Attorneys in MD: (301) 933-1814   VA: (703) 379-9446

MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA ATTORNEYS

Criminal Cases  Traffic Cases  Divorce/Family Cases  

Founding Partner:

Carlos A.F. Salvado Esq.

"My case is simple . . . "

This has got to be one of the most common phrases spoken by individuals who decide they do not need to hire an Attorney.

Whether accused of a crime, a traffic offense, dealing with a civil suit or divorce most tend to see their particular situation as very cut and dry. However, the law is not simple and legal issues cannot be approached in such a simplistic manner. Legal jurisprudence has taken years to develop, is complicated by nature, and is continuously changing.What is procedurally correct one day may be incorrect the next. The lack of this knowledge can reak havoc on a litigant's ability to communicate relevant facts and issues to the judge or jury.



A recounting of an actual case witnessed in a Virginia courtroom in late 2004 will illustrate the point. Despite the judge just about begging the defendant to come back with an attorney, he insisted on pleading guilty and proceeded alone. Although the judge had found the prior DUI defendants guilty and sentenced them to jail, most if not all were given suspended sentences condition upon a successful period of probation. Therefore none of them had to serve a day in jail.



Obviously seeking a like disposition, the defendant began to describe his 50 years with a stellar driving and criminal record. He had never been in trouble with the law. He explained that his drinking had never gotten in the way of his life or work and did not realize it had become a problem. He spoke very elonquantly considering the embarrasment he must have felt.

On the day of his traffic stop, he had his usual glasses of wine at dinner and afterwords was driving home from the restaurant. At the traffic stop he had voluntarily submitted to a preliminary breath test thinking nothing of it. Eventually it was determined that he had a blood alchohol level of .15, nearly twice the legal limit in both Maryland and Virginia.

He begged the judge to understand that he had quit drinking and had started treatment. It was apparent to everyone in the courtroom that the defendant spoke the truth. The judge then turned to the defendant told him that although he understood his situation he had no choice but to do the following.



Then, unlike what he had done in the cases before, he sentenced the only individual who had voluntarily sought treatment, had a credible explanation, and seemed to have everyone convinced that he was a candidate for leniency to serve 5 mandatory days in jail. You could hear the gasps from the citizens throughout the courtroom.

What happened? . . .

The judge had no choice. His discretion had been taken away in this particular fact pattern by a recently passed Virginia law that had come into effect on July 1, 2004. Under current Virginia DUI law a defendant found guilty of driving while under the influence with an blood alcohol content of .15 - .20 must be sentenced to serve 5 mandatory days in jail. This defendant had been stopped after July 1 and thus fell under the new law. Whereas those before him were adjudicated under the old. Therefore the explanation given by the defendant in this particular case could not be considered by the trial judge with regard to those 5 days of jail. And thus, the communication was fruitless.

What should have happened? . . .

No doubt that an attorney would have known to focus on breaking down the barrier caused by the .15 B.A.C. result. This could be accomplished in a number of ways. For example, by expert testimony attacking the validity of the test or its ability to accuratly depict the B.A.C. at the time of driving. Only if the judge had ruled against the .15 B.A.C. result would the defendants story had become relevant with regard to the mandatory 5 days. The defendant did not realize the significance of pleading guilty without first questioning the B.A.C.



The law is filled with nuances. Most are far more obscured than the one in this example. Without their knowledge a defendant may fail to communicate the issues and facts to the judge or jury in a way that will ensure a proper outcome. A cut and dry fact pattern immediately becomes confused at best or uncommunicated at worst.

What should You do? . . .

Consult an attorney as soon as possible. This will ensure that no mistakes are made that could be detrimental to your case. We provide free consultations for Criminal, Traffic, and Personal Injury cases. During this consultation we can advise you of your rights, the penalties that you may be facing, and/or any legal claims you may have.