The arraignment in a DUI case

In Michigan, a refusal to submit to a chemical test under the state's implied-consent provision starts a license process that is separate from the criminal charge. Michigan's notice statute requires the peace officer to notify the person immediately and in writing that a hearing may be requested within a period counted from the date of that notice. The Secretary of State prescribes the notice form, and the statute requires it to state that a failure to request a hearing within that period will result in suspension of the person's license or permit to drive.

The same notice must state that there is not a requirement to retain counsel for the hearing, though counsel would be permitted to represent the person. That describes what the notice says; it is not a suggestion about whether to have a lawyer.

If a hearing is requested, Michigan's hearing statute directs the Secretary of State to hold it and limits it to listed issues: whether the officer had reasonable grounds to believe the person committed a specified crime, whether the person was arrested for that crime, whether a refusal was reasonable, and whether the person was advised of specified rights. The statute treats commercial and noncommercial drivers differently and provides for a petition to circuit court for review.

Ohio's initial-appearance statute connects the license and the criminal charge in a different way, and the forum it names is the court. It applies to an arrest for operating a vehicle, streetcar or trackless trolley in violation of Ohio's OVI provisions or a municipal OVI ordinance, or for being in physical control in violation of the related state provision or a substantially equivalent ordinance.

Where a suspension was imposed under a separate Ohio section in relation to the arrest, and the person appeals it and the judge, magistrate or mayor terminates it, the statute allows that official, at any time before adjudication on the merits, to impose a new suspension if the official determines that continued driving will be a threat to public safety. Where no such suspension was imposed, the official may impose one on the same determination.

A suspension under these provisions continues until the complaint is adjudicated on the merits, and time served under it is credited against certain later judicial suspensions. If the court holds the license of a person in the second situation and does not impose a suspension, the statute directs the court to return it, provided it has not otherwise been suspended or cancelled.

North Carolina and Ohio both use the term initial appearance. Ohio's statute requires the initial appearance on a covered charge to be held within a period the statute itself states, measured from the arrest or from the issuance of the citation. In a separate division, the same statute names the initial appearance, the preliminary hearing and the arraignment as distinct proceedings.

North Carolina's police-processing statute provides that, upon an arrest, the officer shall inform the person of the charges or a cause for the arrest, may take the person for chemical analyses and evaluations, may take photographs and fingerprints, and shall take the person before a judicial official for an initial appearance after completing all investigatory procedures, crash reports, chemical analyses and the other listed procedures.

North Carolina's applicability statute explains that these procedures govern the investigation and processing of an implied-consent offense as the state defines it, and that the trial procedures apply to such an offense litigated in the District Court Division. Under the initial-appearance statute, a magistrate may hold the appearance at any place within the county and, to the extent practicable, is to be available at locations other than the courthouse when that will expedite the appearance.

North Carolina's initial-appearance statute directs the magistrate to determine whether there is probable cause to believe the person is impaired. In making that determination, the magistrate may review alcohol screening tests and chemical analyses, receive testimony from any law enforcement officer about impairment and the circumstances of the arrest, and observe the person arrested.

If the magistrate finds probable cause, the statute requires the magistrate to consider whether the person is impaired to the extent that conditions under a separately cross-referenced provision should be imposed. The excerpt does not describe those conditions, so their content is a question for a lawyer in North Carolina.

The statute also requires the magistrate to inform the person in writing of the established procedure for having others appear at the jail to observe the person's condition or to administer an additional chemical analysis if the person is unable to make bond. A person who is unable to make bond must list the people they wish to contact, with telephone numbers, on a form that sets out the contact procedure, and a copy of that form is filed with the case file.

A plea is the defendant's formal answer to a criminal charge. As a concept, a plea that denies the charge leaves the prosecution to prove it at later stages, while a plea that admits the charge or does not contest it can move the case toward sentencing. Which plea forms a court accepts, and what each means for the license, for employment or for any later case, are matters of the law of the state where the charge is filed. None of the excerpts cited here lists plea options.

Arizona's extreme-DUI statute, which covers driving or actual physical control while under the extreme influence of intoxicating liquor, provides that at the arraignment the court shall inform the defendant that the defendant may request a trial by jury, and that the request, if made, shall be granted. That requirement appears in that particular section; the excerpt does not say that the same rule governs other Arizona charges.

A lawyer licensed in the reader's state can explain which pleas are available there, what each would mean for the court case, and how a plea could interact with any license proceeding.

Decisions about release and about driving while a case is pending are made under the law of the state where the case is filed. The statutes cited here show only parts of that law, and they describe categories of decisions rather than predicting what a court or magistrate will decide in any case. The categories below come directly from the North Carolina and Ohio excerpts, and each is limited to the proceeding and charges its statute names. A lawyer in the relevant state can explain which categories could arise in a given case.

• Bond and custody: North Carolina's statute addresses a person who is unable to make bond, including written information about observers or an additional chemical analysis at the jail.
• Impairment-related conditions: a North Carolina magistrate who finds probable cause considers whether conditions under a separately cross-referenced provision should be imposed.
• Driving before adjudication: an Ohio judge, magistrate or mayor may impose a suspension that lasts until the charge is adjudicated on the merits, on a public-safety determination.
• Certain other Ohio charges: for charges listed in a separate division of the same statute, a judge may suspend the license at the initial appearance, preliminary hearing or arraignment on the same public-safety determination.

After the charge is answered, a case can move into a stage of pretrial motions, where questions about the evidence are raised before any trial. New York's chemical-test evidence statute gives one example: a defendant who was compelled to submit to a chemical test under a specified subdivision of the state's testing statute may move to suppress that evidence under a specified article of New York's criminal procedure law, on the grounds that the order was obtained and the test administered in violation of that subdivision or any other applicable law.

That provision is specific to New York and to compelled tests under the subdivision it names. Whether any motion is available in another state, or in a particular case, is a question for a lawyer in that state.

• Which proceeding is the scheduled court date, and what happens at it in this court?
• Is there a separate license proceeding, which forum hears it, and what triggers it?
• What conditions on release or driving could be considered before the case is decided?
• Which pleas are available, and how could each affect the license case?

Deadlines, limits and penalty ranges are set by each state’s statutes, so this page does not state them. Each state page shows them with the official source and the date they were verified — or says plainly that a figure has not been confirmed yet.