The officer did not advise me of my Miranda rights so the charges must be dismissed.
Almost everyone has watched a television show or movie and observed the police advising a person that is being arrested of his/her Miranda rights, meaning the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney. In DUI cases, Miranda warnings are often not given until after the person has submitted to a blood test because Pennsylvania courts have expressly held that a DUI suspect does not have the right to consult with an attorney in determining whether to submit to the blood test. In Pennsylvania, the police are actually required to inform the DUI suspect that he/she does not have the right to consult with an attorney before submitting to the blood test. If the police informed a DUI suspect of Miranda rights at the time of arrest, the suspect would most likely be confused when he/she were advised a relatively short time later that he/she did not have the right to talk to an attorney.
The police cannot charge me with DUI if they did not see me driving.
While we generally refer to the offense of DUI as Driving Under the Influence, Pennsylvania law actually prohibits a person from driving, operating, or being in actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle after consuming a sufficient amount of drugs or alcohol. The phrase "actual physical control" is not defined in the DUI law but has been explained in many Pennsylvania cases. For example, a person was found to be in actual physical control of a vehicle to justify a DUI charge when the car was parked on the berm of a road approximately fifty yards from the establishment where the suspect had purchased beer; the vehicle was protruding into traffic lanes with the engine running and the high beams on. In another DUI case, the court found that the suspect was not in actual physical control when the suspect was found asleep in the driver's seat of a running car that was parked in the lot of the establishment where the suspect had been drinking.
I submitted to a blood test and it evidences that my blood alcohol level was above the legal limit so there is no reason to contact a lawyer.
Another commonly held misconception is that a person charged with DUI cannot challenge a case if he/she submitted to a blood test. Admittedly, cases in which the DUI suspect submitted to a blood test and the test evidences a blood alcohol or controlled substance concentration above legal limits are difficult to defend. Generally, in order to win these cases, the defense lawyer must keep the test results from being admitted into evidence at trial. In some cases, the defense attorney may file a pretrial motion and seek suppression of evidence by arguing that the investigating officer did not have sufficient cause to conduct the traffic stop or arrest the suspect for suspicion of DUI. In other cases, the defense lawyer may file a pretrial motion and argue that the results should not be admitted as they are not reliable based upon the hospital's failure to follow testing protocol.
I can only be charged with DUI if I am driving on a roadway and not if I am driving on private property.
While some portions of the Vehicle Code only apply if a person is driving on a highway or roadway, the DUI law is applicable if a person is driving on a highway or trafficway. A "trafficway" is generally defined as a place that is open to the public for purposes of vehicular travel as a matter of right or custom. People have been charged and convicted of DUI for driving in parking garages or on private roads in housing developments, as those areas have been defined as being a "trafficway." However, a suspect charged with DUI for driving on an Air Force Base had the DUI charges dismissed after a court ruled that the base was not a "trafficway" because it was not generally open to the public. It is important to have an experienced attorney review your DUI case to determine whether the driving or operation of the vehicle occurred on a highway or trafficway to justify the DUI charges.
I cannot be charged with DUI for since I used the drugs days before driving and was not "under the influence" when I drove.
Pennsylvania's DUI law prohibits a person from driving, operating, or being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle with any amount of a Schedule I, II, or III controlled substance or a metabolite of such substance in his/her blood. While the DUI law prohibits a person from having "any amount" of a controlled substance in the blood, the Department of Health is actually required to prescribe minimum levels of controlled substances that must be found in the blood for the test results to be admissible in a DUI prosecution. The minimum levels of controlled substances required to justify a DUI prosecution are set relatively low so even minor use of drugs can lead to DUI charges. Under the per se drug DUI law in Pennsylvania, a person can still be prosecuted for DUI if they have an amount of controlled substance in their blood that exceeds the minimum level established by the Department of Health even if the person was not under the influence of the drug when they were driving.
Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on
their profile in addition to the information we collect from state
bar associations and other organizations that license legal
professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo
with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do
What determines Avvo Rating?
Experience & background
Years licensed, work experience, education
Legal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awards
Legal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagements
This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in .
Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.