionally, an experienced DUI attorney will note that unlike the HGN is more complex then the other field tests, and almost appears to have the qualities of a medical examination, and the police are not doctors. An experienced DUI lawyer will also note mistakes between the way the law enforcement was trained to administer the test, and the way that the test was actually performed.

Walk the Line- The Walk and Turn is a divided attention test. This means that the investigating officer is not only judging the suspected DUI driver’s ability to perform the walking and turning, but also his or her ability to follow the directions.

When performing the test, the suspected DUI driver is instructed to take a certain number of steps heel-to-toe along a straight line. He or she is instructed to then turn and take a certain number of steps back down the line heel-to-toe. It’s almost never ten steps, and sometimes it’s a different number of steps down then back. The reason for this is simple, the officer wants to see whether the person performing the test remembers the number of steps he or she has been instructed to take.
During the actual test the officer has been trained to evaluate the suspected DUI driver on eight “indicators”:

•Cannot keep balance while listening to instructions
•Starts before instructions are finished
•Stops to regain balance while walking
•Fails to touch heel-to-toe
•Loses balance while walking/steps off line
•Uses arms for balance
•Does not perform turn correctly
•Takes the incorrect number of steps

An experienced DUI lawyer will challenge the the officer's interpretation of the suspected DUI driver's performance on this test. He or she may emphasize those things that were done correctly (i.e., correct number of steps, only stepped off line twice in 18 steps, etc.), while also noting the conditions under which the test was performed (alongside a freeway, in high heels, in the dark, with the only lighting being provided by the patrol cars emergency lights, etc.), and that other things affect a persons balance, and this is especially true under the circumstances presented by a DUI investigation.

One-Leg Stand- The one-leg raise test is also considered a divided attention test. For this test the officer directs the suspected DUI driver to raise one foot off the ground (typically about six inches), while counting aloud by thousands (typically to 30), or the suspected driver might be asked to estimate when he has been performing the test for 30 seconds.

The officer is looking for four different indicators:

•Sways while balancing 
•Uses arms to balance
•Hops to maintain balance
•Places foot down

Again, an experienced DUI lawyer will challenge the the officer's interpretation of the suspected DUI driver's performance on this test. He or she may emphasize those things that were done correctly, while also noting the conditions under which the test was performed, and that other things affect a persons balance, and this is especially true under the circumstances presented by a DUI investigation.
Other Field Tests - There are a number of other tests that law enforcement has used over the years to "test" sobriety. These include have a person recite the ABCs, The Romberg Balance Test (Which measures the sway of a person standing with his or her hands at their sides), The Finger to Nose Test, and the Finger Dexterity/Finger Counting Test.  

These tests have become less common over recent years. However, where they are used, an experienced DUI lawyer should have the tools and training to challenge them.  


Statements
A suspected DUI driver's statements to the investigating officer can have a significant impact on a criminal prosecution. These statements can be separated into categories. Statements that are helpful to the defense case, and statement that are harmful. Statements that are the result of custodial interrogation and require the reading of Miranda rights, and statements that are either non-custodial, or not the result of interrogation, and do not require Miranda.

Miranda Rights- Most people are familiar with the “Miranda” rights which provide that an officer must advise a person who is in custody as follows:

•You have the right to remain silent.
•Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law.
•You have the right to an attorney.
•If you can’t afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you.

Once a DUI suspect person has been taken into custody, an officer must read him or her these rights before any questioning. If the officer fails to properly advise the defendant of the rights, the prosecutor will be barred from using any statements of the suspected DUI driver made as the result of “custodial interrogation.” 

An experienced DUI lawyer may request a Miranda hearing (CrRLJ 3.5) where the prosecutor will be required to establish that the Miranda rights were read to properly, understood and waived. To show this, the prosecution must show that any waiver of the Miranda rights was:

•Knowing;
•Voluntary; and
•Intelligent.

The point where a DUI suspect is “in custody” is critical to a Miranda issue in a DUI case. This is because, Miranda rights only apply where a person is in custody. Prior to a person being taken into custody, or the officer forming probable cause to arrest for DUI, the Miranda is not necessary and the officer is allowed to ask questions. Furthermore, Miranda only applies to statements that are the result of questioning and/or words or actions by the law enforcement that they should know are likely to elicit an incriminating response.

Standard Thirty Questions- to assist in conducting a DUI investigation the arresting officer has a DUI packet which includes a list of questions to ask the arrested DUI suspect. These questions are often asked just prior to the breath test. The questions range from limiting potential defenses: Is there anything wrong with your motor vehicle? How many hours of sleep did you have last night To determining awareness of circumstances: What road were you on when stopped? What time is it? To getting admissions: How much have you had to drink? Do you feel that your driving was appreciably affected by your alcohol consumption?

Sometimes a DUI suspects answers are helpful to the defense. For instance, when the officer asks for the time, he does so not because he wants to know what time it is, but because of a belief that a person who is under the influence will have lost track of time. If a suspect gives the correct answer, an experienced DUI lawyer will argue that it is evidence, gathered by law enforcement, indicative of a person who is not intoxicated.

However, often a suspected DUI driver's answers are harmful to his or her case. Under these circumstances an experienced DUI lawyer will work to suppress the statements and/or limit their impact.

Other Questions and/or Statements- A suspected DUI suspect typically makes statements other than those that are responses to the DUI packet. These statements can occur as the result of questioning by the officer, which can be both custodial and non-custodial, or statements that are made extemporaneously. For instance, very early in the investigation the officer is likely to ask whether a suspected DUI driver has been drinking. An experienced DUI lawyer has, no doubt, seen responses to this question ranging from a denial (which will require an explanation as to why the suspect has alcohol on his breath), to one or two beers (the most common answers), to "yeah officer, I've had a lot to drink, you saved a whole bunch of lives by getting me off the road tonight." An experienced DUI lawyer should know how to handle any of these statements in negotiations, motions and trial.
The Breath / Blood Test

There are two types of breath tests which a DUI suspect might encounter. Preliminary Breath Tests are administered by the investigating officer prior to arrest and are intended to assist with his or her decision on whether there is enough probable cause to make an arrest. Evidentiary Breath Tests are administered at the station and the results are admissible against in a court to establish guilt. Blood tests, like evidentiary breath tests, are admissible to establish guilt.
 
  • The Preliminary or Portable Breath Test - The Preliminary Breath Test or Portable Breath Test is a handheld device used by law enforcement in the field. These machines typically have an LCD readout. In Washington State, the Preliminary Breath Test results are not admissible into evidence at trial. 
  • The Evidentiary Breath Test - As a general rule the most damaging evidence in a DUI defense is the breath or blood test. For the approximately the last thirty years law enforcement in Washington State has relied upon one of two types of machines to administer the evidentiary breath test, the DataMaster and the DataMaster CDM. In 2014, the Washington State Patrol announced that the Datamaster machines would slowly be replaced by the Draeger 9510. Regardless as to which machine is used, there are specific procedures that must be met before any breath test results can be used as evidence against a DUI defendant. An experienced DUI attorney will know how to challenge these test where they are not administered properly. Furthermore, even where the proper procedures are followed, it is still possible to present a strong defense defense by challenging the accuracy and/or reliability of the results. 
    • The Draeger 9510- In 2014, the Washington State Patrol announced that law enforcement would begin using the next generation of breath testing instruments. This new breath testing device, the Draeger 9510, is now being slowly implemented by law enforcement agencies across Washington State. The process of replacing the Datamaster devices has been slow and, to date, the Datamasters remain the primary devices in both King and Pierce counties. However, the Draeger is on the way. Having become the primary evidentiary breath testing elsewhere in Washington State, including Snohomish County.
    • Like the Datamaster and Datamaster CDM, the Draeger uses Infrared Spectroscopy. But, in addition to the result obtained through that measurement process, the Draeger also tests for the presence of alcohol through an electrochemical fuel cell. Then, the two results are compared to each other to ensure that they are consistent. The Prosecution will likely argue that this manner of double-checking increases the forensic reliability of the Draeger breath test results. The Draeger device uses dry gas rather than a liquid solution used by the Datamaster machines to verify the accuracy of an alleged breath test. 
    • The Draeger 9510 is susceptible to the same kinds ofprocedural errors that affected the Datamaster test results. Furthermore, the new technology has resulted in new evidentiary issues, and new challenges to the accuracy of the test. The DUI attorneys at Stewart MacNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., are already aggressively investigating the potential challenges to the new machine, and are prepared to attack the Draeger evidence.
  • The Blood Test - Under Washington law a suspected DUI driver will only be expected to provide a blood test in specific circumstances. For instance, when he or she is incapable of performing a breath test, due to physical injury or incapacity or limitation, or if he or she is being treated for medical purposes by medical personnel, or where the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the suspected DUI driver is under the influence of drugs. Also,if a DUI suspect is unconscious, under arrest for vehicular manslaughter or is DUI and has been involved in an accident that resulted in serious bodily injury to another person, breath OR blood may be taken 

without consent. Finally, as with other searches, law enforcement may be able to require a blood test pursuant to a lawfully executed search warrant.

Blood test evidence can be complex, but, for an experienced DUI lawyer, blood test results are open to attack. These include problems with the manner in which the sample was collected, chain of custody issues and concerns with the preservation of the blood samples (Washington law requires that they be preserved in an anticoagulant and an enzyme poison sufficient in amount to prevent clotting and stabilize the alcohol concentration). 

Consult with a Lawyer

ou should in no way rely solely upon this information if you or a loved one has been charged with a DUI, Physical Control or Minor DUI, as this information is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney trained in DUI defense. The lawyers at Stewart MacYNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., are available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week to answer your questions, and the first call and consultation are free.
CALL OR EMAIL US TODAY FOR A FREE CONSULTATION
South King & Pierce County (253) 859-8840 | Eastside (425) 454-9959 | Seattle (206) 901-9984
Share by: