|
D. Do Not Give Up On An
Alcotest 7110 Case
Some attorneys
say, “there
is not much you can do about the new machine.” I do not
agree. There are many defenses against evidence from the new
machine, Alcotest 7110. Compared to the Breathalyzer, Alcotest
7110 is much more hi-tech and complex. There is no easy way to
defend against an Alcotest 7110 case but it is still winnable.
The machine and the legal aspects are admittedly technical and
complex, but experience, knowledge, and skill can turn those
complexities against the State. I continually educate myself
about the new machine including the technology used, scientific
research, etc. I am the right attorney to defend your DWI.
Here is one example of my winning cases against Alcotest 7110
evidence.
EC1 = 0.096
IR1 = 0.094
EC2 = 0.096
IR2 = 0.094
Prosecution BrAC = 0.09
After a trial, Not Guilty on DWI
You can
see more sample winning cases of DWI here
Because of this “Chun” litigation, many people have
already pled guilty with certain conditions. This is called a “conditional
plea”, in which the defendant was convicted but could wait
until the Supreme Court ruled on the issues of the scientific
reliability of the Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C before execution of
sentence (this is often called a “Chun Stay”).
I personally do not believe in pleading any clients guilty,
especially under this conditional plea procedure. I am the one
who led the fight on the machine. As a matter of fact, I fight
all the way. In almost all cases, I do not plead my clients guilty.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1The figure is as
of May 29, 2007. Win rate is defined as the number of clients
not convicted for DWI divided by the total number of clients
who were charged with DWI. The clients are those who retained
this office after 2005. Each case varies. Under any circumstance,
we do NOT guarantee a successful outcome in any individual case.
2The
figure is as of May 29, 2007. Win rate is defined as the number
of clients not convicted for No Automobile Liability Insurance
divided by the total number of clients who were charged with
said charge. The clients are those who retained this office after
2000. Each case varies. Under any circumstance, we do NOT guarantee
a successful outcome in any individual case.
|
