A DUI arrest can create several problems at once. There may be a criminal prosecution, a separate Department of Licensing proceeding, immediate concerns about driving privileges, and serious questions about employment, professional licensing, and a person’s future. Understanding what happens next—and what the State must actually prove—is important.
At Dalton Law Office, we approach DUI defense by examining the entire investigation, from the initial traffic stop to the collection and interpretation of scientific evidence. A police officer’s conclusion, a breath-test number, or a toxicology report is not the end of the inquiry. Each must be evaluated in the context of the law, the underlying evidence, and the procedures used to obtain it.
The following answers address common questions about Washington DUI charges.
A DUI arrest can initiate two separate legal proceedings: a criminal prosecution in court and an administrative driver’s license proceeding through the Washington Department of Licensing (DOL). The two proceedings have different procedures, standards, and deadlines.
In the criminal case, the court may address release conditions, bail, alcohol monitoring, and future court appearances. As the case progresses, defense counsel reviews the evidence, investigates potential constitutional or scientific issues, determines whether motions should be filed, and evaluates the available options, including negotiation and trial.
The DOL proceeding concerns driving privileges. It may arise from a qualifying breath or blood test result or a refusal to submit to an evidentiary breath test. The DOL can suspend or revoke a license even if the criminal charge is later dismissed or the defendant is acquitted. That is why both proceedings require attention from the beginning.
Generally, only seven days after receiving notice.
Under RCW 46.20.308, a driver who receives notice of an administrative suspension or revocation ordinarily has seven days to request a formal DOL hearing. The hearing request requires a $375 fee, subject to a waiver for qualifying indigent applicants.
The notice may be given at the time of arrest or later, including when the Department receives qualifying blood-test results. The deadline runs from the applicable notice, not necessarily from the date of the alleged offense.
Missing the deadline generally waives the opportunity to contest the administrative action at a hearing. Retaining an attorney does not, by itself, constitute a hearing request. Anyone arrested for DUI should preserve the paperwork provided by law enforcement and determine immediately whether a DOL deadline is running.
For additional information, see our page on Washington DUI Licensing Consequences.
A driver should stop safely, remain courteous, and comply with lawful instructions. Washington drivers are generally required to provide their driver’s license, registration, and proof of insurance when properly requested. There is no benefit in being confrontational or physically resisting an officer.
At the same time, a traffic stop does not mean the driver must volunteer potentially incriminating information. Questions about drinking, drug use, or activities earlier in the evening may be designed to develop evidence for a DUI investigation. A driver can politely decline to answer questions about suspected criminal conduct rather than speculate, exaggerate, or make statements that may later be used against them. Do not provide false information.
If arrested, clearly request an attorney. You can call Dalton Law Office, PLLC at 360-213-0013 . After hours the message will provide a cell phone number to call. The rules governing access to counsel, custodial questioning, and evidentiary testing are important and sometimes time-sensitive. Officers may continue an otherwise lawful investigation even when a person declines to answer questions, and remaining silent does not necessarily prevent an arrest.
Police commonly ask suspected DUI drivers to perform roadside exercises such as the walk-and-turn, one-leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus test. These exercises are intended to produce observations that officers may use to support an arrest.
Roadside field sobriety tests are generally presented as voluntary. However, declining the tests is not necessarily without consequences. In State v. Mecham (2016), the Washington Supreme Court permitted the use of a driver’s refusal to perform field sobriety tests, although the justices differed in their constitutional analysis.
The fact that a driver performs poorly on a field sobriety exercise also does not automatically establish intoxication. Performance may be affected by medical conditions, physical limitations, footwear, roadway conditions, lighting, the instructions given, and the officer’s administration of the test. Those circumstances may matter when evaluating the reliability and significance of the officer’s conclusions.
No. Washington law distinguishes between a preliminary breath test, often offered at the roadside, and an evidentiary breath test administered following a DUI arrest.
A preliminary breath test is voluntary under WAC 448-15-020. Its principal investigative use is to help establish whether alcohol has been consumed and whether probable cause exists for an arrest or a search warrant. It does not replace the evidentiary testing procedures governed by Washington’s implied-consent law.
A post-arrest evidentiary breath test is different. Under RCW 46.20.308, refusal can result in substantial license revocation and may be used as evidence in a criminal prosecution. Law enforcement may also obtain a warrant authorizing a blood draw when legally justified.
The decision whether to submit to an evidentiary test should not be based on blanket advice about always agreeing or always refusing. The applicable warnings, available legal advice, and circumstances matter.
Yes. Washington law provides more than one way for the State to establish DUI.
Under RCW 46.61.502, the State may prosecute a driver based on a qualifying alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher within two hours after driving. But the statute also permits prosecution when the State alleges that the driver was under the influence of or affected by alcohol, drugs, or a combination of substances—even without a test result reaching a statutory concentration.
A result below 0.08 does not automatically establish guilt or innocence. The State must still prove the elements of the particular offense charged, and a test result must be considered with the other evidence.
There is also no universally reliable formula for how many drinks produce a particular blood alcohol concentration. Alcohol absorption and elimination vary, and individual conditions may affect both test results and observable behavior. Estimates based solely on the number of drinks consumed are no substitute for examining the facts and evidence in an individual case.
Yes. Washington’s DUI statute applies to alcohol, cannabis, prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, controlled substances, and combinations of substances. The fact that a medication was lawfully prescribed does not, standing alone, provide a defense to an allegation of impaired driving.
For drivers age 21 or older, Washington also establishes a per se THC threshold of 5.00 nanograms per milliliter of whole blood within two hours after driving. But the State may pursue a cannabis DUI based on alleged impairment even without a qualifying THC concentration.
Drug DUI prosecutions present significant scientific questions. Detecting a substance in a person’s blood does not necessarily answer whether that substance affected the person’s ability to drive at the relevant time. Different substances have different pharmacological properties, and toxicological findings must be interpreted in light of what the test actually measures, when the sample was obtained, and the other evidence.
We examine the claimed relationship between the laboratory result and the conduct alleged. We also investigate the qualifications and methods of the laboratory, the collection and handling of specimens, the underlying analytical records, and the assumptions used by expert witnesses.
Learn more about our approach on our Drug and Marijuana DUI Defense page.
A misdemeanor DUI is classified as a gross misdemeanor, with a possible maximum sentence of 364 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. Washington also imposes mandatory minimum penalties under RCW 46.61.5055, which vary according to the individual’s qualifying prior offenses, alcohol concentration, and whether an evidentiary breath test was refused. The statute provides for certain alternatives to mandatory jail time in specified circumstances.
Depending on the case, a conviction can involve incarceration or electronic home monitoring, financial penalties, substance-use assessment and treatment, probation or monitoring conditions, license suspension or revocation, and ignition-interlock requirements. The cumulative financial burden can extend well beyond the fine imposed by the court.
There can also be consequences outside the criminal case. A DUI conviction may affect employment, professional licensing, insurance costs, commercial driving privileges, and international travel. For some individuals, the indirect consequences are as significant as the sentence itself.
Washington’s firearm restrictions also warrant careful consideration. Certain qualifying repeat DUI-related convictions can result in a prohibition against firearm possession under RCW 9.41.040. These consequences depend on the nature and timing of the offenses and should be evaluated before a plea is entered.
Most Washington DUI prosecutions begin as gross misdemeanor offenses, but some qualify as Class B felonies.
Under current RCW 46.61.502(6), DUI is a felony when a person has three or more qualifying prior offenses within 15 years. Certain specified prior convictions, including DUI-related vehicular homicide or vehicular assault and a previous felony DUI or felony physical-control conviction, can also establish felony treatment.
Not every prior alcohol-related incident necessarily qualifies in the same way. The statutory definition of a prior offense, the dates of arrest, the original and resulting charges, and the conviction records must be carefully examined. Those details can materially affect both the permissible charge and potential sentence.
Not necessarily, but there may be substantial licensing consequences even before the criminal case is resolved.
An administrative suspension or revocation can follow qualifying test results or refusal under the implied-consent statute. A conviction can create additional licensing consequences, although Washington law provides credit for certain administrative suspension periods arising from the same incident.
Some drivers may qualify for an ignition interlock driver’s license, allowing them to drive vehicles equipped with a functioning interlock device during an otherwise applicable suspension or revocation. Eligibility depends on the driver’s record and compliance with Department of Licensing requirements, including applicable insurance and device requirements.
The criminal case and licensing case should be evaluated together, but neither should be mistaken for a substitute for the other.
Washington’s ordinary statutory process for vacating misdemeanor convictions does not permit a conviction for DUI or actual physical control while under the influence to be vacated under RCW 9.96.060.
That makes the original disposition of a DUI prosecution particularly important. When an appropriate resolution to a different offense is legally and factually supportable, that conviction may have different consequences and may eventually qualify for vacation, depending on the offense, criminal history, applicable waiting periods, and other statutory requirements.
Vacating a conviction is also not the same as automatically erasing every record of an arrest or prosecution. Record relief is governed by separate rules, and individual circumstances matter.
Yes. The availability and strength of a defense depend on the evidence, the way it was obtained, and the legal questions presented by the case.
A meaningful DUI investigation may examine whether the initial stop and subsequent detention were lawful; whether the officer had sufficient grounds for arrest; what the officer actually observed and documented; whether statements were lawfully obtained; and whether roadside testing was administered and interpreted appropriately.
When breath or blood evidence is involved, the investigation extends to the scientific process. Depending on the case, that may involve observation periods, testing protocols, instrument records, maintenance and quality-control data, blood collection and storage, chain of custody, laboratory procedures, analytical uncertainty, and the opinions offered by forensic witnesses. Some issues bear on admissibility; others bear on the weight and reliability of the evidence. The distinction matters.
At Dalton Law Office, we use pretrial motions, discovery, independent investigation, and expert analysis when warranted by the facts. Suppression or exclusion of significant evidence may fundamentally change a prosecution, although no particular result can be promised.
For a closer look at the scientific issues, see Washington DUI Science: Breath and Blood Tests.
If you have been arrested or charged with DUI in Clark County, Cowlitz County, or elsewhere in Southwest Washington, the first steps matter. Evidence should be preserved, court dates should be addressed, and any Department of Licensing deadline should be identified immediately.
Dalton Law Office approaches DUI defense with the same attention to investigation, constitutional protections, forensic evidence, and trial preparation that we bring to other criminal cases.
Call 360-213-0013 to discuss your case. For urgent matters outside ordinary business hours, follow the instructions provided in our office voicemail.