How to get rid of that pesky ignition interlock device following your Seattle DUI arraignment
Lately I have been seeing more and more people required to have an ignition interlock device following their DUI arraignment on a first offense DUI. Previously only the Judges in Seattle Municipal Court were imposing this ignition interlock device requirement following a DUI arrest. But more and more Judges around King County are following suit. I believe this is a complete misinterpretation of the law, and is quite frankly unconstitutional. However if you do find yourself in this boat of having an IID on a first offense DUI, don’t fret there may be a way to get rid of it.
Whenever I have a client facing this dreadful situation the first thing I have them do is get an alcohol and drug evaluation. The purpose of this evaluation is for a state certified chemical dependency counselor to find that you do not suffer alcohol abuse or dependence and because of that you’re not likely to drink and drive. Typically the recommended treatment on a DUI case for this type of evaluation is a one day class called an alcohol drug information school and victim impact panel class.
Once the results of the evaluation come in for the DUI arrest, I make my clients take both of those classes. I then file a motion in the court asking the Judge to reconsider the ignition interlock device that was imposed. For example lets say you have a DUI in Seattle Municipal Court. This is a place where the bulk of my practice is and it can be a little tricky if you’re not familiar with it. First you need to file what is called an add on motion. This is a motion where you request the case to be heard on a certain date. Secondly you then filed the motion to strike the ignition interlock device once that date is received.
The next thing is do is get the records for my clients ignition interlock device. It will say whether there have been any positive tests for alcohol and when they were. Ideally there are no positive tests and that also can be submitted to the DUI Judge in an effort to show the client has not consumed a drop of alcohol and then decided to drive.
Now once you’re in front of the Judge you need to make a pitch that the IID is unreasonable and a simple abstain condition will do the trick of keeping your client from drinking and driving. Obviously there is more to it than that but that is the gist of the argument. If you find yourself in this position and an IID was imposed at your arraignment feel free to contact my office and I can help you get it removed.
About the author: Matthew Leyba is a Bellevue Seattle DUI Attorney in Western, WA. He has been named a Rising Star by the Seattle Met Magazine in the field of DUI Defense, an honor less than 2.5% of all Attorneys receive. Additionally he is rated as a 10/10 and listed as a Superb Seattle DUI lawyer by Avvo.com