What Determines the Cost for a Reckless Driving Lawyer in Virginia?
Blog Post
Should You Hire a DUI/DWI Specialist?
Daniel Leavitt • Nov 15, 2021
Hiring a Virginia DUI Attorney Can Make all the Difference
- Virginia DUI Law is Very Nuanced
Most general criminal lawyers in Virginia have done DUI cases and so they have a general background about DUI law. The problem is, when it comes to things like the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, and the breathalyzer they really have no idea how those work. So when a general criminal lawyer reviews a DUI case in Virginia, they cannot really make good progress because they don't know how to attack those issues.
In fact, many general criminal lawyers will take an officer at their word that the tests were conducted accurately and show intoxication. The opposite is often true. At Leavitt & Martin, when we review body camera footage showing how officers conduct the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, we OFTEN find issues with how the tests are conducted.
This leads to recognized legal defenses that result in either an OUTRIGHT WIN at trial or an offer to reduce the charge to something much less severe. See the following examples of cases we either WON at trial or had reduced to something minimal based on legal defenses.
List of Services
-
CHESTERFIELD DUI ELEVATED BAC COMPLETELY DISMISSEDList Item 1
Leavitt & Martin represented client on a charge of DUI 1st offense with an elevated BAC. Based on aggressive cross examination on the field sobriety tests, the judge outright DISMISSED the case. A senior member of the police department complimented us on our cross examination, and advised us that it would be the officer's best learning experience going forward.
-
GOOCHLAND DUI 1ST OFFENSE DISMISSED AFTER FULL TRIALList Item 2
The prosecutor refused to offer a plea deal other than to plead guilty to the DUI. Our client did not admit to drinking alcohol. At the trial, we were able to cross examine the police officer and bring out favorable information. We were able to explain away a lot of the incriminating information. At the end of the trial, the judge found our client NOT GUILTY.
-
POWHATAN DUID REDUCED TO IMPROPER DRIVINGList Item 3
This case we were prepared to plead not guilty and have a full blown trial because there was a VERY STRONG legal argument that our client was not guilty of DUID. However, based on the police video dash camera footage it is obvious our client did swerve so there is a very good chance the charge would have been reduced to RECKLESS DRIVING. We were able to negotiate a plea agreement for IMPROPER DRIVING WITH NO LICENSE SUSPENSION.
-
CLIENT WITH UNSUCCESSFUL LAWYER HIRES LEAVITT & MARTIN TO GET OUTCOME THE OTHER LAWYER COULD NOT GETList Item 4
This case offers a PRIME example of why it makes sense to hire a DUI specialist. Client initially hired a general criminal defense lawyer. The case involved an elevated BAC of a .21 which would carry mandatory jail time. The other lawyer negotiated a result that would involve no jail time, but a conviction for DUI. After hiring Leavitt & Martin, we were able to poke holes in the case that resulted in a reduction to RECKLESS DRIVING AND NO JAIL AND MINIMAL CONSEQUENCES. This was a MUCH BETTER result and we were able to achieve it by finding legal defenses the other lawyer could not find.
-
HENRICO .24 ELEVATED BAC REDUCED AFTER REJECTING PLEA AGREEMENT
It is important to hire a DUI lawyer who knows how to evaluate a case. Many prosecutors do not know how to properly evaluate a DUI case. This prosecutor offered to let our client plead guilty to the charge as is, with no reduction at all which would have resulted in mandatory jail time. After evaluating the options, our client wisely followed our advice and entered a plea of NOT GUILTY. At that moment when the prosecutor saw we were going to fight for our client, the prosecutor requested a continuance and ended up offering a reduction to RECKLESS DRIVING WITH NO JAIL TIME AND MINIMAL CONSEQUENCES. Our client chose to accept the plea agreement. It is very important to know how to evaluate a case properly, and know when to fight a case.
Leavitt & Martin: Certified to Administer SFST's
Virginia officers are trained to administer the standardized field sobriety tests (SFST's) according to standards set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) standards. There is actual science behind these three field sobriety tests that when performed according to the standards, will likely show intoxication.
At Leavitt & Martin, both Daniel Leavitt & Corey Martin took the NHTSA three day certification course in DWI DETECTION AND STANDARDIZED FIELD SOBRIETY TESTING. This is a three day course, and to pass the course participants must PERFECTLY administer the three standardized field sobriety tests according to NHTSA standards.
In real life trials, MOST POLICE OFFICERS IN VIRGINIA DO NOT DO A GOOD JOB OF ADMINISTERING THESE TESTS. For example, I have seen officers write in their police report that the defendant failed the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test which is the eye test. However, when looking at the body camera footage it is clear that the officer NEVER PROPERLY TESTED the defendant.
A properly conduct HGN test will take at least 1-3 minutes to conduct. I have seen MANY officers finish this test in 15-30 seconds. It is not possible to accurately conduct this test according to NHTSA standards in that time period. That means you can throw out that test and the results cannot be used against your client.
Leavitt & Martin: Track Record of DUI Success in Virginia
New Paragraph
FREE GUIDE
Recent Articles
What Determines the Cost for a Reckless Driving Lawyer in Virginia?
MOST IMPORTANT VIRGINIA DUI LAWS FOR DRINKING AND DRIVINUG
LEAVITT & MARTIN NEW KENT RECKLESS DRIVING REDUCED 96 MPH
Midlothian
14413 Justice Rd.Suite 1Midlothian, VA 23113(804) 873-4004 (phone)(804) 452-7480 (fax)
Emporia
Leavitt & Martin, PLLC312 South Main StreetEmporia, Virginia 23847(804) 317-2385 (phone)(804) 452-7480 (fax)
Disclaimer: The information on this website is for information purposes only. This website should not be taken as legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This information should not be taken as the formation of a lawyer or attorney client relationship.