California magazine questions DUI attorney practices

The May 2009 issue of California Lawyer Magazine featured an article from Tom McNichol calling DUI defense, "the specialty people love to hate - but dare not drive without." The article takes a close and, at times, critical look at the practice of DUI defense.

McNichol interviewed prominent DUI attorney Lawrence Taylor. Taylor is known for his outspoken press releases defending the rights of accused drunk drivers. He has lead the charge to change many DUI laws, recently focused on gender discrimination and marijuana DUI in press releases these past few months.

Taylor points out the double-standard of DUI defense: snub your nose at it until you need it. Many people assume all DUI offenders are given a fair trial but found guilty because they are indeed guilty. Taylor says defendants are often shocked to face the reality of a court that is not kind to accused DUI offenders.

McNichol points out this hard treatment of DUI offenders is largely due to the extreme statistics of death, injury and general danger DUI drivers cause. It is in response to these things, according to McNichol and many state lawmakers, that laws and punishments must be tougher.

New laws bring more business to DUI attorneys, the article points out. The laws also bring a host of small lawsuits to the court. A primary current concern is the Supreme Court ruling that forensic scientists must be present in court when evidence is presented. This means a lab technician who analyzed a chemical BAC test should be called to testify. Attorneys, judges and court officials are all concerned about how this will bog down the courts.

McNichol discusses the reasons why the DUI specialty is attractive to defense lawyers. He cites the fact that it is largely recession proof, and it may even be more profitable in an economic downturn when drinking tends to go up. DUI defendants are generally wealthier than most criminal defense clients, meaning they will likely pay larger fees and pay them on time.

While McNichol addresses these common trends in DUI defense, he points out there are attorneys who handle cases very differently. The one end, according to McNichols, includes the, "specialists who've spent much of their professional lives mastering" DUI defense. These attorneys tend to be highly technical and rather expensive.

McNichol calls the other group, "DUI mills." His research claims these attorneys charge very little for their practice and usually settle with a guilty plea. McNichol is largely critical of these attorneys, calling them "escort lawyers" who push guilty pleas and take the client's money. These attorneys often send letters to individuals on the list of police DUI reports.

McNichol is unforgiving in the portrait he paints of these less-costly DUI attorneys. He fails to address the key issue, though, for many clients who approach the "DUI mills:" DUIs are expensive. And they get more expensive each year. With interlock requirements, fines and penalties, impound fees and more, DUIs may cost up to $10,000 before attorney fees.

DUI penalties are and have long been a regressive approach to a criminal, social and political issue. Those persons who are least able to afford alternate transportation are also least able to afford high-end defense. For many people, low-cost DUI attorneys are the only form of defense they can afford. Going in without an attorney is a worse option.


Source