Skip to main content

I have a DUI and it was finalzed as DUI with No Test. what does that mean?

Everett, WA |

The final charge for my DUI read no test. Does that mean a better outcome then what my blow results were? Why would my public defender do that? I would ask him, but he is not getting back to me, since my case is over. I actually refused the test, but he had my paper work sighned off from judge to just read "DUI, No test" is this better? Thanks all

The reason Im asking is cause it was my Second DUI and I have to answer or go back to court for my First one for violating my probation. So, is it better that it read No Test, and opposed to Test Refusal? Hope I dont go back to jail. I already spent 20 days for my second one.

+ Read More

Attorney answers 3

Best Answer

There are two sentencing levels for a DUI, with harsher mandatory minimum sentencing and license suspension for DUI conviction where the breath test result was .15% or the driver refused to take the breath test. A "no test" DUI is where the breath test result was not admissible or never offered. In the real world this rarely happens, but the prosecutor will sometimes agree to amend to a "no test" for purposes of sentencing.

All misdemeanor DUIs carry a possible year in jail, $5000 fine and 5 years probation. The minimum that the judge could impose on a second DUI is as follows:

Less than .15% BAC or "No Test:" 30 days jail + 60 days electronic home monitoring and $1121 in fines, fees and assessments. DOL will revoke your license for 2 years.

.15% BAC or greater or "Refusal:" 45 days jail + 90 days electronic home monitoring and $1541 in fines fees and assessments and DOL will revoke your license for 300 days (for >.15%) or 3 years (for refusal).

Either way you will be required to have an Interlock Ignition Device for 5 years (or 1 year if the IID was not required on the first offense), 5 years probation and other mandatory conditions such as a substance abuse evaluation, treatment and a DUI victim's panel.

A "no test" is better than a "refusal" because it potentially saves you 15 days in jail, 30 days EHM, a few hundred dollars and 1 year additional suspension. It probably will have no affect whatsoever on what the court in the first DUI will do. You violated probation by committing a new DUI.

Your attorney should also have warned you that if you have 3 major moving violations (DUI, reckless driving, driving while license suspended in the second degree, etc...) you risk being declared a Habitual Traffic Offender and having your license revoked for 7 years.

The answer provided is for educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. You should consult an attorney for legal advice regarding the facts of your specific case and designed to help you with your personal needs.

Scott Weymouth Lawrence

Scott Weymouth Lawrence


Sorry...that is 3 major moving violations in a five year period for HTO status.



Thanks Scott, I appreciate your help. You Rock, keep up the good work you do. SMiles


It sounds like you either blew above a .15 or refused the test. When the judge enters a "no test" its really geared for DOL. If this was your first offense, you would only be suspended for 90 days, if it was a no test. If you were convicted of a refusal you would be suspended for 2 years or if you were convicted of a BAC .15 or above, you would face a 1 year suspension. This also changed the sentence and fines.



Thank you Dean, I appreciate your expert assistance. Have a good day.


If your initial DUI charge was a DUI with a Refusal of the BAC then technically a "No Test" DUI result is better. However, it is still a conviction of DUI and on paper looks the same as the original charge. The difference is that a "No-Test" DUI has penalties that are less harsh that the original "refusal DUI." In summary, better yes, but not much better.
Whether this was an acceptable result depends on the facts of the case which I do not know. If your driving was not horendous, you did the FSTs acceptably, you did not make any statements that would suggest impairment, and so on, then perhaps a better result would have been more appropriate. On the other hand if the facts in the report suggest severe impairment then perhaps it was acceptable. Without knowing more it is impossible to validate the result however, as a DUI attorney I'm never thrilled in a DUI refusal case ending up as a No-Test.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer