​​​​​​​Case:  City of Grand Rapids v. R.H.
Charges: OWI-High BAC "Super Drunk"   (DUI Attorney  - Law Office of Edward J Sternisha cases won )

Client was originally charged with Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) with a High BAC (or Super Drunk).  Although the arresting officer testified under oath that the defendant made a series of erratic turns, drove on the wrong side of the road, and refused to stop for the emergency lights, Ed was able to clearly show that none of that was true.  When the officer testified that the defendant had slurred speech, poor balance, and failed the alphabet, Ed was again able to show that those statements too were false. 

 
Ed even employed an investigator who used photos to demonstrate in court that the streets the officer claimed the incident took place on were not even the same streets shown in the officer’s own dashcam video.  In the end, the officer’s credibility was shot and Ed’s client only paid a small fine for a minor traffic violation that will not cause him to have a criminal record.  The OWI criminal charges were DISMISSED!



Outcome:  All criminal charges were dismissed.


--------------------

Remember, every case is different and the results mentioned here are not typical.   Ed Sternisha is a DUI Attorney.  If you have been charged with an OWI offense, plead not guilty and “Call Ed Instead!”  (616) 233-CALL-ED.

​​Case:  City of Grand Rapids v. D.B-P.
Charges: OWI-High BAC "Super Drunk"

Client was stopped for allegedly crossing over the double-yellow center-line causing an oncoming vehicle to "slow down and swerve to avoid being struck."   A careful review of the police officer's dashcam video led Attorney Ed Sternisha to discover that not only did the client never cross over the painted lines, the oncoming vehicle never slowed down nor did it swerve at all.    With the traffic-stop being invalid, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss all criminal charges and the client simply paid a small civil fine. ​


Outcome:  All criminal charges were dismissed.


--------------------

Below is a summary of some of the cases Attorney Edward Sternisha has obtained successful results from:

Case:  State of Michigan v. C.S.

Charges: (1.) OWI-2nd Offense, (2.) Refusing P.B.T. (3.) Implied Consent Refusal

Client was stopped for allegedly failing to use his turn signal prior to turning at an intersection. While carefully reviewing the police officer's dashcam video, Attorney Ed Sternisha discovered what appeared to be the blinking of a turn signal on the rear of the client's pickup truck.  At the Implied Consent hearing with the Michigan Secretary of State, Attorney Sternisha presented the video and questioned the state trooper who made the stop.  The trooper agreed that he could see the blinking of a turn signal on the back of the client's truck.  At that time, the hearing officer dismissed the Implied Consent Refusal and the mandatory 1-year driver's license suspension was cancelled.


Later at court, Attorney Sternisha presented the same video to the judge and asked that the criminal charges be dismissed as well.  Although the prosecutor objected and claimed the officer simply made a mistake, the judge ruled that to him, it appeared as though, from the officer's position near the intersection, the officer could not tell if the client did or did not use a signal and therefore said, "If you can't tell, you can't stop him."  The judge then dismissed the criminal charges.


Outcome:  All charges were dismissed.


--------------------

​​​​​​​​​Case:  State of Michigan v. D.L.

Charges:  (1.) OWI-2nd Offense, (2.) Drunk & Disorderly, (3.) Driving on a Suspended License

Client was arrested and charged with Operating While Intoxicated - 2nd Offense, Drunk & Disorderly, and Driving on a Suspended License (DWLS) after his ex-girlfriend called the police claiming he was trying to break into her home.  The police arrived and found the client on the porch of the apartment complex and were told by the ex-girlfriend that he arrived one hour prior.  Even though he had been on the porch for an hour with a half-empty bottle of 100-proof liquor, the police felt that because he must have driven to that location and he was now intoxicated, he should be charged with drunk driving.  Even though a blood test conducted two hours later returned a result of .14% BAC, Attorney Ed Sternisha was able to convince a jury that there was no possible way to determine if the client had any alcohol in his system at the time of driving.  Because he was standing on the porch with the bottle of liquor for an hour, the jury agreed with Attorney Sternisha and found the client
Not Guilty of OWI-2nd, Not Guilty of Drunk & Disorderly, and only found him guilty of DWLS.


​In this case, DUI Attorney Ed Sternisha used the prosecutor's own evidence, including police photographs and a recording of the original 911 call to demonstrate to the jury that the client was not guilty of what he was accused of.


Outcome:  Jury verdict of Not Guilty of OWI-2nd and Drunk & Disorderly.  Only guilty of DWLS.


--------------------

​​​​Case:  City of Grand Rapids v. K.B.
Charges: OWI-1st

Client was arrested and charged with OWI after he pulled into a gas station where police were on-scene making an unrelated arrest.  The police questioned him and asked him to pick a number between 17 and 19.  When client picked 17, they asked him to submit to a breath test.  After he refused to provide a breath sample, he was arrested.  After reviewing the ridiculously weak case, Attorney Ed Sternisha met with the prosecutor who agreed  to dismiss all criminal charges if the client simply paid a small civil fine. ​


Outcome:  All criminal charges were dismissed.


--------------------

​​​​​​Case:  City of Grand Rapids v. R.V.

Charges:  OWI-1st

Client was arrested and charged with Operating While Intoxicated - 1st Offense after an officer pulled him over for turning into a parking lot, then pulling back onto the road to go in another direction (which by the way, is not a traffic offense).  The client informed the officer that he was from out-of-town and was unfamiliar with the area and was simply turning around.  Although the client performed the field sobriety test well, he was arrested after a PBT showed a result of .08% BrAC.  At the jail a formal breath test was administered with the first result of .08% and the second test, three minutes later, showing .07%.  Attorney Ed Sternisha discussed the case with the prosecutor and negotiated a resolution where the client would pay a fine for a careless driving ticket, which is a civil infraction, and the prosecutor would dismiss the criminal charges.


​​Outcome:  Criminal charges dismissed in exchange for a minor traffic ticket.


--------------------

Case:  State of Michigan v. A.O.

Charges: (1.) OWI-1st, (2.) Possession of a Firearm While Intoxicated, (3.) Concealed Pistol License Holder Possessing Firearm While Intoxicated.

Client was stopped for speeding 43mph in a 25mph zone and subsequently arrested and charged with the three crimes listed above.  Attorney Ed Sternisha’s meticulous investigation revealed that there were no speed limit signs posted anywhere on the street for drivers traveling in the direction where the client was driving.  After several back-and-forth court proceedings, an evidentiary hearing was held to determine the actual speed limit for that road.

In an unusual move, Attorney Sternisha called the County Clerk, the County Road Commission Director, and a Lieutenant from the Michigan State Police Headquarters in Lansing as defense witnesses.  At the conclusion of the hearing, the court, agreeing with Attorney Sternisha, held that the enforceable speed limit on the road in question was 55mph, not 25mph.  As such, because the client was only traveling 43mph and therefore not speeding, the traffic stop never should have occurred.  The court then granted the defense motion to suppress all evidence and dismiss the case. 


Outcome: All charges were dismissed.


​--------------------

​​​​​​Case:  State of Michigan v. C.F.

Charges:  OWI-1st; Refuse PBT

Client was arrested and charged with Operating While Intoxicated - 1st Offense after an officer pulled her over for "weaving within her traffic lane" - described as going from side to side inside the painted lines, (which by the way, is not a traffic offense).  After investigating the case and reading the allegations, I was not surprised when the blood test results came back below the legal limit - I have dealt with this officer before. I was, however, surprised that the police received the lab results over a month prior and never produced a copy for the defense even though today was the 2nd court appearance since they learned of the results.

Without the lab results, I would not, and could not, advise my client to plead guilty to a crime that the police couldn't even prove occurred. Still insistent on seeing the lab results, and having the prosecutor finally retrieve them from the police department, as I expected, it was below the legal limit.  Attorney Ed Sternisha discussed the case with the prosecutor and negotiated a resolution where the client would pay a fine for a careless driving ticket, which is a civil infraction, pay a fine for refusing the PBT, another civil infraction, and the prosecutor would dismiss the criminal charges.


​​Outcome:  Criminal charges dismissed in exchange for a minor traffic tickets.


--------------------

DUI Lawyer "Call Ed Instead!"®

Law Office of Edward J. Sternisha, PLLC