Maryland Court of Appeals Rules on DUI Rights Prior to BAC Testing

Written By Staff Writer

The right to counsel is a hallmark of fairness in the American legal system and one of the procedural due process rights afforded to citizens in almost every case. It is a glimmer of hope in what can otherwise be a dark and terrifying time. But what happens if you are denied this basic right? April Deering’s case provides a disturbing answer to that question that will affect countless drivers throughout Maryland.

According to a recent ruling by Maryland’s highest court, Deering was pulled over for suspected drunk driving early on the morning of May 3, 2012. After being transported to the Fruitland Police Department, Deering was informed that she had the option of submitting to a Breathalyzer test to determine her blood alcohol content (BAC) under Maryland’s implied consent law.

The consequence for refusing a Breathalyzer test in the state of Maryland is a 120 day license suspension. On the other hand, if one submits to the test and is found to be over the legal limit, the consequence for a first-time drunk driving conviction may include a 90 day license suspension.

Deering was detained early in the morning. Her repeated requests to have an attorney present to advise her on whether or not she should submit to the breath test were denied. The Court of Appeals found that this was done so that the two hour time limit required for alcohol testing would not be exceeded. Deering eventually agreed to take the test, which resulted in a BAC of 0.16. She was charged with DUI and, subsequently, had her license suspended for 90 days.

Deering later argued in her administrative hearing that she deserved a lesser suspension because her right to counsel was violated. This motion was rejected by the MVA court, however, when it found that the detaining officer needed to act quickly to capture an accurate breath sample.

Unsatisfied with the outcome of her hearing, Deering took her case to the Maryland Court of Appeals. Deering and her attorney fervently argued for her right to due process under the Constitution.

Despite their valiant efforts, the Court of Appeals called into question whether a person suspected of driving under the influence has the right to have an attorney present for a Breathalyzer exam. More specifically, the Court in Deering ruled that being denied the opportunity to speak to your attorney does not stop the administrative license suspension, meaning you will still have your license suspended for blowing a high BAC. You can find a pdf copy of the ruling here.

This decision goes to the very foundation of defendants’ rights throughout the State of Maryland. It is concerning that the court would find that the right to legal counsel does not come into play when one is facing administrative penalties. There is also some question, and serious concern, that this ruling could have a n impact on the right to legal counsel in other situations.

As a firm that provides services for countless people charged with DUI offenses in Maryland every year, our office finds it extremely concerning that a defendant can be forced into making a legal decision without counsel and, effectively, without the ability to completely comprehend what is happening. Though this ruling is troubling, our colleagues remain dedicated to their cause and will continue to fight on behalf of those who are wrongly accused or who fall victim to over-zealous prosecution.

If you have been arrested for a DUI- or traffic-related offense do not give up hope. our office is a staunch defender of the public’s rights in Maryland and will do everything he can to ensure that your case is handled fairly and competently in the Maryland court system. Call his Maryland law office today if you have questions or to schedule a free, legal consultation.