In the cases I'm discussing the ICWs have an additional piece of language directly related to CDL holders which informs them they face a possible suspension of their CDL even if they are not driving a commercial motor vehicle. Neither of my clients were read this additional portion when presented with the ICWs. To their credit during cross examination, both WSP Troopers admitted that they either forgot to read the additional language related to CDL holders or that they didn't know they had to read it. Surprisingly the first time I argued this to a King County District Court judge, that particular judge found no error since the driver was told he would lose his license for at least a year if he refused. If a CDL holder is convicted of a DUI, even in their non-commercial motor vehicle, they face a minimum one year CDL suspension.
This particular judge said that by warning my client of the effects of a refusal on his personal license (that is, at least a one year suspension) that somehow satisfied the warnings regarding his CDL and he was not prejudiced! What!!!!
I again argued this same issue to a separate King County District Court judge who did find it to be an issue and suppressed the breath test results. It is amazing the inconsistency we often find when judges at the same level (District Court in this case) reach differing opinions on obvious violations of Due Process which prejudice drivers, in this case, specifically CDL drivers.
The moral of the story is, if at first you don't succeed, try a different judge!
___________________________________________________________________
About the author:
Nathan Webb, is a seasoned Seattle DUI Lawyer. His practice emphasizes DUI defense. He has been repeatedly recognized as one of Seattle's Best Attorneys! He was recognized as a Top Seattle DUI Attorneys by Seattle Met Magazine, Repeatedly named a Super Lawyer Rising Star in the area of DUI Defense by Washington Law and Politics Magazine, and Rated Superb for DUI Defense (perfect 10.0 out of 10.0) by Avvo.com.