Can I Represent Myself on a DUI Charge? by Jon Scott Fox   April 2010

Certain things are legal to do, but not necessarily wise to do. Representing yourself when charged with DUI falls into the category of "not wise." However, it is clear under our constitution and relevant court decisions that a citizen has a protected right to defend himself/ herself against any criminal charge, whether it a DUI or a murder charge. This right is set forth in the Washington State constitution as the "right to appear and defend in person, or by counsel." (Washington Constitution article I, Section 22.) The courts take seriously the right of self-representation. Recently, a felony conviction for violating a no-contact order that resulted in an 18 month prison term was reversed by the Washington State Supreme Court because the trial court did not permit the defendant to represent himself. (State v. Madsen No. No. 81450-3, decision issued March 25, 2010.)

It is established, then, that an individual has a constitutional right to represent himself regarding a DUI charge. But is this a wise idea? In my 29 years of defending DUI cases in Washington State, I have been in court on a number of occasions when the accused elected to represent himself on a DUI charge. Not once have I seen this work to the advantage of the accused. There are many reasons why representing yourself regarding a DUI charge is a bad idea. First, there are numerous court rules and a large body of reported case decisions that impact how an effective DUI defense might proceed. A good DUI defense attorney spends a large amount of time studying rules, procedures, and court decisions so that informed choices may be made in court. Second, experience counts. Knowing the particular "lay of the land" regarding local court procedure, prosecutor policies, and judicial tendencies is necessary to be effective defending a DUI charge. Third, there is science. Defending a DUI charge involving either a breath or blood test requires knowledge of the scientific principles behind the collection and analysis of breath/blood evidence to be used in court. Fourth, if the case should proceed to trial, an experienced trial lawyer will more effectively present the defense that an individual who has never before conducted a jury trial. And last but not least, almost every DUI arrest involves not only court proceedings but also proceedings at the Department of Licensing involving the department's intention to suspend the driver's license. There are explicit deadlines that apply to practice before the Department of Licensing and since DOL license suspension procedures are "administrative," (as opposed to criminal) a separate body of procedural regulations applies.

If a criminal defendant does wish to proceed by representing himself, the judge will make an inquiry on the record to determine that the defendant is fully aware of all of the pitfalls of this choice. This is required because an individual who represents himself is held to the same standards that apply to attorneys. Bear in mind that prosecutors have special training and in many cases, years of experience prosecuting DUI cases. They are formidable, knowledgeable adversaries. It is safe to say that a driver who defends himself against a DUI charge will be at a significant disadvantage in the courtroom compared to the well trained, experienced prosecutor. Any citizen accused of DUI who is considering represented himself would be well advised to take advantage of the free consultation offered by most good DUI defense attorneys to get a better picture of what lies ahead in the courtroom and at the Department of Licensing before going forward.