Build Defenseshield.jpgwall.jpg

Posts Tagged ‘registry of motor vehicles’

RMV Hardship Suspensions

Wednesday, February 11th, 2009

Beware the lawyer who only does half his homework and claims to be a success when you are acquitted on all criminal charges and found responsible of two minor civil infractions.  An experience OUI lawyer will always review a client’s complete driving history as a conviction for any criminal motor vehicle violation or civil infraction could trigger a suspension as a Habitual Traffic Offender.  Suddenly, your big success has landed you with a four year suspension without warning or recourse.

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 90 Section 22F defines the Habitual Traffic Offender as the following:

Anyone who within a five year period (1) has three or more convictions (singularly or in combination) for OUI, Operating Negligently or Recklessly, making a false statement on an RMV application, leaving the scene of property damage or personal injury, operating with a suspended or revoked license; operating without a license or the commission of any felony involving a motor vehicle; or (2) twelve or more convictions or offenses required to be reported to the RMV for which the RMV is required or authorized to suspend or revoke the person’s license for 30 days or more.

There is an exception created for a person with no prior record of automobile violations who is convicted of multiple offenses within a six hour period.  In this instance, all violations are considered a single offense.  This exception is for the unfortunate person who spoils a perfect driving record with one “bad night out” and gets the OUI, Negligent Operation, Leaving the Scene and Speeding violations in one arrest. 

Otherwise, the penalty is a four year suspension with an opportunity to beg for a “hardship license” after one year.  If and when the RMV lets you drive again, it will only be after you have copleted a driver improvement course and passed a driving test. 

Therefore, if you are aware that you have a history of any type of driving infractions, regardless of what type or how old, let your lawyer know or your may be one of the soldiers who wins the battle but losses the war.

RMV FAIRNESS ??

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

I represented a client this morning at the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) as he was called in for a hearing to determine whether he had violated the terms of his ignition interlock device (IID).  The notice he received informed him that he had missed a service visit in July 2008 and as a result we prepared a defense to that allegation.  After all, the purpose of providing notice is so the accused can prepare a defense, right?

Well, not surprisingly, upon walking into the hearing we were sandbagged.  The RMV representative handed me a notice for 5 other alleged violations.  When questioned as to why the original notice did not contain these additional allegations, the Board gratiously offered to allow me to take my client in the hall and discuss the issues.  Lets imagine that conversation…

“Mr. J, do you remember if you had your IID serviced on this particular date 8 months age and if not why not?”

“Well Mr. Lawyer, can you believe I have no memory of that particular date and did not bring my 2008 calendar with me.  In fact, I left my file cabinet at home also so I can’t look for any documents that may refresh my memory.  By the way, why is the RMV raising these allegations so many months later when my memory is exhausted and any witnesses or documents I may have had to prove my innocence are no longer available?”

“Please Mr. J, I know I am your lawyer and you hired me to ensure that you are treated fairly and that justice prevails, but now is not the time to get crazy.  We are at the RMV.”

Although I am making light of this experience in my blog, my frustration is overwhelming.  Be clear, this is no inconsequential hearing.  If the RMV finds that a violation has occured, the penalty is a 10 year license loss.  You would think that with the stakes so high, the RMV would at least pretend to treat the accused fairly.

Now, I know what most of you are thinking, “If he had the device in his car, he must be a drunk driver and he shouldn’t have violated any terms of his IID.”  Truth be told, there are many circumstances that rebut the various allegations made by the RMV.  False positive tests are known to be caused by hand sanitizers, certain foods and drinks.  Mechanical malfunctions or power failures have been caused by drained car batteries and other installation issues.  In this instance my client was out of town for work many weeks each month.  There was ample evidence to prove that he had not been in Massachusetts to either drive his car or have it serviced as required.

I am optimistic (cautiously) that the RMV will accept this explanation and refrain from taking my client’s license.  However, I write to inform and warn that if you are subject to IID restrictions and you have any problems with the device, service provider or otherwise, document the problem, save your evidence and prepare to be brought before the RMV even if you resolve the problem without hearing from them.  I assure you, as RMV fairness will have it, the allegation will reamerge when you least expect it and are least prepared to defend against it.

Ignition Interlock Devices for Repeat OUI Offenders

Thursday, October 16th, 2008

The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) requires anyone who has been convicted, made an admission or been assigned to a Driver Alcohol Education Program more than once in their lifetime to install an iginition interlock device in their car before they will reinstate driving privileges.  This requirement is imposed even if the court characterizes your case as a first offense. 

An Ignition Interlock Device is a handheld breath alcohol testing device that is connected to the car’s ignition.  The car will not start with an initial test of greater than .02.  In addition, the car will require random “rolling retests” which tests your breath alcohol level periodically.  The driver is required to have the device installed and calibrated every 30 days.  A calibration includes a data upload which reports any infractions to the RMV.

Possible violations of the Ignition Interlock requirement include failed intitial tests or missed rolling retests as well as failed rolling retests, missed monthly calibration and device tampering.  The penalties for any of these infractions range from a lockout (the car will remain disabled) to a 10 year license loss.  With such extreme penalties it is critical that drivers who require an ignition interlock device remain vigilant about following the guidelines and protect themselves from device malfunctions.

Specifically, if your device indicates a failed test and you have not been drinking, immediately report to a medical office for a blood test or to the police department to prove your sobriety.  It may be months later that the RMV questions the violation and it is the driver’s burden to prove innocence. 

Be warned, these devices are not accurate as there are endless cases of erratic breath test results being recorded within minutes.  If accused of a violation, contact an experienced DUI attorney and protect yourself.