Possible for DUI charges to be reduced to wet reckless?
I drove for 2 hours under the influence of alcohol until I decided to take off my tights. While taking off my tights, my car swerved which resulted in me getting pulled over, breathalysed, and charged with a DUI. I am 18 years old and I blew a .14. Is there any hope for my charges to be reduced to a...
I drove for 2 hours under the influence of alcohol until I decided to take off my tights. While taking off my tights, my car swerved which resulted in me getting pulled over, breathalysed, and charged with a DUI. I am 18 years old and I blew a .14. Is there any hope for my charges to be reduced to a wet reckless? Technically I was driving fine until I took my tights off, which would cause anyone to swerve.
You can compare how the insurance quotes would change, for example here – autoinsurance.maclenet.com
Okay, but who other than an intoxicated person would think you can safely take your tights off while driving?? You are an under age drinker who was probably not technically driving fine. That’s why the legal limit is .08 in California. A .14 is almost twice that, and anyone who says they are fine at that level needs an alcohol education program before they hurt themselves or someone else.
No. Get a lawyer.
The tight removal defense was declared inadmissible in a court of law after the New York Ballet vs. State of New York ruling, 1975.
Why would you take your tights off then? If it would cause anyone to swerve then that was just STUPID. Anyway you blew a .14? That is almost TWICE the legal limit for 21 in the U.S. You didn’t say where you are, but if you are in the U.S.(since it doesn’t specify you are from another Country) then you are talking about UNDERAGE DRINKING and are actually like SEVEN TIMES the legal limit. Under 21 is a ZERO TOLERANCE of .02 where I am. They aren’t going to lower YOUR charges when you are that high over the legal limit.
Technically you were driving under the influence which led you to think you could somehow remove your tights while driving. D.U.I. is not based on how well or unwell you are driving, but on your blood alcohol level, or B.A.C. and for someone under 21 in the U.S. any B.A.C. at all is considered enough for a D.U.I.
Technically you were drunk.
You are under age and got caught.
Insurance companies view the two as one in the same.
I would not count on it.
I hope you learned your lesson.
Wet reckless isn’t actually a reduced charge. It carries the same penalties as a DUI and is still considered a prior conviction if you get another DUI…which is what they never tell you. It’s a way to scam people into pleading guilty to a "lesser charge" when in actuality it isn’t. They came up with it as a way to get people to plead guilty rather than pleading not guilty, and eating up resources by having to try the case in court. Basically, what a wet reckless charge says is that you drove recklessly BECAUSE of alcohol…and that there’s a possibility that you wouldn’t have if you hadn’t been impaired…which is the exact same thing as DUI.
P.S. Who else other than an obviously impaired driver would think they could (safely) remove their tights while operating a moving vehicle?
Don’t count on it. You’re 1) under aged, and 2) blowing an awfully high reading.
You judgment was obviously impaired as evidence by you trying to remove your tights. So your self-description of "driving fine until I took my tights off" is probably not an accurate statement, but rather cased on your impaired judgment.
The swerving was just a reason for the police to pull you over. The crime was having the alcohol concentration around a 0.14. Even IF you had driven "fine", it doesn’t matter how long you drove (other then if you weren’t drinking while driving, your alcohol concentration would be around a 0.170 when you started driving).
You’re 18, lay off the alcohol until you are old enough and mature enough to know not to drink and drive.