Because many judges follow established guidelines provided by legal commissions, third-offense DUII sentences typically include as much as thirteen months in jail. Opponents of the bill argue that such strict guidelines unnecessarily curb judicial discretion in assessing appropriate sentences.

Additionally, Measure 73 provides that third-offense DUII charges within a ten year period are automatically considered a felony. If convicted under the new guidelines, defendants will be considered felons and subject to restrictions; these include prohibition from owning firearms, holding certain jobs, and obtaining residence in some areas.

For more information regarding Oregon DUII law including finding the right DUII attorney to handle your case, visit the law firm of Gilroy and Napoli.

Third offense DUII convictions carry a mandatory jail sentence of at least 90 days, followed by three to five years of probation, though judges may sentence those convicted to even longer prison sentences (up to five years) depending on the circumstances surrounding the DUII event in question. In addition, the sentence carries a mandatory lifetime driver’s license revocation, meaning those convicted lose their state licensing eligibility forever. Those convicted of third offense DUII charges are further not eligible for hardship licenses that allow them to travel to work and other necessary destinations.

In addition, those convicted are still subject to many of the same fines and levies placed against those found guilty of first- and second-offense DUII charges. These can include a minimum $2000 fine (with a maximum  penalty of $125,000) as well as hundreds of dollars in additional fees, including court costs. Finally, those convicted must also attend substance abuse classes and victim’s impact seminars at their own expense.

As the name implies, felony arrests include harsher sentencing guidelines than first- and second-offense charges. These can include, pursuant to a judge’s discretion, jail sentences of a minimum 90 days ranging up to five years, followed by a three- to five-year period of probation. In addition, felony DUII convictions impose a mandatory, permanent revocation of Oregon state-issued driver’s license privileges. Those convicted of felony DUII in Oregon also may not receive a hardship license.

Besides jail time and license revocation, felony DUII offenders must pay a monetary fine of no less than $2,000 dollars with a maximum fine of $125,000, though the actual dollar amount may range as high as $125,000. Judges base their assignment of jail time and fines upon the circumstances surrounding the arrest. Those convicted of a felony DUII must also register for and attend substance abuse and victims’ impact seminars.

Under Oregon state law, second offense penalties can include a cash fine of not less than $1,500 and up to $6250, as well as court costs. Second Offenders may not qualify for diversion programs, but often will face jail-time. Offenders may also be required to attend treatment and a Victims Impact seminar at their own expense.

Second Offenders additionally face mandatory suspensions of their Oregon state driver’s license. Convicted offenders might be allowed to apply for a hardship license following an initial mandatory suspension period that will allow them to drive to and from work and other necessary destinations.

If you’ve been charged with a second DUII, you need a qualified Oregon attorney to fight for you. Contact Gilroy Napoli today to find out the many ways we can help with a second offense DUII.

Even for a first-offense arrest, Oregon DUII law requires a minimum $1,000 fine iif the arrested person is found guilty; the actual DUII penalties may range up to $6250. In addition, the DUII defendant will be required to pay additional costs and expenses to the court. The court may also require the DUII defendant to undergo alcohol evaluation tests and participate in a treatment program, either of which can end up costing thousands of dollars.

Oregon also carries a special provision in its DUII statutes that makes plea-bargaining to a lesser charge impossible, as can be done in many other states. Knowledgeable, experienced DUII attorney representation is crucial for those wishing to avoid the expenses of a DUII conviction. Contact Gilroy & Napoli today for the best representation available.

While a DUII diversion can help you avoid penalties and even jail time, it will stay on your driver’s record in Oregon for life.

Oregon’s House Bill 2318 (effective January 1, 2010) allows DUII arrests to be expunged if the charge is dismissed or if a prosecutor declines to prosecute, but current Oregon state laws do not allow individuals to seal or expunge DUII diversions or convictions .

In Oregon, a DUII, which stands for “driving under the influence of intoxicants,” is usually a Class A misdemeanor that carries the potential of probation, jail time, license suspension, and heavy fines. If a driver has three DUII convictions in 10 years, a DUII charge becomes a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

When a driver is charged with a DUII, he or she can plead “guilty” or “no contest,” pursue an acquittal at trial, or, if eligible, enroll in a diversion program. Only an acquittal will remove the DUII from a driver’s record. While successfully completing the DUII diversion program helps drivers avoid the penalties of a conviction, a DUII diversion agreement will appear on his Oregon DMV driving record for life.

If you’ve been charged with a DUII, contact the law office of Gilroy & Napoli to help you decide which option is best for you.

Increased DUI Saturation Patrols Scheduled Over Thanksgiving Weekend and Throughout the Holiday Season

Drunk driving is one of America’s deadliest crimes. In 2008, 11,773 people died in highway crashes involving a driver or motorcycle rider with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or higher. The picture for women is particularly disturbing: nationwide, 21% of the 5,473 female drivers killed in crashes in 2008 had BAC levels of .08 or higher.

These frightening statistics are the very reason why police departments all over Oregon, and across the nation, are joining forces, from Thanksgiving weekend to New Years’ Day, to conduct DUII saturation patrols. The goal is not only to arrest impaired drivers, and protect everyone else on the road, but also to create general deterrence through high-visibility law enforcement; when the perceived risk of getting caught by law enforcement increases, the likelihood of choosing to drive while impaired actually decreases.

Gilroy & Napoli, DUII attorneys, would like to encourage each and every one of you to plan ahead and take extra care this holiday season. Please designate a sober driver or arrange for a sober ride home before beginning your evening of celebration.  Safe celebrating, and happy holidays, from Gilroy & Napoli.

Cargren was charged with four counts of manslaughter along with the criminal DUII charge. Read Portland’s KATU news coverage of the incident here.

From a DUII law perspective, this tragedy offers an opportunity to point out interesting aspects of DUII law here in Oregon and its relationship with Oregon criminal law. An Oregon DUII is usually a misdemeanor charge. The penalties for a class A misdemeanor conviction vary widely and are determined by several factors relating to the case. A DUI conviction can carry a fine up to $6,500, a lifetime revocation of driving privileges, up to a year in jail, and mandatory attendance in DUII awareness programs. Completion of these programs shows a commitment to altering criminal behavior and can help reduce penalties; Cargen failed to complete any mandated DUII programs until 1999.

After a driver’s third DUII charge, an extremely rare instance but not unheard of as evidenced by Mr. Cargren, the punishments stiffen harshly. At this point the driver can be charged with a Felony DUII according to Oregon criminal law.

Many drivers never get to this point because Oregon DUII law affords several opportunities for DUII offenders to get back on track after a drunk driving conviction. If the offender has a quality DUII attorney, they will be counseled to complete all mandated DUII programs and change their habits to avoid another DUII conviction. A second or third DUII charge is much harder to defend than a first.

Interestingly, under Oregon criminal law DUII offenders cannot enter into a plea agreement, they must plea to their charge. This means that most people who face a DUII charge plead guilty and enter in to the state’s Diversion Program, where after a year, the DUII charge is removed from their record. This structure highlights the state’s commitment to reduce repeat DUII offenders, while simultaneously offering relief to people who commit an unfortunate lapse in judgment.

Drivers in Oregon should be grateful for this opportunity to remove their DUII charge from their record and get on with their lives. But, according to a 2005 study commissioned by Multnomah County, about 1/3 of participants fail to complete the Diversion Program. These drivers are more likely to be arrested for a DUII and face the harsh penalties that await repeat offenders. The state of Oregon hopes to entice DUII violators into this program to lower recidivism.

If you are convicted of a DUII in Oregon, the state affords several opportunities to get your life back. The drivers, who never learn from their mistakes, do not attend programs, ignore their DUII lawyers, and repeat their crimes, risk forfeiture of their freedom. If you are convicted of a DUII, please, follow the sound advice of your DUII lawyer and complete the generous programs offered by the state, I’m sure Mr. Cargen wishes he did.

The new law would expand the definition of an ‘intoxicant’ to cover commonly abused drugs, such as Nyquil and Robitussin.

Chuck Hayes, chairman of the Governor’s Advisory Committee on DUII, spoke in support of House Bill 2491 to the House Judiciary Committee on Monday and why explained why Oregon should adopt this change.

“Right now if a driver is stopped on the highway for bad driving and there is some probable cause that person is under the influence, then if that (non-controlled substance) is the only substance that is causing the impairment,” explained Hayes. “Then that person cannot be convicted because it does not fall within our definition of an intoxicant presently in the state of Oregon”

Hayes, a former Oregon State Police Officer, recounted three confrontations with impaired drivers on Oregon roads, who turned out to be impaired by non-controlled substances. Each driver eventually cleared the limited Oregon DUII laws. Hayes also pointed out to the committee that 40 of the 50 states now have DUI statutes in place that include intoxication from non-controlled substances. Hayes says this legislative trend is in response to the escalation in abuse of these readily available drugs, especially by young drivers.

Hayes’ examples included two drivers who were charged with a DUII in Portland and another in Albany, Oregon. These drivers displayed common characteristics of impaired driving, including slurred speech and lethargy. None of the drivers were even capable of performing standard sobriety tests. However, each driver registered a .00 BAC, and their DUII charges were dropped.

Other states, including Washington, have realized multiple benefits from expanding the definition of ‘intoxicant’ in their DUI law. Law makers in Washington state, which adopted a similar amendment to their DUI law in 1997, say they have benefit from safer roads, and the opportunity to help citizens with addictions to these drugs through court-ordered counseling programs. These states can also raise awareness, through PSAs and other initiatives, of the abuse of these drugs by demonstrating they can cause impairment equal to excessive alcohol abuse.

Hayes anticipates criticism from those who believe the new law will overreach and convict innocent drivers who suffer from unintended impairment from prescription or over-the-counter drugs.

Hayes defends the expansion of the Oregon DUI law by pointing out that all of these drugs come with clearly labeled warnings and instructions to avoid intoxication. He outlines one incident where a driver who had forgotten his anti-depressant medication in Portland after leaving town, returned, and compensated by ingesting five days worth of his medication, even though the medication bottle adorned a warning against this kind of use. The driver ended up weaving between traffic lanes on I-5 before being stopped by police and charged with a DUII that was later dropped.

“It comes back to responsible use and awareness,” Hayes concluded.

Gilroy & Napoli are DUII Attorneys in Lake Oswego, Oregon. They do not claim support or disapproval of the proposed law, but only strive to educate the public of developing news related to DUII law in Oregon. If you are charged with a DUI in Oregon, contact Gilroy & Napoli for more information on defending your DUI.

• I have never been convicted of a felony DUII in Oregon or any other state.
• On the date that the petition is signed, there are no DUII charges pending in Oregon or any other place against me for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, a controlled substance or an inhalant, or for having a blood content over the allowable level.
• I am not participating in a DUII Diversion program or any similar program in Oregon or anywhere else except a program I may have entered as a result of being charged with the present DUII.
• There are no charges pending against me for any degree of aggravated vehicular homicide, murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, or assault that resulted from the operation of a motor vehicle.
• During the 10 years prior to the presently alleged DUII charge, I have not been convicted in Oregon or anywhere else for the operation of a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, a controlled substance, an inhalant, or having a blood alcohol content over the allowable limit.
• During the 10 years prior to the presently alleged DUII charge, I have not participated in a DUII diversion program or any similar rehabilitation program in Oregon or any other place.
• During the 10 years prior to the presently alleged DUII charge, I have not been convicted in Oregon or any other place on any charge of an offense in any degree for aggravated vehicular homicide, murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, or assault that resulted from the operation of a motor vehicle.
• The DUII that I am charged with did not involve any deaths or physical injury to any other person.
• At the time of the alleged DUII, I did not have a commercial driver’s license.
• At the time of the alleged DUII, I was not operating a commercial motor vehicle.