When an Interlock Ignition Device is Required for a DWI – and When it Comes Off

January 10, 2021

By DFW Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 369-0577

www.texasdefensefirm.com

The blow devices to start your car (also known as “deep lung devices,” “DLDs,” or “Interlock Ignition Devices”) have been one of the most major developments in DWI cases over the last 15 years.

The Texas Legislature and courts have been increasingly requiring them in impaired driving cases.  In some circumstances they can be ordered to be placed on your car immediately after an arrest and can remain on the vehicle even after a person finishes probation years later.  The legislature has even incentivized folks to get interlock devices by offering benefits such as non-disclosure eligibility if someone voluntarily keeps one on their car during probation when they otherwise wouldn’t be required to keep one.

Possible Times when a DLD Can Be Ordered By A Judge

 

As you can see, the case has many times where the interlock can be ordered onto the car by the Judge.  Many of these time periods can and do run consecutively and over-lap meaning the interlock may simply stay on from the point a person gets it onto their car until the case is finished.

Ignition interlock providers claim it can only be removed by court order and have this provision in their service contracts… so they typically won’t even remove the device unless or until they see a court order.

What if You Don’t Drive Anymore or Can’t Have the Interlock for Some Other Reason?

Most judges will allow you to substitute a hand-held device for an interlock device though I’ve not found any support in the code for this.  If you have questions or need an alternative or to substitute the interlock device then speak with your lawyer.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is certified in criminal law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.  He is recognized as a Texas Super Lawyer by Thomson Reuters.


Probation Officer Recommendations

January 5, 2021

By Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 369-0577

www.texasdefensefirm.com

Probation officers are often the gatekeepers between their probationers and ultimate freedom.  Probation officers are often asked about recommendations for things like travel, removal of an interlock ignition or deep lung device from a vehicle in DWI cases, or even early release from probation.

When folks visit with me wanting to change something about their probation, it’s very common for them to tell me their probation officer is “not opposed,” or “on board with” or even “recommends” something.

In truth – when I do pick up the phone to ask the probation officer their views I hardly ever get much of anything useful.  I’m usually told the probation department opposes our request to the judge or takes no position on our request to the judge (usually citing department policy).  I can’t remember the last time a probation officer actually told me they supported our motion.

Probation officers also make recommendations for revocations and adjudications.  It’s a bit of a different topic – but remember it is the Judge who ultimately determines what happens in a case, not the probation department.

Probation Officers Don’t Like Making Recommendations

Probation officers work in a bureaucracy. I’ve been in the Army, the District Attorney’s Office, and and have worked alongside government my entire career.  My blog is anything but political but probation departments with their bureaucracies come with some flawed cultures I’ve noticed.

I find there are three cultural problems I’ve seen with probation departments struggle with.  First, there is a climate of fear surrounding decision making.  Personnel are collectively intimidated about sticking their neck-out and making an uncommon or unconventional decision which has any potential at all to backfire.

Second, there is a “default to no” culture at most probation departments.  This means the default answer requests is typically “no.”  The answer is “no” if they don’t understand the request, “no” if they are 50/50 on the request, and especially the answer is “no” if they find a teeny-tiny reason the request could somehow backfire.

Third, if one decision maker is good – then seven are better.  And then they’ll come up with better reasons for saying “no.”

I’m probably jaded, but my view is probation officers simply don’t want to make decisions or recommendations which help their probationers.  They might claim to be in support in closed quarters with no one listening but they often quickly back off any such boldness.  They often claim they are bound not to make recommendations by office policy.  That could be true in some instances but those policies have never limited them from making recommendations against my clients… so I tend to view the policies skeptically.

Often I find a probation officer will claim they are not taking a position – yet they passive/aggressively oppose our requests in open court.  So I never take for granted they are in our corner or neutral on an issue.

I know I’m making many generalizations here.  There are plenty of probation officers I’ve worked with who break this mold and are very forthcoming on their views whether they are helpful or not to my client.

A Probation Officer’s Recommendation Isn’t Everything

It’s okay probation officers if don’t want to make recommendations.  Judges are comfortable making difficult calls granting things the probation department doesn’t like or want.

It’s the Judge who controls terms and conditions of probation – and Judges disagree with probation officers all the time.  Many judges have far more antagonistic relationships with the probation department than you may think.

For these reasons when I’m asked to help someone modify their probation – I just don’t put much stock in what the probation officer reportedly recommends.  If they are in our corner all the better.  But we can still win without it.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is certified in criminal law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.  He is recognized as a Texas Super Lawyer by Thomson Reuters.

 


Getting a Deep Lung Device Off Your Car

April 28, 2011

By Dallas and Collin County Criminal Defense Lawyer Jeremy Rosenthal

(972) 369-0577

texasdefensefirm.com

The most common complaint I get about the deep lung device (also known as an ignition interlock device) is not the hassle, not the cost, but is that is a very cruel and degrading mark of shame.

Whether it’s increased legislative requirements or increased pressure from mothers against drunk driving, these devices are becoming more and more popular with judges.

If you’re reading this, chances are you want to know how to get the thing OFF your car with the Judge’ permission.

The first question is whether the Judge has discretion to order the device removed.  Discretion is just a legal term meaning that the law allows the Judge to decide one way or the other.  For example, in a situation where it is a second DWI arrest, the accused must legally have the deep lung device installed on the car pursuant to Tex.Code.Crim.P. 17.441.  But, under Texas.Code.Crim.P. 42.12 Section 13(i), the Judge may allow a probationer to have the interlock device removed after 50% of the probation is complete.

If the judge has the legal discretion to remove the device, the next step is to convince him or her that this is appropriate in your case.  Here’s the key in Texas — private companies monitor the ignition interlock devices and they keep a detailed log of whether there have been any violations or if the car is under-utilized which indicates the driver may be driving another vehicle and avoiding blowing into the apparatus.  Virtually any judge that I know would ask to see the records from the log.  This means that to have a good chance of getting the deep lung device off your car — you have to have as clean a record as possible.  Also keep in mind that probation officers and the personnel that monitor these devices are highly cynical.  Some will take any failure – regardless of the cause – as proof that the driver has been drinking.

Even with a clean record, it’s no guarantee that your judge will allow the apparatus to be removed, but you’re not giving yourself a chance to get rid of the humiliating device with a dicey record.

You should consult with your attorney as to when it is appropriate to ask the Judge to have a deep lung device removed from a car.

*Jeremy Rosenthal is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas. Nothing in this article should be considered legal advice.  For legal advice about any specific situation, you should contact an attorney directly.