First, yes; I do have an attorney - an (AMAZING) attorney I clearly stated from the very start of my question I am sincerely grateful to have representing me and whom I have absolute faith in. I'm not certain what gave you the impression that I was "shopping for a second opinion" given that I made sure to state that it was not my intention to undermine him/her in my second sentence. Nonetheless I assure you I had/have NO intention of interfering with my attorney in his/her defense of my case. I know I have no right or reason to "suggest" how to do his/her job, my attorney's knowledge and experience are invaluable - their assignment is the only reason my case is defensible. Yet, as much as I adore my PD, the caseload s/he carries assures we get very little time to communicate or consult and I wouldn't want to abuse his/her time by asking mostly academic questions like the one I posed here. I happened upon a reference to this motion in an article and became curious about what might be necessary for one to be granted and whether they can be/are made successfully in DUI cases. I wasn't asking whether one should be made my case in particular, I trust my attorney will make that decision if it is prudent, but given what little I had read/understood it seemed possible s/he might make a motion like this at trial and I wanted to learn more about them to better understand the probability. I am incredibly grateful for the responses I received. The information provided was much more than I'd hoped for, has given me a much clearer understanding of how/why these motions are made and I thank each of you for taking the time to explain this to me.

Secondly, I do know that not all JDs are lawyers (but *almost* all lawyers are JDs, right?) and that not all lawyers - JDs or otherwise - practice criminal law. This site limits the number of characters allowed per question and I thought the abbreviation was acceptable - I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that the reference to your advanced degree would convey the reverence for your professional expertise I wished to express. For the purposes of this site, your clarification seems like a distinction without a difference, but I apologize if I offended anyone.

As I stated in my original question, I'm not an attorney and have very little knowledge of criminal law or its practice, but an arrest forced my entry into the legal system - this completely foreign world - and I am often curious about laws and procedures controlling my case, and criminal law in general (which I find generally to be utterly bewildering and terrifying). I genuinely appreciate the wealth of information available on this site and the generous contributions of many dedicated and knowledgeable attorneys participating here for free. I understand that each of you is donating your very valuable time when you respond to these questions, and that this site is primarily a professional network which allows inquiring persons to connect with attorneys they may wish to retain. I also understand that there are sometimes very good reasons to admonish a person for posting a question despite having retained or been assigned counsel, but I wish you had read my question a bit more carefully. Perhaps then your answer might have been a bit less condescending.