Leslie Prince, California DUI Attorney (Interview Transcript)

 

Richard Jacobs from myDUIAttorney.org sits down with Leslie Prince, a DUI attorney in Northern California.

 

RJ: What made you choose to become a DUI attorney?

LP: Well I didn’t choose to handle DUI cases in particular, what I do in Solano county is all types of criminal defense and DUI is just one aspect of it.

 

RJ: For the DUI portion, how many cases do you handle and how many have you done in what time period?

 

LP: I would estimate that the DUI cases are 10-30% of my caseload. Over the years I’ve probably handled 100 to 150 DUI cases.

 

RJ: Is there any particular circumstance of the people that come to you with DUI cases, are there more first time offenders, more men than women?

 

LP: Well I’ve handled the whole gamut from first time DUI offenders to multiple offenders but a lot of the offenders are first time with no prior criminal record and no familiarity with the criminal justice system. They are a different class of clients from my other clients.

 

RJ: So you are saying that DUI is a catch all. Are there any other commonalities?

 

LP: Well for the most part the DUI clients have no prior criminal record and they’re just not your typical criminal defense client. A lot of them have city jobs or just regular law-abiding citizens and just find themselves in the situation where they’ve picked up a DUI unlike my other clients where they have committed prior crimes or are not new to the criminal justice system.

 

RJ: Are you seeing a lot of your clients being close to the .08 limit or are some a lot higher than that?

 

LP: I do see people that are a lot higher and then there are a lot that are closer to the legal limit between .08 and .10.

 

RJ: Do a lot of your cases end up going to trial or do they accept plea-bargains, what happens to them.

 

LP: Yes, most DUI cases settle without trial. There’s a statutory minimum in terms of jail time and there are certain conditions that are always imposed for a first time DUI or a second time DUI so unless there’s a good defense to the charges it’s usually better not to go to trial on it, usually you’re just going to get the standard offer.

 

RJ: Is there anything unique about the DUI laws in California or in the counties that you serve?

 

LP: I don’t know that there’s anything unique because I don’t have a lot of familiarity with the laws in other states or counties. I can tell you that in Solano county if a person is right at .08 a lot of times the case can be negotiated down to a lesser offence such as a wet reckless that’s because they allow for a margin of error in the testing equipment so when the person is right at .08 that doesn’t mean that the people are going to be able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was at .08 or higher.

 

RJ: Well that’s good to know for the people who are right at .08 that they have more of likelihood of getting their charges reduced.

 

LP: Yes, I think a lot of times people can handle a DUI case on their own without needing an attorney but there’s certain types of cases where they’re better off with an attorney and certainly when there’s someone who’s close to .08 or even a little bit higher, that’s certainly one situation when they’d want to hire an attorney.

 

RJ: Well that’s great that you’re being honest as there’s a lot of lawyers who would say you always need a DUI attorney.

 

LP: No I don’t feel that way. When people call me and ask me questions about a DUI, one of the things I want to discuss is whether they even need an attorney because as I said there is a standard offer that is made for a first DUI and sometimes even for a second or third DUI, but actually I wouldn’t recommend that someone represents themselves for a second or third DUI, but for a first DUI if they are well over the legal limit and they have no obvious defenses then I will often tell people that they don’t necessarily need an attorney, that they can represent themselves.

 

On the other hand there are advantages to having an attorney, for one thing the attorney can review the police report and see if there are any defenses to the case. The defenses aren’t always obvious, sometimes it’s technical things, having to do with the maintenance of the breathalyzer and that sort of thing. Also in a misdemeanor DUI case the attorney can do all the court appearances for the defendant so the defendant never has to appear in court which is a huge advantage, and in any DUI case you also have the separate issue of the driver’s license and dealing with the DMV and that’s separate from the court case.

 

RJ: What would be your best tip for when someone’s been pulled over?

 

LP: Well they should certainly cooperate by pulling over immediately, and they should cooperate with the police but they should not answer questions about how much they’ve had to drink or where they’ve been drinking that sort of thing. They can be asked those sorts of questions and it’s better not to answer those questions. However it is very important whenever someone is pulled over for a DUI that they agree to submit to a chemical test whether that’s a blood test or a breath test or whatever because the law in California states that by obtaining a driver’s license you are implying consent to submit to a chemical test if you get pulled over for a DUI and if you fail to cooperate with the testing procedure you can be charged with a separate offence known as a Refusal and that has additional penalties and consequences.

 

RJ: How would you phrase your refusal if the officer asks you how much have you been drinking?

 

LP: You could just say I’m not going to answer that without an attorney. You have a constitutional right to remain silent and all police officers know that. But again I want to make a distinction between not answering questions about how much you’ve had to drink and submitting to the chemical test and of course you do submit to the chemical test because if you don’t that will lead to additional penalties.

 

RJ: What kinds of things can you do to help someone who’s been charged with a DUI, can you reduce their time in jail or fines or lessen the charge?

 

LP: The charge could be reduced if the person is right at a .08 for the reasons I already mentioned and there may be other defenses , I mean certainly the People have to prove that the defendant was driving and that the drinking occurred before the driving so there are situations where the charge can be negotiated either down to a lesser offence or dismissed altogether. But apart from that in California there are statutory minimums for example two days in county jail for a first DUI and a statutory minimum of 10 days in jail for a second DUI. And what I mean by that is the court doesn’t have any discretion to impose less than 2 days for a first DUI or less than 10 days for a second DUI. I know in Solano county they usually will impose the minimum. If there were aggravated circumstances for example if there was an accident then sometimes they’ll ask for more than the statutory minimum all of that is up for negotiation, at least if they want to impose more than the statutory minimum. And frankly that’s something that an attorney can do is negotiate with the DA for a less resolution but again it can never be less than 2 days in jail for a first DUI or 10 for a second.

 

In addition there are fines and fees and those are also statutorily mandated and there isn’t a lot of room to negotiate those if you agree that the person has committed the offence.

 

RJ: For the areas where you are able to offer help, is it pretty often that you are able to do that?

 

LP: Well, it’s always going to depend on the facts. It’s certainly a lot harder to negotiate if a person has a blood alcohol of .10 or higher and it appears in the police report that there was an appropriate basis for pulling the person over in the first place and there’s no issues regarding the testing equipment , so those are hard cases to beat. In the old days they used to have to show that the person was impaired and that left a lot more room for defending the case but nowadays they don’t have to prove impairment they only have to prove that the person’s blood alcohol level was at .08 or higher and it’s hard to refute the science of that.

 

RJ: What have you learned about people’s behavior and their reaction to being prosecuted for DUI, what insight have you gotten into the human side of DUI?

 

LP: As I mentioned a lot of my clients are not typical criminal clients and haven’t had a prior record and a lot of times people are just shocked they think they’ve only had a couple of glasses of wine over dinner or at a friend’s house, they’re just driving home and they just can’t believe that they’re being stopped for a DUI. And I think that generally drinking gives you a false sense of confidence and people don’t realize or acknowledge or are in denial about the fact that they’re over the legal limit.

 

RJ: Are there any common stories or excuses that you hear over and over again from clients?

 

LP: Yes, often they say I wasn’t speeding or I wasn’t weaving, because the police has to have probable cause to pull you over in the first place so if you can prove that wasn’t the case then you can file what’s known as a motion to suppress evidence and you can have the whole case thrown out. The problem is though that usually it’s the person’s word against the police officer’s and usually the People are going to side with the police officer’s because the defendant has usually been drinking and there’s some evidence for that even if they’re not admitting to being drunk and obviously have a motive for not being truthful. So those are hard cases to win but if in fact the person was not committing any traffic violations and were pulled over for no reason and you can establish that then it makes the whole case go away you get a dismissal.

 

RJ: Do you feel that current DUI punishments are too harsh or too lax and why do you feel that way?

 

LP: You know that’s a hard one I think that generally speaking a lot of the punishments that we have for a lot of crimes are much too much but for DUIs I don’t think the punishments are too harsh, I don’t think that people should be drinking and driving. I think a lot of people don’t realize how impaired they are and end up putting a lot of people in danger. And I feel funny saying that because generally I’m very pro-defendant and in general feel that a lot of our punishments for other crimes are way too harsh but a first time DUI is a misdemeanor whereas possession – not driving under the influence – just straight possession of cocaine or heroin or methamphetamine is a felony. So no I don’t think the punishments for DUI are too harsh.

 

RJ: What do you see is the future of DUI in terms of the punishments and the number of people that become offenders?

 

LP: Well it certainly seems that we are leaning in the direction of imposing harsher penalties for DUI. I think as soon as marijuana is legalized you’ll see a lot fewer alcohol DUIs, although you may see a lot more marijuana DUIs, although I’m not sure that someone driving under the influence of marijuana poses the same risk as someone who is driving under the influence of alcohol.

 

RJ: What would be the ballpark cost of a DUI for you to handle from start to finish for a simple one versus non simple?

 

LP: For a routine first time run of the mill DUI my fee is around $2000 without trial and most of those cases do resolve without trial. If the case is going to trial for a simple case you are looking at about $3000-$5000. Now those fees would go up of course if you’re talking about a second or a third or a fourth DUI and there other circumstances that make it more complicated for example if there was an accident and someone was injured, there are other factors which make it more complicated for example if someone was driving on a suspended license. So it depends on whether it was a first DUI or subsequent and whether there are other factors.

 

RJ: What makes you and your firm unique in providing DUI defense and what kind of personal statement do you want to make to people reading this interview?

 

LP: I feel that I’m very easy to communicate with, I’m very conscientious. I work hard for all my clients and as we discussed earlier, when people call me I’m not just jumping in trying to get them to hire me, I want to have an honest discussion about whether they even need a DUI attorney and I will have that conversation with clients, and consider their case and discuss with them whether or not it’s something they can handle or whether they’d be better off with an attorney. I’m very responsive to clients if they call me and I’m not there, I will return their calls. I try to make myself available to answer any questions. I don’t wash my hands of clients once their case is over. If they have questions regarding probation or other things I’m available to help them