Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant was charged with two counts of aggravated driving while under the influence. The State tried to offer the defendant a settlement deal, which would have allowed him to accept a sentence of five years in prison if he agreed to plead guilty. The defendant rejected the deal and decided he wanted to move forward with trial.

Two days before trial, the trial judge had the parties in for a scheduling conference, just to talk about logistics for trial. At that conference, the judge asked the defendant about whether he was sure he did not want to settle the case. The defendant stated that he was sure, and that he wanted to proceed with trial as originally planned.

more The Decision

The case went to trial, and the defendant was found guilty as charged. After he was sentenced, he appealed before the court of appeals. The defendant’s argument was that the trial judge broke one of Arizona’s rules of criminal procedure by participating in the parties’ settlement discussions. According to state rules, the judge that is going to proceed over a defendant’s trial is not allowed to also be involved in conversations about whether the case is going to settle.

The court of appeals examined the trial court judge’s conduct to see whether he did, in fact, break the rule that the defendant was referencing. The higher court determined that the judge was actually just verifying that the defendant wanted to go to trial, given the fact that he could face a harsher sentence if found guilty at trial. The court thus determined that the judge was ensuring the defendant knew his rights instead of actively participating in “settlement discussions.” The kind of conversation that the judge had with the parties, said the higher court, was not prohibited under the law.

Given this conclusion, the court denied the defendant’s appeal.

Are You Facing DUI Charges in the State of Arizona?

If you or a loved one is facing charges for a DUI or other crime in Arizona, give us a call at the Law Office of James E. Novak. We understand that criminal procedure can be tough to navigate, and we are fully committed to handling the litigation of your case so that you don’t have to. If you are fighting criminal charges, don’t wait. Call us today for a free and confidential consultation at 480-413-1499. You can also fill out our online form to have your questions answered.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant was driving one afternoon with her young daughter in the backseat. At the time, the defendant’s daughter was not in a booster seat but was buckled in only by the car’s lap belt. As she drove, the defendant started swerving the car and veering off the side of the road. Eventually, she crossed the double line into oncoming traffic and crashed head-on into another car.

Unfortunately, the defendant’s daughter suffered severe injuries and later died of brain trauma. The second car’s driver was also injured, and he was treated for a fracture to his leg. The driver’s car was also completely totaled. Upon searching the defendant’s car, officers found prescription bottles, medical marijuana, and pipes in the defendant’s possession. A subsequent analysis of the defendant’s blood showed that she had several heavy depressant-like drugs in her system – drugs that would certainly impair her ability to drive. The defendant was criminally charged, and her case went to trial.

more The Decision

The jury in the defendant’s trial found her guilty after hearing evidence from a forensic scientist, several pedestrians that saw the defendant driving erratically, and a group of first responders. After being found guilty, the defendant appealed the decision, arguing that there was not enough evidence to support the verdict.

Reviewing the case, the higher court looked at whether the State did present substantial evidence to support a conviction. The evidence, said the court, was enough for the State to meet its burden: the State brought in evidence of the defendant’s blood test, the labels on her prescription bottles warning her of the drugs’ adverse effects, and the disclaimer on her medical marijuana card warning her not to drive while using the drug. The evidence showed that the defendant did not apply her breaks at the necessary time and that she did not put her daughter in a booster seat, as she should have done for a child of that age.

Because the court decided the evidence presented was enough to support a guilty verdict, the defendant’s appeal was denied. The jury’s original decision remained in place.

Are You Looking for a Criminal Defense Attorney in Arizona?

At the Law Office of James E. Novak, we represent clients in Arizona facing a wide range of crimes, including DUIs, aggravated DUIs, vehicular crimes, and all types of drug crimes. Our team is proud to provide award-winning representation because we believe every individual deserves a qualified, hard-working defense attorney who will not stop fighting for the best possible outcome. For your free and confidential consultation, call our office today at 480-413-1499.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant was charged in 2019 with multiple counts of aggravated and extreme aggravated driving under the influence. After being charged, the defendant sold her car to pay for an attorney to represent her in criminal court. She pled guilty and was sentenced to two years of supervised probation with a 45-day jail sentence.

The sentencing order stated specifically that all but 14 days of the sentence could be suspended if the defendant put a “certified ignition interlock device” on any car she operated for a period of 12 months. This device would allow for more surveillance of the defendant’s driving and would keep her from committing the same offense again.

In 2021, the defendant’s probation officer petitioned for early termination of her probation. The State disagreed, stating that the defendant had not installed any ignition interlock device on a car and did not qualify for early termination. The defendant responded that she could not install such a device because she no longer owned a car and had not actually driven since the sentencing. The superior court terminated the defendant’s probation, and the State appealed.

The Decision

On appeal, the State argued that the statute clearly stated that the defendant’s sentence could only be suspended if she installed an interlock device on her car. Because she had not installed any such device, it was inappropriate for the lower court to grant an early termination of her probation.

The higher court considered this argument but ultimately denied it. It would not make sense, said the court, for the defendant to be ineligible for early release solely because she could not afford a car. If this were the case, any defendant unable to afford a car would not qualify for an early end to probation. Thus, said the court, the State’s argument reflected an “absurd interpretation” of the statute. It was only reasonable to conclude that the defendant was indeed eligible for early release even though she had not installed the appropriate device – she could not actually install such a device, and in the meantime, she was not posing any threat to drivers on the road since she was not operating any vehicles.

With that, the court denied the State’s appeal and affirmed the early end to the defendant’s probation.

Are You Facing DUI Charges in Arizona?

If you have found yourself facing DUI charges in the state of Arizona, call us at The Law Office of James E. Novak. We bring a solid knowledge of relevant statutes and law to every case we encounter, offering you exceptional representation that ensures your rights are well protected. For a free and confidential consultation, call us today at 480-413-1499.

In Arizona, not all DUI offenses are created equal.

• DUI – A DUI offense is the most basic version of an Arizona drunk driving crime. Someone can be found guilty of a DUI if they are driving a car with a blood-alcohol content between .08 and .14.
• Extreme DUI – Someone can be found guilty of an Extreme DUI If they operating a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol content of .15 or more.
• Aggravated DUI – An aggravated DUI results when someone is driving under the influence (with a blood-alcohol content of .08 or more) under one of the following circumstances:
  1. Driving on a suspended or revoked license;
  2. Having committed two prior DUIs in the past seven years;
  3. Driving with a passenger under the age of 15 years old; or
  4. Refusing to submit to a breath sample (for those ordered to have an ignition interlock on their vehicle).

So, even a driver who is arrested for a DUI for the first time may face any of these charges. Like most other states, Arizona law provides for escalating punishments for those who are convicted of repeat DUI offenses.

For example, a first time Arizona DUI offense can result in the following punishments:

• Up to 10 days in jail
• Up to a $1,250 fine
• Participation in alcohol treatment and education
• Installation of an ignition interlock device
• Mandatory community service

A second-offense DUI in Arizona carries stricter penalties, including:

• Up to 90 days in jail
• Up to a $3,000 fine
• 12-month driver’s license revocation
• Participation in alcohol treatment and education
• Installation of an ignition interlock device
• Mandatory community service

For an Arizona Extreme DUI, the penalty goes from up to 30 days in jail with a $2,500 fine for a first offense, to 120 days in jail, a $3,250 fine, and the mandatory installation of an ignition interlock device for a second offense.

In some cases, a third-time DUI or extreme DUI offense will constitute an aggravated DUI. However, as mentioned above, even a first-time offense may result in an aggravated DUI charge. Aggravated DUIs are punishable by up to two years in jail and a three-year license suspension.

Have You Been Arrested for an Arizona DUI Offense?

If you have recently been arrested for an Arizona drunk driving crime, contact Attorney James E. Novak for immediate assistance. Attorney Novak is a veteran DUI defense attorney, with years of experience handling even the most complex and challenging Arizona DUI cases. With his assistance, you can rest assured that you are in good hands at every step in the process. Attorney Novak represents clients facing all types of DUI offenses, including first-time DUIs and aggravated DUIs. To learn more, and to schedule a free consultation today, call 480-413-1499 today.

According to the court’s opinion, the defendant was driving a 14-year-old girl home from a party when he was involved in a car accident. Evidently, the defendant did not know the girl very well, and was unaware of her age. When police arrived on the scene, they found a bottle of pills inside the vehicle, and the defendant admitted that he had smoked marijuana earlier that day.

The defendant was arrested and charged under A.R.S. section 28-1383(A)(3), which makes it an aggravated DUI to operate a vehicle under the influence of drugs or alcohol while carrying a passenger less than 15 years of age. The defendant requested the trial court instruct the jury that he could not be found guilty unless the prosecution proved the defendant knew the girl was under 15 years of age. The court rejected the defendant’s request and the jury convicted the defendant of aggravated DUI. The defendant appealed.

On appeal, the defendant once again argued that knowledge of his underage passenger’s age was an element of an aggravated DUI charge under A.R.S. section 28-1383(A)(3). The court first noted that there was no mention of the culpable mental state required to find a defendant guilty of an aggravated DUI. The defendant argued that the court should read-in a knowledge requirement because strict liability crimes are generally disfavored.

The court agreed with the defendant that strict liability crimes are disfavored, noting that it is only when “there appears to be a clear legislative intent not to require any particular mental state for the commission of the crime.” For example, in order for a defendant to be found guilty of aggravated DUI under A.R.S. 28-1383(A)(1), the prosecution must show that he “knew or should have known his or her license was suspended, canceled, revoked or refused for a prior DUI offense.”

Here, however, the court noted that the legislature did not include a knowledge requirement in the statute. The court explained that its role is to interpret the laws as written and it will “assume that the legislature has said what it means.” Thus, the court held that by choosing not to include a knowledge requirement in section 28-1383(A)(3), the legislature indicated its intention to make the crime a strict-liability offense.

Have You Been Arrested for an Arizona DUI Offense?

If you have recently been arrested and charged with an Arizona aggravated DUI offense, Attorney James E. Novak can help. Attorney Novak is a dedicated Tempe DUI attorney with extensive experience handling Arizona DUI cases. At the Law Office of James Novak, we represent clients across Arizona who face first-time DUI offenses, as well as those who have multiple prior convictions for Arizona DUI-related offenses. To learn more, call 480-413-1499 to schedule a free consultation today.

Additional Resources:

• The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
• A.R.S.section 28-1383

Aggravated DUI in Arizona

Under Arizona Revised Statutes section 28-1383, a motorist can be charged with an aggravated DUI offense if the prosecution can prove one of several additional facts. For example, if a motorist is found to be driving under the influence while their license was suspended. Another example is if there is a passenger under the age of 15 in the vehicle at the time the driver is arrested for DUI.

The Facts of the Case

The defendant was arrested in Arizona after he rear-ended a police officer. It was later determined that the defendant was intoxicated and that his California driver’s license had been suspended. The defendant was charged with aggravated DUI, convicted, and sentenced accordingly.

The defendant appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court improperly instructed the jury that it could infer the defendant knew his license was suspended because there was insufficient evidence indicating that he had notice of the suspension. The defendant claimed that he was not living at the California address at the time, and the mere fact that a notice was sent was not sufficient to establish he had actual knowledge of the suspension. The defendant argued that he jury should have been instructed on the lesser-included offense of non-aggravated DUI.

The court disagreed with the defendant and affirmed his conviction. The court explained that one month prior to the defendant’s arrest, a notice of suspension was sent to his California address. The court noted that, although he defendant claimed not to be living at the California address at that time, it was the address he provided to police upon his arrest. Thus, the court held that the evidence supported the lower court’s decision to instruct the jury that it could presume the defendant had notice of the suspension if the jury believed that the notice was sent to his California address.

Have You Been Charged with an Aggravated DUI?

If you have recently been arrested and charged with an Arizona aggravated DUI, contact the Law Office of James E. Novak. Attorney Novak has decades of experience representing individuals charged with all types of Arizona DUI crimes, and knows how to attack the prosecution’s case against his clients. Whether it be through a motion to suppress blood- or breath-tests, or through argument to the jury, Attorney Novak is prepared to take on any Arizona DUI case. To learn more, call 480-413-1499 to schedule a free consultation today.

Additional Resources:

• A.R.S. section 28-1381
• A.R.S. section 28-1383

Other Articles of Interest from The Law Office of James Novak’s Phoenix DUI Blog: Arizona Court Condones Officer’s Arrest of Defendant, Despite Potentially Innocent Explanation for Signs of Intoxication, Phoenix DUI Law Blog, September 12, 2018

When Can an Officer Pull a Motorist Over Based on a Belief of Intoxication?, Phoenix DUI Law Blog, August 24, 2018

A number of clients have questions about the nature of aggravated DUI charges. Let’s take a moment to consider these kinds of cases and the legal penalties involved right now.

Defining Aggravated DUI

In essence, an aggravated DUI refers to circumstances that aggravate the DUI charge based on their severity and the nature of your arrest. When these circumstances apply to your case, you will face more serious jail time and fines as a result.

As with all DUI cases, an aggravated DUI arrest involves motorists exceeding a BAC of 0.08, which is the national legal limit.

Types of Aggravated DUI

There are two classifications of aggravated DUI, Class 4 Felonies and Class 6 Felonies. Let’s consider the four types of aggravated DUI and their classification:

• DUI while a child under 15 is also in the vehicle (Class 6 Felony)
• Prior DUI arrests within 7 years of the current DUI arrest (Class 4 Felony)
• DUI arrest with a suspended or revoked driver’s license (Class 4 Felony)
• DUI arrest while your vehicle is equipped with an ignition interlock device (Class 4 Felony)

Penalties for First-Time Aggravated DUI (Class 4 Felony)

The following penalties are common for a first-time aggravated DUI as a class 4 felony:

• Between 4 months and 3.75 years in prison
• At least $4,700 in fines and fees
• Drivers license revoked
• Alcohol counseling
• Probation
• Potential community service
• 2 years of ignition interlock device in vehicle

Penalties for Class 4 Aggravated DUI with Prior Felony Convictions

The following penalties are common for a first-time aggravated DUI as a class 4 felony if you have prior felony convictions:

• Between 2.25 years and 7.5 years in prison
• At least $4,700 in fines and fees
• Drivers license revoked
• Alcohol counseling
• Probation
• Potential community service
• 2 years of ignition interlock device in vehicle

Note that with more than one prior felony conviction, your prison time shoots up to 6 years to 15 years.

Penalties for First-Time Aggravated DUI (Class 6 Felony)

The following penalties are common for a first-time aggravated DUI as a class 6 felony:

• Between 1 day in jail to 2 years in prison
• At least $4,700 in fines and fees
• Drivers license revoked
• Alcohol counseling
• Probation
• Potential community service
• 2 years of ignition interlock device in vehicle

Penalties for Class 6 Aggravated DUI with Prior Felony Convictions

The following penalties are common for a first-time aggravated DUI as a class 6 felony if you have prior felony convictions:

• Between 9 months and 2.75 years in prison
• At least $4,700 in fines and fees
• Drivers license revoked
• Alcohol counseling
• Probation
• Potential community service
• 2 years of ignition interlock device in vehicle

Note that with more than one prior felony conviction, your prison time shoots up to 2.25 years to 5.75 years.

Contact The Law Office of James Novak

For more information about your legal rights and options after a DUI charge, be sure to contact a drunk driving and criminal defense attorney today. The team at The Law Office of James Novak will fight diligently for you every step of the way.

A number of clients have had questions about the differences between Extreme DUI charges and Aggravated DUI charges. We’d like to compare the two right now.

Different Drunk Driving Charges Based on Circumstances

Classifications such as Extreme DUI and Aggravated DUI are intended to denote the circumstances at the time of your arrest. While drunk driving is always taken seriously, sometimes certain situations involve even harsher penalties.

As you are about to read, Aggravated DUI is considered more serious than Extreme DUI, and the penalties reflect this.

About Extreme DUI

An Extreme DUI refers to cases in which a person’s BAC (blood alcohol concentration) is 0.15 or higher. This means that the BAC is at least twice the legal limit. This level of intoxication leads to stiffer penalties, though Extreme DUI is still considered a misdemeanor charge.

Penalties for Extreme DUI

If you are convicted of an Extreme DUI, you will face at least 24 hours of jail time as well as a $900 fine plus an additional charge of $250 for a “DUI Assessment” and $1,250 for an “Extreme DUI Assessment.” Your driver’s license will be revoked for 1 year as well. An ignition interlock device will need to be installed in all of your vehicles, which will require you to blow into the device and demonstrate sobriety before the vehicle can start.

Additional Extreme DUI convictions after the first will carry harsher fines and penalties, so keep that in mind.

About Aggravated DUI

Unlike Extreme DUI, an Aggravated DUI is considered a felony. Aggravated DUI applies in the following circumstances:

• A child younger than 15 years old is in the car while you are driving drunk

• Your driver’s license is restricted, revoked, or suspended at the time of a DUI

• You have two prior DUI convictions within last 7 years (84 months)

Penalties for Aggravated DUI

Since Aggravated DUI is a felony, you will face at least 4 months in prison and up to 3.75 years. Fines for an Aggravated DUI conviction can total around $4,700. Those convicted will have their driver’s license revoked and have an ignition interlock device placed in their vehicle for 2 years. Probation, community service, and alcohol counseling are also common for Aggravated DUI convictions.

How a Drunk Driving Attorney Can Help You

Whether you face an Extreme DUI or an Aggravated DUI, you need to take these charges seriously. Working with a skilled drunk driving defense attorney will allow you to receive expert legal advice. We will help reduce penalties when possible, and help you through the complexities of Arizona’s drunk driving laws. We are here for you to ensure you receive a fair hearing and that your Constitutional protections are respected.

Contact The Law Office of James Novak

For more information about extreme DUI, aggravated DUI, and many other matters related to drunk driving charges, be sure to contact our criminal defense law firm today. The team at the Law Office of James Novak will help you make smart choices about your legal options.