Affluenza Teen Sentenced
By Price Benowitz Staff Writer
February 6, 2014
When one thinks of legal justifications for manslaughter, typically three arguments come to mind: self-defense, “heat of passion”, and insanity. However, a recent event that has captured the national media and general public’s attention has introduced a new element into the equation – “affluenza”.
In June of 2013, a 16-year-old driving a pickup truck in Tarrant County, Texas hit and killed four individuals and seriously injured two passengers. At the time of the accident, the teenager was operating the vehicle under the influence of alcohol and with a BAC level of three times the legal limit. The teen had previously been charged with drinking and possession of alcohol, but needless to say, his run-in with the law had little effect on his behavior. The case, however, transcends the typical DUI.
While the event is a tragedy for a variety of reasons, the story would not have remained in the eyes of the general public for as long as it has were it not for the defense counsel’s unprecedented argument. The lawyer’s argument, in a nutshell, was that his client was not responsible for his actions because he was suffering from the condition of affluenza. The term is a portmanteau of “affluent” and “influenza,” and one finds the following when consulting a dictionary:
“A psychological malaise supposedly affecting wealthy young people, symptoms of which include a lack of motivation, feelings of guilt, and a sense of isolation.”
The defendant’s lawyer explained that his client’s parents had set no limits for their son, and that his impulse control problems were a direct result of growing up in such an environment. In short, the culture of materialism and absence of consequences were grounds for absolving the teenager of responsibility for stealing beer from a local Walmart, driving while intoxicated, and killing four innocent individuals in addition to leaving two passengers seriously injured. One of those passengers, Sergio M., is now paralyzed. His family is suing the teen, the teen’s family, and the business owned by the teen’s parents (to which the vehicle was registered) for damages cumulatively amounting to $20 million.
Defense counsel was supported by Texas psychologist Dr. G. Dick Miller, who is adamant that affluenza is a bona fide defense in the case at hand. While Miller recognizes that the “condition” is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, more commonly known as the DSM, he believes that the teenager, as a result of affluenza, did not possess the mental acuity that would warrant him culpable for his actions. Among those who recognize affluenza as a legitimate condition, addiction and personality disorder are seen to be the primary symptoms.
This story has captured the national media’s attention yet again, as Texas District Judge Jean Boyd yesterday sentenced the teenager to 10 years probation, conditional on his long-term psychological and addiction treatment. The family will reportedly pay $450,000 annually for their son to attend a rehabilitation center in California. The ruling is controversial on its own, but to make matters worse, it has been reported that the same judge had previously sentenced a 14-year-old African American to 10 years in a juvenile detention center for killing one person. Across news syndicates and social media, critics of the decision have reiterated that had the defendant in the present case been a minority or subject to different socio-economic circumstances, it is likely that he would be facing time in a juvenile penitentiary.
While incarceration is far from the perfect solution, there has been a strong consensus that 10 years probation is merely a “slap on the wrist,” and will do little to change the teenager’s behavior. On a broader level, this incident has provoked discussion and debate about the juvenile criminal justice system, and the appropriate penalties for DUI-related involuntary manslaughter. It has also served as an example of the richer class receiving differential treatment in what is supposed to be an impartial court of law. Until these disparities are addressed and rectified by society as a whole, even those with big bank accounts, will suffer.
For more information about how DUI is treated under the law, please visit the following page.
Faulty Breathalyzers Could Nullify DC DUI Convictions
By Price Benowitz Staff Writer
Jan. 28, 2014
A District of Columbia appellate court has ordered the release of police records showing Breathalyzers used in the nation’s capital were unreliable, prompting speculation that the revelations may justify overturning hundreds of drunk driving convictions dating back four years.
Tom Ramstack at The Legal Forum, notes this isn’t the first time the Metropolitan Police Department’s Breathalyzer, the Intoxilyzer 5000EN, has generated legal concern. An initial round of court action was launched about three years ago, when some roughly 20 lawsuits were filed against the District of Columbia. In those suits, the plaintiffs claimed the device had malfunctioned, leading to wrongful convictions for driving under the influence (DUI). Price Benowitz founding partner David Benowitz was instrumental in calling into question the constitutional violations posed by the malfunctioning devices. The lawsuits that were filed alleged violations of constitutional protections and also named Metropolitan Police Officer Kelvin King as a defendant because it was his responsibility to calibrate the Intoxilyzers to ensure they were providing accurate readings.
In February 2011, the Metropolitan Police confirmed the existence of “a potential problem with the accuracy of the [Intoxilyzer] machines.” That announcement led to the dismissal of nearly all of the drunk driving convictions that had been entered before the confirmation was made public.
But the civil suits against the District and King went forward, prompting the Metropolitan Police Department to seek an outside expert opinion on its Breathalyzer. The analyst chosen for the task, Ilmar Paegle, studied its performance and confirmed its readings were erroneous. As a consequence of Paegle’s study, King then came under official police investigation.
At this point, the Washington DC chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police, which is the local police union, stepped into the fray. It filed a claim, under the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to compel the Metropolitan Police Department to publicize the results of its Breathalyzer investigation. At first, the police department refused to comply, claiming that evidence compiled during an official investigation is specifically exempt from FOIA’s disclosure requirements. The union pressed the matter, filed an appeal, and succeeded in persuading the department to release a total of 871 documents.
Still not satisfied, the union demanded more disclosures in the DC Superior Court, where its lawyers said the police department was withholding key information pertaining to defects in the malfunctioning Breathalyzer. When the court disagreed and ruled in favor of the police department, the union took its case to the appellate court.
Earlier this month, the DC Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s ruling and ordered the police department to hand over all of its documents describing its difficulties in maintaining quality control over the Intoxilyzer. Barring the intervention of a federal court, the Metropolitan Police Department must now comply with the order of the appellate court. When the documents finally become available for public review, they may contain damaging revelations that former DUI defendants can use to reopen their drunk driving cases and, possibly, result in negating their convictions.
So once again, hundreds of people convicted of DUI offenses are learning that they may have been unfairly convicted and could possibly see those old convictions tossed out. This is significant on many levels as a DUI conviction can haunt a person for years, particularly when it comes to qualifying for employement and housing. If you have suffered a DUI conviction in Washington, DC since 2010 you may want to contact a dedicated DUI attorney who can review your case and find out if it qualifies for appeal under this latest ruling. David Benowitz and the attorneys he leads at the firm’s Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia offices, are eager to answer all your questions and fight for your rights.
Justin Bieber Arrested for DUI
Written by Price Benowitz Staff Writer
Many people have never received a DUI, and most never expect to get one; but, as Justin Bieber has taught us this week, never say never.
Early Thursday morning, a Miami Beach Police Officer initiated a traffic stop of Bieber’s yellow Lamborghini for drag racing at the intersection of Pine Tree Drive and 41st Street – a residential neighborhood in which the speed limit is 30 mph. The officer wrote in the arrest report that Bieber and his competitor, who was driving a red Ferrari, were travelling at speeds of approximately 55 to 60 mph.
According to the arrest report , Bieber questioned the officer as to why he was being pulled over, and exhibited signs indicating his ability to drive was impaired. The officer then asked Bieber to exit the vehicle and place his hands on the vehicle so that the officer could perform a pat-down for weapons. Bieber was verbally hostile to the officer, and at one point took his hands off the vehicle and turned to face the officer in protest. Bieber repeatedly refused to comply with the officer’s request to keep his hands on the vehicle, despite a warning from the officer that if he continued to do so he would be subject to arrest.
The report goes on to state that Bieber tried to turn to face the officer again, at which point the officer handcuffed Bieber and placed him under arrest. Moreover, Bieber proceeded to resist the arrest, at which point he was placed into custody with the assistance of another police officer, and transported to the Miami Beach Police Department.
Upon his arrival at the police department, Bieber was offered SFSTs, or Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, according to protocol. The tests include the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus, Walk-and-Turn, and One-leg Stand tests; more information about such tests can be found here. Bieber agreed to submit to the tests and, according to the arrest report, “did not perform to standards.” He also agreed to a breathalyzer test and drug evaluation.
As this was all unfolding, officers also discovered that Bieber was driving with an expired license, which is a criminal traffic violation in Florida punishable by up to 60 days imprisonment, probation, and a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 (Florida State Code § 322.065).
Later that day, Bieber made an appearance before a judge via a video link, in which the judge set bail at $2,500.00. Bieber was formally charged for DUI, non-violently resisting arrest, and driving on an expired license. Upon posting bail, Bieber exited the jail and was greeted by paparazzi and shouting fans.
Minus the luxury automobile and celebrity status, the aforementioned is a typical example of what can happen to individuals who decide to drink and get behind the wheel of a car. A DUI conviction can be a serious imposition on one’s livelihood, as it can lead to suspension of driving privileges, imprisonment, fines, and other collateral consequences.
However, if you have been charged with a DUI, there are legal resources available to you. In Bieber’s case, it is evident that the arresting officer and law enforcement personnel in custody acted consistently with their legal obligations. This is not always the case, however, and an experienced DUI lawyer will have an in-depth understanding of what a law enforcement officer must do at each stage in a DUI stop and arrest, and be able to identify any deviation from those obligations. If you are facing DUI charges in the state of Maryland, contact a Maryland DUI lawyer with Edward Tayter Attorney at Law today.
Increased Demand for Maryland DUI lawyers
During New Year’s celebrations, nowhere is safe!
A quick study of drunk driving and other crime stats for New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day and you might decide your health and safety would be best served by staying locked in your house for the next 48 hours.
Studies by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety suggest that early morning hours of the New Year make January 1 the most dangerous drunk driving day of the year, averaging more fatal crashes involving impaired drivers than all the other alcohol-infused holidays combined. According to statistics from the Mothers Against Drunk Driving & National Safety Council, 140 people died in drunk driving accidents last January 1.
The Latest in Maryland DUI News
A crash course in how not to enter a bar
DUI’s are no laughing matter. They can end or at least wreck lives. And careers. But sometimes, when you hear of a truly ridiculous DUI case, you can’t help but quietly chuckle and shake your head. That’s an understandable reaction when you read about Warwick, Maryland resident Douglas Lyn Taylor, who earlier this year, according to local police, crashed his truck into a bar and began trying to make his way into the establishment. The bar was closed, the doors were locked and the lights were off. But that didn’t deter Taylor, who was still intent on patronizing the watering hole when police arrived on the scene a few minutes later. As the Cecil Daily reports, the cops arrested Taylor having witnessed him repeatedly stumble and slur his speech. A field sobriety test was not issued, as the local law enforcement members judged the man’s inebriation to be severe enough to require immediate medical attention. The police report alleges the man reeked of booze, and an alcohol blood test later confirmed that Taylor had a BAC tally of 0.24, which is three times the legal limit. Not surprisingly, Taylor has been charged with driving under the influence of alcohol. So the next time you’re wondering, “What does a man have to do to get a drink around here?” remember that ramming your vehicle into the front of a closed bar is not the correct answer.
Wait a second, this isn’t a road
When you choose to drink and drive, you’re putting yourself and others at serious risk. That fact is doubly true if you choose to drink and try to drive onto a railroad track. Luckily, for Lorin Noelle Angelucci of Port Deposit, Maryland, her escapade ended only in an arrest, probation, and fines—as opposed to a serious injury or death. As The Star Democrat reports, Angelucci, whose vehicle became stuck not far down the tracks she was attempting to navigate, was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol. Angelucci could have been subject to other serious traffic offenses for driving a car on a railroad track, but by pleading guilty to the DUI prior to a trial, prosecutors agreed to drop all other charges.
Most Americans understand the concept of three strikes and you’re out—most, but not necessarily all. When it comes to DUIs, one Princess Anne man has nearly struck three times. Yes, Anthony Eugene Ward was recently charged with his eighth DUI. You heard right, eight. As WBOC 16 reports, Ward, who was found asleep at the wheel of his truck, with the engine running, now has six DUI charges in Maryland to add to his previous two in Delaware.
Get a lawyer
Of course not all DUIs are as egregious as these examples. Police may cut corners to meet DUI quotas, or you may have had an extra glass of wine and find yourself barely over the limit. Regardless of the circumstances, the mistake of driving under the influence shouldn’t needlessly shatter your personal and professional life. Protect your legal standing and your constitutional rights by employing the counsel of an experienced Maryland DUI attorney.
Justifiable Homicide in Maryland Home Invastion
Police report that the fatal shooting of an intruder at a Prince George’s County apartment complex appears to be justifiable homicide carried out in self-defense. According to police, 29-year-old Benjamin Jackson returned fire against an intruder who forced him into his apartment, wounding the suspect who later died at an area hospital. While an investigation is pending to determine whether or not Jackson will face charges, preliminary findings show that the shooting was justified. According to the Prince George’s County State’s Attorney, “Generally speaking, people do have a right to defend themselves and others in their homes, including deadly force in some circumstances.” However, in comparison with criminal homicide, justifiable homicide cases are rare. According to 2008 FBI reports, there were only 204 firearm-related justifiable homicides compared with nearly 9,500 criminal murders involving firearms. While the use of deadly force in self-defense is rare, Maryland criminal lawyers understand how to utilize the theory of justification as a defense to murder charges.
In this case, although the shooting appears to be a classic case of self-defense, an investigation is still underway. Police have not yet determined whether the gun used by Jackson to shoot the intruder was possessed legally. Jackson has two prior misdemeanor convictions of carrying a concealed weapon in another state.
Additionally, the family of the man killed denies that he would be linked to such a violent crime. They report that he was a loving father of two and a youth mentor. However, the suspected intruder, tentatively identified as Keith L. Fletcher of Washington DC, is suspected in another robbery earlier that day and had an active warrant for his arrest stemming from his alleged involvement in a March carjacking and robbery. Fletcher was also arrested three times in 2008–twice for drug charges and once for robbery and assault. Fletcher’s DC criminal defense attorney was successful in having all three cases dropped: one due to lack of evidence, one for an officer’s failure to testify in court, and the third for the victim’s inability to identify Fletcher as his attacker.
As the investigation into the incident continues, police are still looking for two other suspects who fled the scene of the home invasion.
This article is presented by The Law Offices of David Benowitz, a criminal defense firm serving Maryland, Washington DC, and Virginia. For more stories like this one, please visit our Washington DC Criminal Defense Lawyer blog.
Delonte West Pleads Guilty to Weapons Charges
Washington DC native Delonte West, guard for the NBA’s Cleveland Cavaliers, pled guilty recently to weapons charges stemming from his arrest in Prince George’s County Maryland. West’s guilty plea came as part of a plea agreement that would allow him to play during the upcoming NBA season. Under the terms of the plea bargain, the NBA player will serve eight months of home detention, two months of supervised probation, forty hours of community service, and two years of unsupervised probation. Additionally, Delonte West is required to wear an electronic monitoring bracelet and to undergo counseling and alcohol treatment.
The weapons charges came after West was arrested in September for cutting off a police officer while changing lanes. The basketball player, who was driving a three-wheeled motorcycle called a Can-Am Spyder, was found to be carrying a Beretta 9mm handgun in his waistband, a Ruger .357 magnum strapped to his leg, and a shotgun in a guitar case strapped to his back. All three guns were loaded. West was also carrying an eight-inch Bowie knife and 100 shotgun shells. According to West’s Prince George’s County criminal lawyer, the NBA player was transporting the weapons from his mother’s house to his own home in Fort Washington.
Originally charged with six weapons offenses, West pled guilty to carrying a dangerous weapon for his possession of the Bowie knife and to illegally transporting a handgun. As part of his community service, Delonte West plans to speak with at-risk youth in Washington DC. Of his public service, West says, “If I never dribble a basketball again, I think I found my calling.”
If you are facing criminal charges and are in need of legal representation in the state of Maryland, more information can be found here.
New Study Shows Christmastime Rage Creates More Crash Chaos than New Years Drunk Driving
Written By Price Benowitz Managing Editor Tracy Manzer
Dec. 4, 2013
We all know not to drink and drive; but don’t shop and drive?
That seems to be the take-away message following the release of a new traffic study that found drivers who are feeling that special kind of stress that comes during this most wonderful time of year are 32 percent more likely to become aggressive. The same study found that the six-day period around Christmas registered 27 percent more auto accidents than crashes during booze-fueled New Year’s Eve, and 18 percent more pile-ups than the heaviest travel period of the year, which is Thanksgiving weekend.
The new report is based upon the work of University of Alabama Professor David Brown, who compiled traffic data from his state over a ten year period. That data was included in a State Farm Insurance report released this week, and which also found — no surprise here — that parents and drivers younger than 49 are particularly prone to “angry driving.”
Jonathan Adkins, deputy executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association, told the Washington Post that it “makes sense” that accidents increase during the holidays because “people tend to drive aggressively when they are feeling stress in their lives.”
Though an informal study conducted by the Post found that drivers in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, DC don’t need holiday pressure to feel the rage.
Brown explained the unique effects of the seasonal stress in the Post piece, saying, “The pressure of the holiday, the pressure of having to find something and running all over to find it and all of those things would tend to distract them. … Their mind is on other things, and the next thing you know they’re pulling out in front of somebody.” In addition to the new report, the Highway Loss Data Institute confirms claims for collisions increase by almost 20 percent in December, while also noting that many minor fender-benders go unreported to police and insurance companies.
The good news, according to Brown, is that Christmas Day is a great day to drive. And even Christmas Eve sees some relief due to a number of businesses closing up shop early. Brown suggested the number of holiday-related crashes might be reduced if law enforcement were to focus on drivers who make erratic and rash manuevers, rather than rely on speed as a possible indicator of “angry,” and therefore dangerous, driving. Who knows, maybe law enforcement agencies will start staging driver check-points at shopping mall and big box retail parking lots.
Seasonal revelers should not, however, assume that the new report will take away from the traditional aggressive DUI and DWI campaigns used in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC every holiday season. For more information about DUI and DWI violations, click here.
DCPS Bus Driver Charged with DUI for Failed Sobriety Test
It is important for people to remember that you can be arrested for a DUI without a breathalyzer test. In fact, there are times where you can be arrested in scenarios where you are not even pulled over. A recent case in the District of Columbia exemplifies this possibility perfectly.
WJLA reports that on October 7th, 2013, an on-duty D.C. Public Schools bus driver was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), and was charged with both a DUI and operating a vehicle while impaired (OWI). The bus driver, 55-year-old Fritz Gerald Aubin, was arrested after failing field sobriety tests, likely the Standard Field Sobriety Tests (SFST). He was fired before the end of October, according to the Associated Press.
Aubin was driving a bus of special needs students when he left his stalled bus in the middle of the street near a gas station. Aubin then proceeded to enter the gas station, where he asked the attendant for a red gas can.
The attendant gave Aubin a red gas can, which is only for use with gasoline. However, Aubin’s DCPS bus runs on diesel fuel, which requires a yellow can. There were some plainclothes DC police officers nearby, and they became suspicious for several reasons. Primarily, they were suspicious because Aubin was filling a red gas can with diesel. But they also noticed Aubin’s uniform was dirty and he was spilling gasoline on the pavement.
The plainclothes officers then administered a battery of field sobriety tests, which Aubin failed. WJLA states that Aubin failed the tests because he “couldn’t walk in a straight line or count out loud, … was unable to stand on one leg … [and] when asked to take eight steps, he told the cops he had taken six, after which the police immediately arrested him.”
Although I do not know for certain exactly what tests the officers administered on Aubin, it is very likely that they used the battery of Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The SFST is comprised of three separate tests where a person is asked to do a certain task and the individual administering the test looks for a number of indicators while the person attempts to complete the task.
The three tests are the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), the Walk and Turn (WAT), and the One Leg Stand (OLS) tests. For more information on these tests, visit our field sobriety test page.
HGN testing involves the officer asking a person to follow an object or light horizontally with his or her eyes, while the officer observes the person’s eyes. There are six indicators, three in each eye, related to whether the eyes can smoothly track the object or light. Although the officers may have administered this test on Aubin, there has been no report of it.
The second test, the Walk and Turn, certainly seems to have administered. It, like the One Leg Stand test, is a divided attention test that requires a person to perform simple physical tasks while listening to and following instructions.
The Walk and Turn test requires a person to take a number of steps (usually nine) along a straight line in one direction, turn on one foot, and then return in the same number of steps, all heel-to-toe. Officers administering the test look for eight indicators, and assume people exhibiting two or more are likely impaired. Aubin seems to have exhibited at least two of the indicators: failing to follow a straight line and taking an incorrect number of steps.
The One Leg Stand test has officers looking for two or more of a total of four indicators. The person taking the test is required to stand on one leg while counting aloud by thousands. Indicators of impairment are swaying, using arms, or hopping to maintain balance, and putting one’s foot down. Therefore, when Aubin was unable to stand on one leg (or even to count aloud), he would have failed this test as well.
The police officers arrested Aubin without administering a preliminary breath test because Aubin exhibited so many indicators of impairment during the field sobriety tests. Drivers should also keep in mind, after reading over the requirements of the field sobriety tests, that sober individuals may also have trouble completing those tests to the satisfaction of a police officer. The tests consider things like using arms to balance as indicators of impairment, for example.
If you have been charged with a DUI in DC after failing a sobriety test, please contact a DC DUI lawyer (our DC office website available here).
If you have been charged with a DUI in Maryland, please visit the Law Office of Edward Tayter website (click this link) to contact an experienced Maryland DUI attorney.
The Holidays and DUI Checkpoints in Maryland
Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Festivus, New Years, and a variety of other winter holidays are just around the corner. That means celebrations with friends and family, good food and libations. But for police officers, it means DUI hunting season. And one of their hunting tools: suspicion-less DUI/DWI checkpoints.
Law enforcement agencies typically employ DUI/DWI checkpoints during the holiday season in effort to protect publish safety by discouraging drunk driving and punishing those who get behind the wheel after a few drinks. While a handful of states outlaw suspicion-less checkpoints, the vast majority of the United States, including Maryland, deems DUI checkpoints to be a perfectly reasonable law enforcement technique. The Supreme Court agrees. In the court’s most recent ruling on the subject, justices stipulated that although a checkpoint is a in fact a “seizure,” it is an acceptable legal tool—determining that its effectiveness in preventing drunk driving far outweighed the “minimal intrusion” or inconvenience caused to the driver.
And though some civil liberties advocates continue to lambast the technique, it is understandable why police would use a Supreme Court-backed legal tool during the holidays. Using statistics from 2001 to 2005, the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) calculated that an average of 45 people died each day during the holiday season as a result of car accidents where alcohol was involved. The largest number of DUI-related fatalities happened on Thanksgiving, with New Years and Christmas not far behind.
But while the Supreme Court has so far sanctioned DUI checkpoints in Maryland and elsewhere, they cannot be executed by police officers willy-nilly. There are various requirements that a checkpoint must meet in order to be valid under the law.
A legal DUI Checkpoint in Maryland must meet the following qualifications:
• It must be “systematic, non-discriminatory, and non-arbitrary;”
• It’s impetus must be the protection of public safety;
• It must be publicized ahead of time (usually with a large road sign), in order to lower the stress placed on the driver;
• Drivers must be given the chance to turn around if they don’t want to be stopped;
• And the checkpoint has to be OK’d by a top-level member of the police force.
And though Maryland police will surely use checkpoints throughout the holiday season, not everyone is gung ho about the technique. Some police believe ramping up patrol units, instead of concentrating resources on a checkpoint operation, is a more effective tool for fighting drunk driving. In 2008, Lt. David Kloos, a commander for the Maryland State Police Hagerstown barrack, told the Herald-Mail the following: “If you look at statistics, statistics will probably tell you a saturation patrol is more successful, but the checkpoint is an educational process.”
Efficient or not, checkpoints will be a reality for many Maryland drivers this holiday season. If you’re arrested at a checkpoint, you should make sure that the checkpoint met all of the qualifications listed above. A Maryland DUI defense attorney can review your case to make sure your rights are properly protected and determine whether police violated procedure at any point during your arrest.
Even if the checkpoint was legitimately executed, a DUI lawyer (such as a qualified attorney at The Law Office of Edward Tayter) can help defend your rights and analyze your case to determine if at any point your case was tainted by police misconduct. In the event that a DUI lawyer can’t find a way to see get your case dismissed or win you a “not guilty” verdict, they can do their best to find a best possible outcome, potentially minimizing the penalties, given the circumstances. See our DUI Lawyer homepage for more information on how to secure the assistance of a experienced DUI lawyer in Maryland.