DWI Case Results

Our Experience is the Difference

Call now to discuss your best DWI defense strategy for Free – (585) 244-5600

Below are only a small sample of DWI case results we have achieved for our clients. We take each case seriously and diligently fight to protect our clients driving privilege. We handle each case on an individual basis and operate with an aggressive approach to ensure our clients achieve the best possible outcome for the DWI charge in Rochester New York. We have handled over 2,500 cases providing us with exceptional experience and an immense knowledge base fighting DWI’s in Rochester New York and the Upstate region. If you have received a DWI and are would like to speak to an experienced Rochester, NY  lawyer contact us today at (585) 244-5600.

People vs. T.H.

Client charged with aggrevated DWI, DUI, and a 4 traffic citations all underage of 21, following a motor vehicle accident. BAC level of .18. Very difficult case. Unable to prove client was in fact intoxicated at time and persued post-driving consumption possibility. Only found guilty of one traffic infraction and ABC law violation. All other charges found not guilty. Must complete Alive at 25. No DWI charges, No Suspension of License. No Ignition Interlock.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. S.T.

Client charged with following too closely, refusal to take chemical test and DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) as a felony. Effort to obtain a plea reduction denied. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of felony charges. Following a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated as felony or as a misdemeanor but guilty of a violation of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. Sentence included four days jail as this was third DWI arrest. No probation. No Ignition Interlock. 90 day suspension of license.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. G.D.

Client charged with leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving while intoxicated) with a BAC of .24% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Effort to obtain a plea reduction denied. Suppression motion granted. No probable cause for arrest. District Attorney’s Office did not appealed decision. All charges dismissed. No criminal record. License restored by the Department of Motor Vehicles.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. M.F.

Client charged with failure to use signal DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving while intoxicated) with a BAC of .16% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock. No one revocation of license. License suspended 90 days with conditional license approved.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. C.O.

Client stopped for failure signal and failure to maintain lane. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving while intoxicated) with a BAC of .12% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Effort to obtain a plea reduction denied. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock. No one year loss of license.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. C.F.

Client stopped for failure to maintain lane. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and ADWI per se (aggravated driving while intoxicated) with a BAC of .24% as determined by a BAC Datamaster, refusal of prescreen test and failure to maintain lane. Suppression motion granted. Testimony precluded. District Attorney’s Office Appealed decision of local court. Appeallate court affirmed the lower court decision. All charges dismissed. No criminal record. License restored by the Department of Motor Vehicles.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. R.H.

Client was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and ADWI per se (aggravated driving while intoxicated) with a BAC of .19% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock. No one year loss of license.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. G.R.

Client charged with violating terms of conditional discharge. Client as alleged to have consumed alcohol and for having an Ignition Interlock violation. Declaration of delinquency dismissed.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. M.E.

Client was stopped for failure to speeding. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .12% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Result: no criminal record. Client guilty of driving while ability impaired but not Driving While Intoxicated or Driving While Intoxicated per se. Client was required to perform 64 hours of community service. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. P.M.

Client was stopped for failure to maintain lane. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .14% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. D.S.

Client was charged with consumption of alcohol in a motor vehicle, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .13% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Trial verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation. No Ignition Interlock.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. M.F.

Client was stopped for speeding. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .16% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. After reviewing the defense argument and memoranda of law the court suppressed the breath test evidence. Verdict: client found not guilty of misdemeanor charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol and speeding. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. H.S.

Client was stopped at a sobriety checkpoint. Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .13% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Verdict: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Followng a trial the client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, and not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se but was found guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. T.V.

Client charged with the traffic infraction of turning without a signal, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .10% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Result: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Client was guilty of Driving While Ability Impaired but not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. J.H.

Client charged with failure to keep right, uninspected motor vehicle, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .19% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Client was arrested prior to the ADWI statute. On defendant’s motion the court dismissed the charges of DWI and DWI per se (driving with .08% or more blood alcohol concentration). Verdict: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se, not guilty Driving While Ability Impaired, not guilty of failure to keep right, not guilty of uninspected motor vehicle. No license suspension. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. M.D.

Client charged with DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .12% as determined by a BAC Datamaster after having been stopped at a sobriety checkpoint. Verdict: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se. Client found guilty of driving while ability impaired. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. R.B.

Client charged with speeding, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .11% as determined by a BAC Datamaster, and the crime of Aggravated Unlicenced Operation 3rd. Verdict: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se, not guilty of Aggravated Unlicenced Operation 3rd. Client found guilty of driving while ability impaired and speeding. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. R.S.

Client charged with traveling in a no passing zone, not wearing a seat belt, unlicenced operator, and the crime of aggravated unlicenced operator in the second degree. Result: client entered a plea to unlicenced operator. Charges of traveling in a no passing zone, not wearing a seat belt and aggravated unlicenced operator second degree were dismissed. Fine. License restored.

___________________________________________________________

People vs. J.Y.

Client charged with the traffic infraction of stopping/standing on pavement and the three misdemeanor charges of Aggravated Unlicenced Operator 3rd, DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), and DWI per se (driving with a blood alcohol concentration above the legal limit) with a BAC of .10% as determined by a BAC Datamaster. Result: client found not guilty of all criminal charges. Client was found not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, not guilty of Driving While Intoxicated per se, not guilty Aggravated Unlicenced Operator 3rd, not guilty of stopping/standing on pavement. Client was found guilty of driving while ability impaired by alcohol. No jail. No probation.

___________________________________________________________