1st DUI is a lawyer needed?

[sed777]

What is the name of your state? California

On Fri night i was cited for a dui and released.

Im trying to figure out if a lawyer is really nesc.

I blew a .11 and the took blood at the station.

I've noticed that everyone has different advice.

I was told by a freind of the family who is a police officer that getting a lawyer is pointless because they are most likely going to get you the same result as if you hadn't had one. The difference being if the was any questionable circumstances.

The DMV hearing.
This seems to be pointless because im sure the blood test will come back the same or higher the the breath test. Although i have called a local dui lawyer advertised on the radio and he is all gung ho about getting the hearing and what not.

I don't have money to burn on Lawyer fees in addition to court fees if the results are basically going to be the same.

Any insight to theis mess is greatly appreciated!

Scott

[nezahualcoyotl]

No need to burn money on a lawyer.

My first DUI I wasted $1,000 on a lawyer for nothing.

My friend got a 2nd DUI and wasted about $4,000 and the outcome did not change.

What county are you in?
From my experience Orange county is much harsher on DUI's than Los Angeles county.

[sed777]

What county are you in?
From my experience Orange county is much harsher on DUI's than Los Angeles county.[/quote]


Im in Orange County

[HomeGuru]

I agree. You do not need an attorney. You sound like a drinking and gambling kind of person.

[undecided2776]

i think he means that your screwed. Man that sucks you got a cop that was strict. Im sorry. I think in your situation the most you an attorney can do is take your money and POSSIBLY lessen your penalties. but i doubt it. also i dont have that much experience but thats what may end up happening.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by undecided2776

Man that sucks you got a cop that was strict.

"Strict"? What other option did the officer have? I suppose he COULD have risked losing his job abd let a drunk driver go ... but why should he?

What would you have preferred the officer to do?

- Carl

[BigMistakeFl]

I agree that you don't need a lawyer. It depends upon whether you intend to fight the charge and go for "not guilty". If the evidence against you is flawed or just incorrect, then a lawyer will be needed. If you are guilty and there's really no defense, why throw money away to get what you would get anyway? Research the minimum penalties (provided this is your first offense and your not an habitual bad driver) and get started on them. This is what you will most likely get with or without a lawyer. Move through your penalties, figure out how you'll get around without a license, and learn not to make this very bad choice again.

[grasmicc]

"On Fri night i was cited for a dui and released."

"Im trying to figure out if a lawyer is really nesc."

It depends on how much money you have and how opposed you are to being convicted. If you are 60 years old, retired, don't have much money, don't need your driver's license, and don't plan on committing any future crimes, then I'd say you probably shouldn't bother with an attorney.

You need to consider what the consequences, for you personally, of a conviction would be and whether you are willing to risk them. This will vary by personal factors not listed here.

"I was told by a freind of the family who is a police officer that getting a lawyer is pointless because they are most likely going to get you the same result as if you hadn't had one."

With the notable exception of Carl, local police know next to nothing about law.

"I don't have money to burn on Lawyer fees in addition to court fees if the results are basically going to be the same."

You are more likely to win with representation.

"Any insight to theis mess is greatly appreciated!"

It's a personal choice. For some people, a slightly lower chance of conviction is worth $10K. For others it is not.

[garrula lingua]

Carl is great.
Many 'local police' are excellent- I've met many who have a better understanding of real-life, triable, criminal law issues than well-educated lawyers.

You sound well-intended, but you're living out of a hornbook.

How many criminal trials have you done ?
How many criminal cases have you handled ?

The real world is a lot different than law school and hornbooks.

PS: That retiree needs his DL as much, if not more, than the youngster;
A case should be fought or settled on the merits, not the age of the defendant.