DUI Case Results
The Law Offices of Sifers & Sifers have successfully represented hundreds of clients charged with DUI offenses over the years. While the outcome of every case is different depending on specific circumstances, the attorneys at the Law Offices of Sifers & Sifers have fought diligently for their clients rights and ensure the best legal care possible.
Below are examples of some of the cases the attorneys at the Law Offices of Sifers & Sifers won on behalf of their clients:
From the Oklahoma Criminal Defense Weekly, March 19, 2007:
J EFF SIFERS & CHARLES SIFERS, OKC, laced them up in Beckham County defending a client charged with DUI, DUR, and Straddling Lanes. The trial judge was the Hon. Floyd Haught and the prosecutor was Gina Webb. Client had two prior DUIs and two prior drug arrests. In this case, client refused the State's test. The centerpiece of the State's case was a 45-minute videotape of the traffic stop and drive to jail which featured client cussing the arresting officer for a good 30 minutes(!) Charles reports that he filed 22 motions prior to trial and 4 more motions in limine on the day of trial (including one dealing with the refusal jury instruction) and Judge Haught denied them all! Although Charles conducted voir dire and gave the opening statement, Jeff stepped up and cross-examined the State's main law-enforcement witness. How do you know if you've done a good job on cross-examination? When the prosecutor mentions in closing argument that she did not know who testified more, you or the cop witness. Sounds like Jeff is on the right track. Although it was a close question, client did not take the stand. The jury came back with a not guilty on the DUI but guilty on the other two misdemeanors, proving once again there are few lawyers in Oklahoma with a more firm grasp on DUI law than Charles, and now Jeff. Congrats on a good win!
NO CONTROL OF THE CAR
V.M., a resident of another state, was in Oklahoma City on business a few months ago and was staying at a motel. One evening, he went out to eat (and drink) with co-workers. On his way back to the motel, he stopped at a convenience store to buy beer. After he went into the store, a Highway Patrolman also stopped at this store to buy gas. This Hi-Po noticed a car (V.M.'s) parked in a clearly marked handicapped space. When V.M. exited the store carrying the beer, the Hi-Po saw him walking to the illegally parked car "unsteady on his feet", open the car door, hand the beer to the passenger, and start to sit down in the driver's seat. However, before V.M. could sit down in the car, the Hi-Po yelled at him to "come here". V.M. never completed his entry into the car. He straightened back up and went to the officer. V.M. was then arrested for Actual Physical Control of a Motor Vehicle while under the influence of Alcohol ("APC").
The State tried to revoke his out-of-state driver's license. An APC charge was filed in Oklahoma County District Court. The D.A. wanted a conviction and fine (etc).
V.M. hired Sifers & Sifers to represent him. After the Department of Public Safety ruled against him on his license, our office filed a District Court Appeal. At the appeal, the senior Mr. Sifers showed the judge that, since V.M. never got into the car, the crime of APC was never committed and the arrest was therefore invalid. License returned. A transcript of that trial was obtained and delivered by Mr. Sifers to the D.A. in the Oklahoma County District Court criminal case with the suggestion "to read this". A few days later, the D.A. outright dismissed the charge. No loss of license. No conviction (or fine or probation) of the APC.
2007 STARTS OFF GOOD FOR OUR CLIENTS
At of the first of 2007, two (2) of our felony DUI cases in Oklahoma County District Court came up for final conclusion. Both had reached the point of the end of any further negotiation. In each case, the prior DUI that the State was using to enhance the new case to a felony was from the Oklahoma City Municipal Court. At pre-trial, we were able to show the DA that in both cases that the State's evidence to prove the prior conviction was INSUFFICIENT! In other words, the State COULD NOT prove a felony if the case actually went to trial. In both instances, the State amended the charges to MISDEMEANORS and neither of these clients were convicted of a felony!
Contact us about your legal matter today!