','

' ); } ?>

Drink Driving With No Priors

This is a case of drink driving for an accused with no priors.

The client was cooperative with the police and made full admissions to the offence. He had no relevant priors for drink driving and this was his first court appearance. A full restitution for the damage caused by his car was also made and our client had remained at the scene and waited for the police to arrive.
Our client’s vehicle collided with the front fence of a house and the police were called and our client questioned about the collision. He was then breath-tested and a blood alcohol concentration of 0.214% was recorded. Subsequently a drink driving charge was filed against him.
 

We represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on charges of DUI and Exceed PCA.

The plea in mitigation emphasised that our client had been driving for 40 years without incident. A reference was also tendered to the court from his wife which attested to our client’s resolve to reduce his alcohol intake. This reference also explained to the court the adverse effect of his disqualification on his family.

The order of the court was that our client be fined $1,000 (with time to pay) and his license cancelled and disqualified for the statutory period of 24 months, backdated to the date of the offence. Clearly, the aggravating features of this case were the high level reading (0.214) and the fact that he had caused property damage to the front fence of a property.

In different circumstances, our client may have been required to undertake a Community Corrections Order with a period of unpaid community work and court ordered alcohol counselling. The magistrate however was satisfied that our client had an otherwise good driving history as this was a case of drink driving with no priors. It was established that our client was a person of good character, had made full recompense for his offending, and was taking appropriate steps to avoid a recurrence of the offence.
 
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 30/01/2017