Maine OUI need advice

[Matt207]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Maine

First off I live in Maine and I am under 21, a week after I had gotten the OUI I got a letter in the mail from the bureau of motor vehicles that had stated my license has been suspended for a year. I got the letter before I had my court date which was 2 months after I had gotten the letter, I just went to court today for the OUI I got a arraignment day offer of $500 fine and 90 day loss of license if I pled guilty, my question is if anyone knows if my license suspension is a year and 90 days or just 90 days? I took the offer because I thought the 90 days voids the year suspension but I am not 100% sure. I have already gone 2 months without my license so I want to know if those 2 months are added to the 90 days or to the year and 90. Also should I go to the court house or the dmv to get it confirmed if it is a year and 90 days or just 90 days. thanks.

 

[FlyingRon]

Both. You were suspended by the court as part of your criminal sentence and administratively by the BMV for busting the per se limit. You had 10 days from the effective date of the administrative suspension to request a hearing though it sounds like you don't have anything that would have changed things.

Each of your suspensions have effective dates and runs for the stated time from that date. They can overlap rather than getting added together.

 

[Matt207]

Both. You were suspended by the court as part of your criminal sentence and administratively by the BMV for busting the per se limit. You had 10 days from the effective date of the administrative suspension to request a hearing though it sounds like you don't have anything that would have changed things.

Each of your suspensions have effective dates and runs for the stated time from that date. They can overlap rather than getting added together.

what do you mean by them overlapping

 

[dave33]

Matt, These are the questions you ask in court. When deals are made, it changes things and not every persons situation is the same. You can try and ask the court clerk when your suspension will be up.goodluck.

 

[davew128]

what do you mean by them overlapping

Do you have a high school diploma and is English your first language?

 

[betachains]

Hey guys, it is not that hard. If you don't know about the status of your license or when you can get it back: call your state DMV.

Any court actions on your license goes thru the DMV.

To the OP: you lose your license for a year, and will be subjected to expensive requirements for a few years after that. Get a bicycle.

 

[betachains]

Matt, These are the questions you ask in court. When deals are made, it changes things and not every persons situation is the same. You can try and ask the court clerk when your suspension will be up.goodluck.

The DMV has the suspension info, not the court clerk.

For first time uncomplicated DUI/OUI's, the "deal" made by the county DA is the same for every miscreant. It is misunderstanding about this very fact that provides a living to many lawyers.

OT: it is really a disgrace for the legal profession that so many 3rd-tier law school grads (most lawyers) make their living defending DUI's, knowing full well that their representation makes absolutely no difference to the outcome of their clients' cases.

 

[FlyingRon]

It means that if the BMV says Effective 12/1/2013 you are suspended for a year, then THAT suspension ends 12/1/2014.
If the court says effective 11/15/2013 you are suspended for 90 days your suspension ends roughly around 2/15/2014.

This means you are suspended form 11/15/2013 to 12/1/2014. You don't serve the suspension time from 12/1/2013 to 2/15/2014 twice.

 

[Ohiogal]

The DMV has the suspension info, not the court clerk.

For first time uncomplicated DUI/OUI's, the "deal" made by the county DA is the same for every miscreant. It is misunderstanding about this very fact that provides a living to many lawyers.

OT: it is really a disgrace for the legal profession that so many 3rd-tier law school grads (most lawyers) make their living defending DUI's, knowing full well that their representation makes absolutely no difference to the outcome of their clients' cases.

It is really a disgrace that you criticize people based on where they went to law school and don't realize that everyone has a right to an attorney or to hire counsel if they can afford it. And representation can make a difference. Wanna know why? I have had DUI cases where there is NO evidence that my client was driving under the influence except the officer's word because the B.A.C. was 0.0. The judges don't dismiss unless the prosecutors request it and the prosecutors won't request it because they want to force a plea. Which means trial. How many lay people know how to go to trial? Oh .... not too many.

Your stereotype is ridiculous.

 

[HighwayMan]

Your stereotype is ridiculous.

As is much of his other commentary, very often.

 

[betachains]

If I were ever to be charged with a DUI with a BAC of 0.00 and no drugs on board, I wouldn't get a lawyer for the charge. But, I would get a lawyer for my subsequent suit against the police and prosecutor.

 

[quincy]

...
OT: it is really a disgrace for the legal profession that so many 3rd-tier law school grads (most lawyers) make their living defending DUI's, knowing full well that their representation makes absolutely no difference to the outcome of their clients' cases.

Wow, betachains. Where did that nonsense come from?

What you wrote is certainly not true in Michigan and, I would bet, it is not true in any other state either. An attorney hired for any alcohol-related offense can make a BIG difference in the outcome (often the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor, a misdemeanor and diversion, a conviction or dismissal).

As an additional note: What law school someone goes to can make a difference in the types of internships s/he is offered while in school, and can make a difference in the employment opportunites available to him/her immediately upon graduation. After that, the only difference tends to be the size of the debt load carried by the lawyer. That's it.

 

[betachains]

Wow, betachains. Where did that nonsense come from?

What you wrote is certainly not true in Michigan and, I would bet, it is not true in any other state either. An attorney hired for any alcohol-related offense can make a BIG difference in the outcome (often the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor, a misdemeanor and diversion, a conviction or dismissal).

As an additional note: What law school someone goes to can make a difference in the types of internships s/he is offered while in school, and can make a difference in the employment opportunites available to him/her immediately upon graduation. After that, the only difference tends to be the size of the debt load carried by the lawyer. That's it.

To the latter point, I don't speak from personal experience, but quite a few of my neighbors are lawyers (non-Wall Street, not big-firm) who say that a large proportion of their business is DUI-related. The few Big-10 (or top-20) law grads of my acquaintance do not do DUI.

I disagree that a lawyer makes much if any difference in the vast majority of DUI cases, except for the hand-holding in the paperwork. Here in CA, the typical 28 year old driver stopped for speeding, alcohol on his breath, blood-tested for BAC of 0.15, no prior record - will get the usual deal from the DA: DUI misdemeanor record, fines, DUI classes, license suspension, a few days in jail/work project, and several years' probation. A lawyer won't get him a different plea agreement.

He is not going to be charged with a felony; he is not going to get a dismissal. Sure, if the driver ran over a pedestrian, or had just one drink 3 hours ago, or got stopped for whistling too loudly,get a lawyer. Otherwise, I contend that for most DUI cases, a lawyer's added value is minimal. Certainly, it is not "often" that the lawyer will make any difference.

 

[quincy]

To the latter point, I don't speak from personal experience, but quite a few of my neighbors are lawyers (non-Wall Street, not big-firm) who say that a large proportion of their business is DUI-related. The few Big-10 (or top-20) law grads of my acquaintance do not do DUI.

I disagree that a lawyer makes much if any difference in the vast majority of DUI cases, except for the hand-holding in the paperwork. Here in CA, the typical 28 year old driver stopped for speeding, alcohol on his breath, blood-tested for BAC of 0.15, no prior record - will get the usual deal from the DA: DUI misdemeanor record, fines, DUI classes, license suspension, a few days in jail/work project, and several years' probation. A lawyer won't get him a different plea agreement.

He is not going to be charged with a felony; he is not going to get a dismissal. Sure, if the driver ran over a pedestrian, or had just one drink 3 hours ago, or got stopped for whistling too loudly,get a lawyer. Otherwise, I contend that for most DUI cases, a lawyer's added value is minimal. Certainly, it is not "often" that the lawyer will make any difference.

Your experience, and the experience of your "lawyer neighbors" in California, are definitely different than mine in Michigan, in the area of attorney education, attorney experience, and how alcohol offenses are handled.

I would never recommend that anyone charged with an alcohol or drug related offense in Michigan head to court without, at the very least, consulting with an attorney.

 

[davew128]

Your experience, and the experience of your "lawyer neighbors" in California, are definitely different than mine in Michigan, in the area of attorney education, attorney experience, and how alcohol offenses are handled.

While you are correct in observing the difference between the states, I've been in CA courtrooms for enough different matters to confirm his observation, though it may differ county by county. Someone with little to no record and no prior DUI is going to be offered a wet reckless plea with or without an attorney.