A previous post examined post-DUI conviction drivers’ license restoration; people who are convicted of DUI have their driver’s licenses revoked, and it is not easy to get them back. Driver’s license suspension after a failed chemical test, or after a refusal, works a little differently. Suspension lasts for a fixed amount of time, and after the suspension period expires, license reinstatement is almost automatic, upon payment of a reinstatement fee and proof of insurance.
That being said, the suspension period is often quite long, and the penalties for driving on a suspended license are stiff. A comprehensive DUI defense includes aggressive representation at the Administrative License Revocation hearing because an attorney can often get the suspension period modified while obtaining valuable information about the state’s case.
ALR Hearing
Drivers must request hearings within 90 days of the notice date; the notice almost always comes contemporaneously with the arrest. The ALR hearing is basically a probable cause hearing to determine if the officer lawfully requested a chemical specimen. So, the only issues are:
- Objective: The state must prove that the suspect was arrested for DUI, the suspect was properly warned, and the suspect failed or refused the test. The “proper warnings” prong is sometimes an issue because officers occasionally use outdated or incorrect warnings.
- Subjective: The state must also prove that, before demanding that the suspect take the test, the officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the suspect was operating a vehicle under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The “operating” aspect is quite broad because under Illinois law, being in physical control of a vehicle satisfies the statute. At trial, operation is an issue in many DUI crash cases because the prosecutor cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect was driving the car. But at this stage, the state only has to present probable cause, and that is a much lower evidentiary standard, so presence in or near the vehicle is probably enough to satisfy this element.
The “under the influence” aspect can be more problematic for the state, especially if the defendant did not perform field sobriety tests. In these situations, probable cause is usually consumption-related evidence, like odor of alcohol, erratic driving, and bloodshot eyes. At trial, this evidence may not be enough to prove intoxication, but at a probable cause hearing, it is normally sufficient.
A failure-related suspension is six months for a first offense and one year for a subsequent offense; a refusal-related suspension is twelve months for a first offense and three years for a subsequent offense. First-time offenders may be eligible for a restricted driving permit that lets them drive with an ignition interlock device.
Why Request an ALR Hearing
Because of the low standard of proof, some people essentially ask “why bother?” The first thing to understand is defendants have nothing to lose because the worst possible outcome is the full suspension, and that would have happened anyway. Furthermore, if the state’s evidence is weak, the officer may reduce the period, and if the state’s evidence is defective (e.g. there is no statutory warning card), the officer may throw out the matter entirely.
However, the best reason to request an ALR hearing has nothing to do with the outcome as such. The ALR hearing gives an attorney the chance to cross-examine the arresting officer under oath, and such testimony is normally admissible at a subsequent trial. Moreover, in closed-file jurisdictions, the ALR hearing may be the attorney’s only chance to thoroughly review the state’s evidence.
Contact Aggressive Attorneys
For prompt assistance with a license suspension matter, contact an experienced criminal defense attorney in Schaumburg from Glasgow & Olsson today because the sooner you call, the sooner we can start working for you.