Recently in Understanding DUI / Research Category

Chicago Now's Real Law Blog discusses how individuals can clear their names and move on after being convicted of a crime, focusing on expungement and sealing of one's records. In theory, either process is used to give convicts a fresh start and escape the taint of a prior misfortune.

In Illinois, most misdemeanor convictions can be cleared from one's record after a period of time; most felonies, on the other hand, cannot. For example, a retail theft in the amount of $100 (or less) usually can be expunged or sealed after about five years or so; this is helpful when applying for a job, to give one example.

Usually a breathalyzer is the last thing you want to see after a night of revelry. But a new pocket-sized, consumer-targeted breathalyzer device called the AlcoHawk Slim Ultra, as described in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, just might save someone's life.

If it catches on and goes into heavy use, the small devices could cut into Chicago DUI lawyers' business. And at $69.99, they're much cheaper than paying the fines, legal fees and other costs associated with a DUI. 

The suburban town of Naperville finished first in Chicago-area DUI arrests in 2009, according to the recently released results of a survey by the Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists (AAIM). Rockford came in first statewide, with 743 arrests, while Naperville police recorded 581 DUI arrests last year.

And while Illinois State Police made 3 percent more arrests in 2009 than 2008, DUI arrests by the Chicago Police Dept. actually declined by nearly 18 percent. Although Chicago DUI attorneys could probably provide more contexts, it's not clear whether fewer Chicagoans are driving drunk or if the city has fewer resources to enforce DUI laws.

Actress, singer and tabloid staple Lindsay Lohan is not the only DUI convict forced to wear a Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor (SCRAM) bracelet on her ankle but she's certainly the most famous. An MSNBC article explains how the novel detection device works.

But if you've been convicted of a DUI and want to look as fashionable as Lindsay Lohan, ask a Chicago DUI lawyer how you may be eligible to wear the device.

SCRAM spokeswoman Kathleen Brown told reporters that the device is "like a breathalyzer for your ankle." That's the quick pitch, but it actually works quite differently than the standard breath-test apparatus.

You may have heard all about the concept of implied consent, which according to FindLaw means drivers who are suspected of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol must submit to a blood-alcohol test.

So while Illinois law may unequivocally state that yes, you must submit to a breathalyzer test, most Chicago DUI lawyers will offer a more nuanced view, as a Chicago Now blog explains. Illinois criminal attorney Lewis Gainor, who writes the blog, first makes it clear that motorists stopped on suspicion of a DUI really don't have much of a choice during the initial stop.

Still, in answering the question of  whether "to blow or not to blow," he provides the common attorney answer, "It depends."

A family drunk driving tragedy inspired John Ruocco to dream up of an ignition interlock system in order to stop drunk driving.

Years before he was even born, about 80 years ago, John Ruocco's 16-year-old uncle was struck and killed by a drunk driver. As he grew up hearing about the incident, detailed in a profile of John Ruocco by ABC News, he vowed to do something to prevent drunk driving:

"They always talked about this young man, what a nice person he was, and what a horrible death he suffered. That kind of stayed with me. I got into the business and developed this technology."

Now 62 years old, the founder and CEO of Interceptor Ignition Interlocks Inc. can say with certainty that he's made good on his promise. And ironically, you have John Ruocco to thank (maybe even as much as your Chicago DUI lawyer) for the option of driving with an ignition interlock system after a DUI conviction.

About two weeks into the professional baseball season, it's finally beginning to feel like spring: The smell of fresh-cut grass, the warmth of the sun, and the crack of the bat. Baseball is a wonderful family pastime, but all-too-often it is tarnished by the over-consumption of (overpriced) beer. However, fans should be aware of the presence of sobriety checkpoints this season.

Do you really want to dial the number of a Chicago DUI lawyer with a foam finger on one hand and a scorecard in the other? 

Days before the White Sox home opener against the, uh, Milwaukee Brewers earlier this week, Fox Chicago reported that Chicago officials and police issued a public service announcement urging fans to avoid committing an error that could jeopardize the ride back home.

Nearly 6,000 people were killed in traffic accidents in Cook County between 1994 and 2008, according to a study by the Scripps Howard News Service cited by the Chicago Sun-Times. The so-called collar counties around the Chicago area (i.e. Kane County, DuPage County) had similarly high rates.

The section of Interstate 94 in Cook County was listed by the news service as the 11th most dangerous road in the US, claiming 301 lives during the 14-year study period.

Statistics compiled by Mothers Against Drunk Driving-Illinois (cited in the article) suggest that half of all drivers involved in DUI accidents have never been stopped or arrested for a DUI before.  

Assuming the machine is properly serviced and calibrated, breathalyzer tests are fairly accurate. Blood draws are even more accurate, since they go straight to the source. Most DUI charges result in a guilty plea precisely because BAC tests are so difficult to challenge. 

But what about the infamous field sobriety test?

The evaluation seems very subjective, especially since the results are dependent upon the officer's judgment. Even so, the primary function of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test is not to collective conclusive evidence but rather to establish probable cause for arrest (NHTSA).

A case recently decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court obviously does not establish precedent in Illinois, but it's a great example of the debate over whether sleeping in your car while drunk, with the engine off, constitutes drunk driving (StarTribune).

The Minnesota Supreme Court certainly thinks so, at least in the case of a man convicted on DWI (driving while intoxicated) charges, even though he was asleep in his parked car with the keys on the console. Justices based their decision on the conclusion that the defendant was in "physical control" of his car when he was arrested.

Physical control? Was he not making a wise decision by sleeping it off instead of driving?