Find a DWI DUI Drunk Driving Lawyer in your state.

Sponsor Attorney

Charles Kingsbury-Houston

Destined To Lose Your License?

Even though you've been arrested for DWI, you don't have to let it ruin your life. You may not realize it yet, but if you are thinking about simply going to court and pleading guilty to your DWI charge you may be cheating yourself.

You see, a qualified attorney can review the case for defects, suppress evidence, compel discovery of such things as calibration and maintenance records for the breath machine, have blood samples independently analyzed, obtain expert witnesses ­ all of which may help you to win your case at trial.

To find out what you need to know about your DWI arrest I've developed a website to give you a wealth of useful information . . . information which will show you how you may be able to save your license and your freedom . . . and possibly avoid fines, fees, and sharply increased car insurance costs of as much as $6,800.

For the most part, my easy-to-navigate site has information on it which you can't get anywhere else unless you are willing to do a great deal of legal research.

When you're on my site, you'll also learn how you can get a free, no-obligation consultation where I'll review your case and show you how I may be able to save your license and your freedom.

Search for Texas DWI Attorneys by County.

Houston DWI Lawyers

• A-B
• C-I
• J-R
• S
• T-Z

• John Petruzzi:

  What options are available to conclude my case?

  • Dismissal.This is a very unlikely result in any case except under unusual circumstances. Beware of any attorney who assures you that they can have your case dismissed.
  • Reduction. This option is also very difficult to obtain and only happens in unusual cases. In some situations the facts may make the prosecutor realize that he/she cannot win. In order to keep his conviction statistics up, an offer for you to plead to a "non-DWI" case is still a win for the prosecution and still means a criminal record for you. This type of disposition, however, is far better than being convicted of DWI because of all the additional punishment and the stigma a DWI conviction carries.
  • Plea Bargain. If you agree not to demand your right to a jury trial at all, then you and the prosecution will agree to your punishment. In DWI cases this results in a final conviction on your criminal record, but it also insures the leniency of your punishment. An experienced DWI attorney can obtain many concessions in plea bargaining if he/she has a reputation for winning cases at trial.
  • Trial. Trial is the only way to be acquitted and have all records of your arrest and accusation removed or erased from all criminal records that were created. This happens when you plead not guilty and force the State to prove you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Only an attorney with experience in DWI trials and a thorough investigation of the facts of your case can provide you with a meaningful estimation of your success at trial. You see, a trial presents many unexpected changes as it proceeds. A true trial attorney can adapt quickly to changing facts and adjust the trial strategy to win your case. It is important to ask any attorney whom you interview about their success rate in jury trials. Anyone accused of a crime has an absolute right to a jury trial. This most fundamental of all American rights must be waived in writing for a conviction to be valid. It is important that any attorney you consider be familiar with all of these dispositions. A reduction in your charge to non-DWI accusations is not offered in all counties, but is worth investigating.
• Calvin Parks: The U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment requires that search warrants be based on "probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The U.S. Supreme Court has specifically stated that warrants that lack "particularity" are unconstitutional. Thus, if an officer executes a warrant that does not particularly describe the location of a search and the items to be seized, any evidence obtained is usually excluded from trial. Moreover, in certain instances, the person searched may sue the officer personally for money damages.
• Paul Rosemurgy: The Sixth Amendment guarantees that all criminal defendants "shall enjoy the right...to have the assistance of counsel." The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Sixth Amendment right to counsel to mean that a defendant must be represented by counsel during any "critical stage in a criminal proceeding."   In 1961, the Court held in Hamilton v. Alabama that arraignment was "a critical stage in a criminal proceeding" under state law, requiring that the defendant be represented by counsel. Due to the absence of counsel during the defendant's arraignment in that case, the Court reversed his conviction and subsequent death sentence for "breaking and entering a dwelling at night with intent to ravish." In support of its conclusion that arraignment was a critical stage under Alabama law, the Court reasoned that it was then that the defenses of insanity had to be pleaded or lost, pleas in abatement had to be made, and motions to quash on the ground of racial exclusion from grand juries or on the ground that the grand jury was improperly drawn had to be made.
• Michael Kohler: If you've been arrested, you need to defend your legal rights with a solid criminal defense attorney.
• Adam Percely: Police officers conduct "field sobriety" tests on drivers when they make vehicle stops and suspect that a driver may be intoxicated. Designed to help officers determine whether a driver is intoxicated based on the officer's assessment of the driver's physical or cognitive ability, these on-site tests typically include the following physical agility exercises: Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) driver must follow officer's penlight with his eyes Walk and Turn requires driver to walk a certain distance and turn around heel-to-toe Standing on One Leg requires driver to raise one leg while counting aloud Finger to Nose driver must bring the index finger to the nose with eyes closed Rhomberg Balance Test driver must stand still with his head tilted back
• Lindeman & Frye: "Driving While Intoxicated" or "Driving Under the Influence" is a serious offense which, depending on your past record and the facts of your arrest, could either be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony. State laws prohibiting drinking and driving have become increasingly complex in the last five years. In our state, the legal limit for blood or breath alcohol while operating a vehicle is .08. A first offender faces suspension of driver's license and monetary penalties of up to $2000.00 or more, and in some cases mandatory jail. A second DWI offense carries a punishment of up to one year in jail and a $4,000 fine. A third DWI offense is a third degree felony and it carries a punishment of up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. In all criminal cases, but especially in the area of DWI, you should know your rights. Remember these rights if you're ever stopped by a police officer for investigation of driving while intoxicated: You have a right to remain silent. You do not have to answer any questions which a police officer asks you during a traffic stop, except to identify yourself and produce proof of financial responsibility. You are not required to perform any field sobriety tasks -- you don't even have to look at the pen the officer will put in front of your face to test your vision reaction. If you believe that you may be driving while intoxicated, your polite refusal to perform these tasks will benefit you greatly in any criminal proceedings which will follow. You should politely refuse and look down or away when the officer attempts to perform the "pen test" on your eyes. In almost every case of being stopped for "investigation" of driving while intoxicated, if it is after dark and you have the odor of an alcoholic beverage on your breath, the officer is most likely going to arrest you regardless of whether or not you think you have passed the tests. You have a right to refuse a breath or blood test. When you are asked to perform a breath test after you are arrested and while you are at the police station, you are not required to submit to this test. There is currently no criminal sanction for this refusal. However, there is a potential drivers license suspension sanction for a refusal. You have a right to a hearing before your license is suspended. Whether you fail a breath test or you refuse a breath test, the Department of Public Safety will attempt to suspend your drivers license. However, they are not always successful. Under our system of laws, you have a right to a lawyer and a jury trial when you're charged with DWI. DWI cases are not "hopeless," and you should not assume that you will be found guilty. Only by consulting a lawyer and reviewing the evidence of the traffic stop and the arrest can you make an intelligent decision about how to resolve the charge against you.
• Musik & Musick Before juries begin the deliberation process, courts provide instructions regarding applicable law or procedure. In criminal trials, courts generally instruct jurors regarding the phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt." This instruction is given primarily because the Constitution has been interpreted to require that each element of a crime be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." Although this phrase is well known and used in courts across the nation, many courts have adopted accompanying language that varies the overall meaning. Such modifications are considered proper so long as the constitutional protections afforded criminal defendants are satisfied.
• Larson Law Firm: The U.S. Supreme Court has generally interpreted the Fourth Amendment prohibition against "unreasonable searches and seizures" to impose a warrant requirement upon police officers who wish to perform a valid search or arrest. However, the Court has carved out some exceptions to the warrant requirement, which make certain "seizures" constitutionally permissible in the absence of a warrant. One exception that the Court has recognized is for investigative detentions based on less than probable cause. In 1968, the Court established a notable exception to the warrant requirement in Terry v. Ohio for investigative detentions based on less than probable cause (i.e., sufficient reason based on known facts to believe a crime has been committed).
• Larry Rousseau: All states have "implied consent" laws that require drivers suspected of DUI to submit to some form of chemical test (breath, blood or urine) to measure BAC. Implied consent laws are based on the logic that all drivers give consent to DUI testing by driving on state roads and highways.      In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that an officer may force a driver to submit to a blood test (without the driver's consent or a warrant) as long as the officer has probable cause to believe the driver is under the influence. While some states allow drivers to choose the form of chemical test, refusing to submit to a chemical test can carry serious penalties (e.g., mandatory license suspension). In fact, refusal to take a chemical test in California will result in a one-year license suspension for the first offense. Further, if a driver is ultimately convicted for DUI, his refusal to submit to a chemical test may enhance the penalties.
• Robert Jones: The Sixth Amendment provides, in part, that criminal defendants have a right to "be confronted with the witnesses against [them]." This provision is generally referred to as the "Confrontation Clause" and means that criminal defendants have the right to cross-examine their accusers or witnesses who are testifying against them. While this principle has generally maintained its strength in the criminal court system, the U.S. Supreme Court has occasionally modified certain aspects.
• Charles Johnson: When you or a loved one are facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation, you need someone you can rely on to help you.
• Kennitra Foote: Most Americans drink alcoholic beverages; many use both legal and illegal drugs. Overindulgence, however, results in intoxication and those "under the influence" can suffer from impaired judgment and abilities. Studies have shown a strong link between drug and alcohol use and crime. For example, it is estimated that as many as two-thirds of felons were intoxicated when arrested.
• Douglas Rankin: On Sept. 1, 2003, harsher drunken-driving laws than ever went into effect in Texas. In addition to the existing $2,000 fine for a first DWI, a new ³driver responsibility² law now adds an additional $3,000 in surcharges to be paid over three years.  A repeat offender faces existing fines plus new surcharges up to $6,000 over three years. Drivers convicted of DWI who refuse to pay the new surcharge lose their licenses. Another new law makes it a state jail felony for an intoxicated driver to have a child 15 years or younger in the car. And a third law now requires every driver involved in an accident that results in serious bodily injury to submit to an alcohol test. Faced with such enormous penalties, how many drivers accused of DWI can afford not to consult an experienced attorney?
• Owsley & Associates: If you are found driving after having drinks you can be arrested either under suspicion of being intoxicated or after taking a breathalyzer. The current legal limit is .08 in Texas.
• Jonathan Paull: You can't afford not to fight. If you take a cheap plea-out, it could cost you up tp $5000 in fines, court costs, increased insurance rates and loss of time at work.
• Jim Medley: Texas law is very strict on the charge of Driving While Intoxicated. The legislature, judges, and prosecutors in the state are under pressure from the public and political interest groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving to treat DWI arrests very harshly. For example, alcohol related offenses like DWI are the only offenses that the law does not allow a person to recieve deferred adjudication probation for. The law allows deferred adjudication for murder and sexual assault of a child, but not DWI.
• Charles Kingsbury: Now that you've come into contact with the law, you've found out the dirty little secret. Anyone drinking and driving is subject to arrest, whether or not it was affecting their driving ability. But being arrested does not mean you will be convicted.
• Thomas Martin: If convicted of driving while intoxicated for the first time, you may be subject to confinement in the county jail for a period of up to six months, and pay an additional fine not to exceed $2,000.  This will be in addition to court costs, increases in your insurance premiums, and possible loss of license.
• Marc Mayfield: You would be hard pressed to find someone who has not heard of the organization commonly known as MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving. It seems that everyone in America is aware of the dangers presented by individuals who are driving while under the influence of alcohol or an illegal substance. However, you may find it an equally difficult task to find someone who could give you a basic understanding of the penalties associated with first time or repeat offenders.
• Paul Mewis: In many cases, your initial contact with law enforcement officers may involve being stopped while driving a motor vehicle. Many of these stops escalate into investigations for possible drunk driving or even drug possession.
• Mohr & Associates: Virtually any case can be plea bargained if both parties are willing as long as there are no outside pressures, such as media coverage. However, rarely does an accused get an offer that is everything you want. In many cases the offer will be for some prison time, especially in any felony case. There is always one other option: Try the case.