Most people know that if your blood alcohol level is .08% or above, you are presumed to be under the influence. What most people do not know, is that the state can prosecute people with “low blows” if the prosecutor believes they can prove the person’s “mental or physical faculties were adversely affected by the use of intoxicants to a noticeable or perceptible degree” (UCrJI 2702). Joan Demarest has experience both prosecuting and defending these “low blow” cases.
While some may be inclined to give up when they see a Drug Recognition Evaluation coupled with a positive urinalysis result, Joan has experience fighting and winning these complicated cases at trial. They are very technical and require a thorough understanding of the science and the law. A positive urinalysis does not necessarily mean someone was under the influence of controlled substances, and not all substances are controlled.
Certain diversion and sentencing requirements in Controlled Substance DUIIs changed effective January 2016, but because not all attorneys know about them, it is crucial to obtain knowledgeable legal representation.
If eligible, DUII diversion may be the best option. However, it is expensive, risky, and only available once every fifteen years. Therefore, it should not be entered into without a thorough evaluation of the evidence and other available options, as well as all of the risks and responsibilities of DUII Diversion.
The District Attorney may object to you being able to enter diversion. Sometimes this is because there is a legitimate legal barrier to your eligibility such as if your DUII caused physical injury to another person or if you had a prior DUII within the past fifteen years. However, sometimes the District Attorney objects for other reasons under circumstances which may still allow a judge to grant diversion.
You are entitled to a hearing and should definitely have legal representation.