Drink driving

If you agree that you have committed the offence and the police are able to prove all the elements of the offence, it is best to plead guilty at an early opportunity to receive the maximum discount. Currently the maximum discount available for an early plea of guilty is 25% of the sentence.

Furthermore, the early guilty plea shows the Court that you have remorse and contrition for your actions.

Our Lawyers at National Criminal Lawyers work closely with you to ensure that we obtain all necessary paper work at increasing the chances of obtaining a non-conviction or section 10.

Driving under the influence (DUI)$2,2009 months12 months6 months

Drink driving penalties in NSW Second Major offence* within 5 years

THE FOLLOWING OFFENCES WILL NOW ALSO ALWAYS RESULT IN A MANDATORY INTERLOCK ORDER:

Major traffic offences include:

• Refuse or fail to supply sample of urine or blood (fatal accident);
• Refusing or failing to submit to the taking of the sample of blood in accordance with the directions of a medical practitioner, registered nurse or prescribed sample taker;
• Failing or refusing to provide oral fluid sample;
• Failing to stop and assist following impact causing death or injury;
• Refuse sample of blood or urine or wilfully introduce or alter amount of drug in blood or urine;
• Drive under influence of alcohol or drug;
• Refuse breath analysis or wilfully alter concentration;
• Prevent medical practitioner or nurse from taking blood;
• Menacing Driving;
• A conviction of murder or manslaughter arising out of the use of motor vehicle;
• Negligent Driving causing death or grievous bodily harm;
• Driving recklessly, furiously or in a manner or speed dangerous to the public;
• Predatory driving, Involvement in a police pursuit, and failing to stop after an impact causing grievous bodily harm; and/or
• A conviction for wounding, causing actual bodily harm or inflicting grievous bodily harm arising out of the use of a motor vehicle;

If you decide to plead not guilty you will need to prepare to go to a Defended Hearing.

A defended hearing is where all the witnesses of that case are called to give evidence. The witnesses are both examined by the prosecution and tested by your defence lawyers.

National Criminal Lawyers have defended thousands of people charged with Cultivate and are experts at these hearings.

Some of the possible defences available for those charged with Drink Driving can include:

• • If your actions were necessary to prevent a greater harm from occurring, you may have the defence of Necessity.
  • The “honest and reasonable mistake of fact” defence. This defence states that you are not guilty of a drink driving offence if, at the time of driving, you:
  • Honestly believed that you were under the limit; and
  • In the opinion of the court, it was reasonable for you to hold that belief in all of the circumstances of your case.
  • If you think that your reading may be as high as it was because your drink has been spiked, that is also a scenario in which this defence can be used; and/or
  • Despite the fact that the reading produced by a breath analysis machine at the station is deemed accurate, there may be a way to challenge that reading with respect to what it was at the time of driving. Often it may be necessary to seek the assistance of experts such a pharmacologist’s expert to challenge the reading.

In NSW, a court can impose any of the following penalties for a supply prohibited drug charge.

• • Prison sentence
  • Home Detention
  • Intensive correction order (previously periodic detention)
  • Suspended sentence
  • Community service order (CSO)
  • Good behaviour bond
  • Fine
  • Section 10

However, from 24 September 2018 new penalty’s will be replacing the above. They are as follows:

• • Full time Imprisonment
  • New ICO (ICO) with a home detention condition available
  • New Community Correction Order (CCO)
  • Fine
  • New Conditional release Order (CRO)

Our client was charged with one charge of drive with high range prescribed concentration of alcohol. His BAC reading was 0.258.

This reading was approximately five times the legal BAC limit of 0.049.

Our client was involved in a collision whilst driving his vehicle on a road trip between Canberra and Sydney. Our client had held his license for approximately 25 years and had some minor traffic infringements.

Normally, matters of this nature are dealt with harshly by the Courts; that is, the starting point in terms of penalty for offences of this nature is usually full-time imprisonment. There is a guideline judgement dealing with cases involving High Range PCA.

Our client was advised by our lawyers in respect of materials required to mitigate the penalty of the Local Court. Invariably, our client entered a plea of guilty in respect of the charge given that he was the driver and registered the high reading of alcohol in his breath.

It was our role to not only collate materials relevant to his sentencing hearing, but also appear at his sentencing hearing with the aim of obtaining a penalty that would see our client avoid full-time imprisonment.

At the sentencing hearing, extensive submissions were given to the Court, and our client gave evidence. It is not usual practice in the Local Court that an individual accused of an offence gives evidence at his/her sentencing hearing. In this case, we advised that giving oral evidence to a Court would provide the Court with an understanding of the factual context of what was occurring prior to the alleged incident, our clients’ subjective case, and our clients’ battle with mental health (For Mental Health applications, click here).

The magistrate in the Local Court had the opportunity to assess our client, and extensive oral submissions were made to the Court in respect of the appropriate penalty. Normally, matters of this nature, as noted above, are dealt with by way of full-time imprisonment.

Our comprehensive preparation of subjective materials to hand to the Court, coupled with our extensive oral submissions, convinced the magistrate not to impose a penalty of full-time imprisonment. Given the nature of the reading, and the fact that our client was involved in a collision, aggravated the circumstances of the offending. Our submissions convinced the Court that a penalty other than a period of full-time imprisonment was warranted. The Court agreed.

The Court imposed a very lengthy intensive corrections order, along with 300 hours of community service. Our client avoided full-time imprisonment for a matter which would normally be dealt with as such.

Our client was charged with Low Range PCA (Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol) after he had been observed doing a U- turn at a traffic light intersection. A breath analysis revealed a reading of 0.069. We asked the client to participate in the Traffic Offender Intervention Program, a course which aims to provide education on traffic rules. Our client’s traffic record was good , with only one speeding offence being recorded in his ten-year driving history.

We were also able to argue that he had a genuine need for a driver’s licence for work, and that he would lose income as a direct result of it being disqualified. The magistrate sentenced our client to a non-conviction under section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) which meant our client was able to keep his driver’s licence.

Our client was pulled over by police and asked to perform a breath test wherein it was found a low reading of alcohol. He pleaded guilty to driving with a low range of PCA and cooperated fully with the police. We represented our client in his sentencing hearing where submissions were made regarding our client’s remorse and the fact that he had successfully undertaken a Traffic Offender Intervention Program. He was given a non-conviction order.

Our client was charged with driving a motor vehicle whilst over the middle range alcohol limit but not over the high limit. The client needed a licence to maintain employment as a truck driver.

He instructed National Criminal Lawyers on the appeal as the local Court convicted him of the offence and fined him.

On appeal, we made submissions on behalf of the client and submitted an affidavit. Our specialist lawyers also drafted lengthy submissions as to our clients mitigating factors for the court to take into account when determining the appropriate penalty. The Court quashed the decision of the local court and dismissed the charge (with a lengthy s10 bond) .