877-Ben-Hall 517-798-5801 877-Ben-Hall Awards & Recognition
By: Ben Hall, Attorney and Owner of Ben Hall Law | Marine Corps and Iraq War Veteran | Former Police Officer | Former Prosecutor | May 10, 2026
An OWI charge in Michigan can affect your license, record, job, insurance costs, and freedom within days. The best defense against OWI charges in Michigan is not a stock excuse. It is a targeted legal attack on how police stopped you, tested you, and tried to prove intoxication under MCL 257.625. That matters because even a first offense can carry jail exposure, points, license sanctions, and long-term collateral damage. Ben Hall is a former police officer and former prosecutor who has over 15 years of experience investigating, prosecuting, and defending OWI charges in Michigan.
Yes. A strong Michigan OWI defense targets admissibility, reliability, or proof of operation under MCL 257.625. In Ingham County and East Lansing cases, the best outcomes often come from suppressing evidence, weakening test results, or showing the State cannot prove you were actually operating the vehicle.
You do not beat an OWI by arguing that you only had “a couple drinks.” You beat it by finding a legal failure in the State’s case. That may be an unlawful stop, a weak arrest basis, noncompliant testing, or missing proof that you drove.
If the stop was invalid, then evidence gathered after the stop may be suppressed. If the chemical test was mishandled, then the prosecutor may lose the BAC result. If the State cannot prove operation, then the charge may fail even if you were intoxicated.
A common misconception is that a BAC over .08 automatically ends the case. It does not. A number only helps the prosecution if the test is admissible, reliable, and tied to the time you were driving.
Ready to protect your future? Contact Ben Hall Law today for a free consultation and let an experienced team with insider knowledge fight for the best possible outcome in your OWI case. Don’t wait—secure the defense you deserve.
Most OWI defense attorneys review what the prosecutor gives them. Ben Hall starts somewhere different.
Before entering private practice, Ben Hall worked as a police officer and as a prosecutor. That means he has personally written the reports that defense attorneys challenge, administered the tests that get contested at hearings, and made the charging decisions that shape how a case moves through court. He knows what those records are supposed to say, what they often leave out, and where the process breaks down.
The inside-out evidence audit applies that perspective to your case from the beginning. Every piece of the State’s file gets reviewed against how it was actually supposed to be handled: the reason documented for the stop, the body cam footage against the written report, the DataMaster calibration and maintenance logs, the observation period records, the chain of custody on any blood draw, and the charging decision itself.
Most people assume the police report is accurate. Ben Hall reads it the way a former officer knows to read it—looking for what is missing, what is vague, and what the video either confirms or contradicts.
That is not a standard defense review. It is a different starting point entirely, and in OWI cases, the early issues are often the ones that matter most.
No. Under the Fourth Amendment and Michigan traffic law, police need a valid traffic basis or reasonable suspicion, not a hunch. A burned taillight may justify a stop. Vague weaving inside one lane may not, depending on the video, officer observations, and timing.
This is one of the most important comparison points in any OWI case: a lawful stop versus a weak stop.
A lawful stop usually starts with a clear, articulable reason. Think speeding confirmed on radar, crossing the center line, expired registration, or a visible equipment violation. A weak stop often rests on vague language in a report, an anonymous tip without corroboration, or exaggerated claims that do not match dash cam or body cam footage.
If the report says you were “all over the road,” but the video shows only one brief lane touch, then the officer’s credibility becomes an issue. If the officer stopped you after a bar exit without a clear violation, possibly suspecting drunk driving, then the defense may argue profiling rather than reasonable suspicion.
Pro tip: the timing matters. Many stop challenges are won or lost by the first 30 to 60 seconds of video, not by what happened after the officer approached your window.
Yes. The best defenses usually attack the stop, the tests, the proof of operation, or the charge level. Cases involving DataMaster, PBT results, or blood draws often turn on technical compliance, while local courts like those in Lansing or East Lansing also pay close attention to video evidence and officer credibility.
The strongest strategy depends on your facts, but these defenses appear again and again in successful Michigan OWI cases:
Notice what is not on this list: generic character arguments. Those help at sentencing. They rarely beat the charge itself.
Yes. You challenge the stop by matching the police report against video, dispatch records, and the actual statute cited. In cases involving NHTSA observations or local patrol video, small contradictions can become suppression issues if the officer lacked reasonable suspicion from the start.
Step 1. Get the stop evidence early. Your lawyer should request the police report, dash cam, body cam, dispatch logs, and any 911 audio. Michigan misdemeanor OWI discovery can be limited in practice, so early, aggressive evidence collection matters.
Step 2. Compare the claimed violation to the video and law. If the officer cites weaving, lane departure, speeding, or an equipment defect, the defense tests whether the video actually supports that claim. If it does not, then a motion to suppress may follow.
Step 3. Litigate whether the stop tainted the rest of the case. If the court finds the stop unlawful, then the field tests, PBT, statements, arrest, and later chemical test may be excluded as fruit of the unlawful stop.
A common misconception is that any tiny mistake by a driver makes the stop untouchable. That is not true. The issue is whether the officer had an objective legal basis, not whether the officer later found alcohol.
No. Field sobriety tests and a roadside PBT serve different functions in Michigan. NHTSA standardized tests measure divided attention and balance, while a PBT estimates alcohol presence. Neither is the same as the evidential breath test at the station, and Michigan treats refusals differently.
This comparison matters because many drivers lump all roadside tests together, especially in cases related to drunk driving.
Field sobriety tests include the walk-and-turn, one-leg stand, and horizontal gaze nystagmus. They are subjective and sensitive to footwear, injuries, age, weather, slope, lighting, and officer instructions. In Michigan, you may refuse field sobriety tests without a direct legal penalty.
A preliminary breath test, or PBT, is the handheld device used at the roadside. Refusing it is generally a civil infraction with up to a $200 fine, not a license suspension. It is also not admissible at trial to prove your BAC, except in limited settings. That makes the PBT far less powerful than many people think.
Pro tip: passing roadside tests does not end the case, and refusing them does not automatically convict you. Police often use roadside testing mainly to build probable cause for arrest.
Yes. Breath and blood tests are often the core of the prosecution’s case, but DataMaster and blood evidence can be challenged through procedure, maintenance, certification, and timing. Cases like People v. Boughner, People v. Wujkowski, and People v. Robe show why details matter.
Step 1. Check whether the test followed Michigan rules. For breath testing, that includes the 15-minute observation period under Michigan administrative rules. In Boughner, a meaningful failure in that observation period helped defeat the result. In Robe, the Court of Appeals suppressed a PBT where the officer observed the driver for only part of the required period.
Step 2. Test reliability, not just compliance. Wujkowski teaches that not every technical slip leads to suppression. If the error was trivial and could not affect accuracy, the State will argue the result should still come in. That means your defense must connect the rule break to a real accuracy problem.
Step 3. Tie the number to the time of driving. If the breath or blood sample came later, then timing matters. If your BAC was rising when tested, then the prosecutor may have a weaker case on what your alcohol level was when you were actually driving.
After reviewing the main theory, your lawyer usually checks supporting records that can confirm or weaken the State’s science:
Common misconception: a machine printout is “objective” and therefore unbeatable. It is only as good as the process behind it.
Yes. Michigan still must prove operation, not just intoxication. If you were asleep in a parked car, sitting in a disabled vehicle, or found near a vehicle without proof of driving, the State may struggle to satisfy a basic element of the charge.
This defense turns on control, movement, and proof. Being in the driver’s seat is not always enough. The prosecutor may try to use warm-engine evidence, witness statements, key position, location, or your own admissions to argue recent operation.
If the engine was off, the car was legally parked, and no witness saw you drive, then operation may be contestable, and a legal consultation can help clarify your options. If you told police you “just pulled over,” then that statement can undo an otherwise strong defense.
Pro tip: do not assume a parked-car case is hopeless. Michigan OWI law still requires proof, and proof gaps can matter more than appearances.
Yes. OWVI is usually better than OWI or High BAC because it carries fewer driver license points and often less severe license consequences. In Michigan, OWVI brings 4 points, while OWI and High BAC generally bring 6 points. High BAC also adds harsher restrictions and often ignition interlock requirements.
This comparison is one of the most practical parts of an OWI defense because many cases do not end in outright dismissal.
OWI means the prosecutor claims you were under the influence or had an unlawful bodily alcohol level of .08 or more. High BAC applies at .17 or above and can trigger tougher first-offense penalties, including a one-year suspension with possible restricted driving only after 45 days and typically with an ignition interlock.
OWVI, or Operating While Visibly Impaired, is a lesser offense. It is still serious. You still face a conviction, a restricted license, and insurance consequences. Still, if the chemical test is excluded or weakened, OWVI is often a better landing spot than standard OWI or Super Drunk.
Trade-off: accepting OWVI may reduce damage, but it still counts as an alcohol-related driving offense. If your goal is a non-alcohol outcome, then you need a stronger evidentiary challenge.
Yes. License protection starts fast, especially if you refused the official chemical test under Michigan’s implied consent law. The Secretary of State process is separate from the criminal case, and the deadline to request a hearing is usually 14 days from the refusal notice.
Step 1. Identify which test was refused. Refusing a roadside PBT usually means only a civil fine. Refusing the station breath test or a lawfully requested blood test can trigger an implied consent suspension.
Step 2. Calendar the 14-day deadline immediately. If you miss it, you can lose the chance to challenge the suspension. Many people focus only on court and ignore the administrative side until it is too late.
Step 3. Build the hearing issues early. The core questions often include whether the officer had reasonable grounds, whether the arrest was lawful, and whether the chemical test request was properly made. If those pieces fail, then the suspension may be avoidable.
A common misconception is that winning in criminal court automatically fixes your license case. It may help, but the two tracks are separate and should be handled as separate battles.
Yes. The biggest defense killers are delay, overtalking, and missed deadlines. In cases involving body cam, DataMaster logs, or implied consent hearings, lost time often means lost evidence, and lost evidence can turn a winnable case into a negotiation case.
Most avoidable damage comes from a few patterns:
Another costly mistake in drunk driving cases is thinking every rule violation guarantees suppression. Michigan cases like Wujkowski show that courts look at whether the error likely affected accuracy. That is why a focused, fact-heavy defense works better than a scattershot one.
Act quickly. Evidence disappears, deadlines expire, and the State is already building its case. If you were charged with OWI in East Lansing, Lansing, or anywhere in Ingham County, contact Ben Hall Law to talk through your case directly. Ben Hall is a former police officer and former prosecutor who knows how these cases are built and where they can be challenged. The consultation is free. The 14-day implied consent deadline is not.
OWI stands for Operating While Intoxicated. Under MCL 257.625, it means driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or with a BAC of .08 or higher. It is a criminal charge, not a traffic ticket, and even a first offense carries potential jail time, license sanctions, and a permanent record.
Yes, and the approach that works is not arguing you only had a few drinks. It is finding a legal failure in how the State built its case. That may be an unlawful stop, a flawed chemical test, missing proof of operation, or a procedural violation during the arrest. Those are the issues that actually move cases.
A first-offense OWI can mean up to 93 days in jail, fines up to $500, license suspension, six points on your record, and possible ignition interlock. High BAC at .17 or above triggers harsher penalties including a one-year suspension. The collateral damage, lost jobs, higher insurance, and a permanent record, often outlasts the court case itself.
A charge alone does not automatically suspend your license, but a conviction or a chemical test refusal can. If you refused the station breath test or a blood draw, the implied consent process is separate from your criminal case and has a 14-day hearing deadline. Missing that deadline can cost you the chance to challenge the suspension entirely.
Yes, and timing matters. Dash cam and body cam footage can be harder to obtain as weeks pass. The implied consent hearing deadline is 14 days. An attorney who has been on both sides of Michigan OWI cases can identify problems in the State’s evidence early, before those opportunities close.
A Michigan OWI conviction is permanent. Recent changes to state law created limited expungement options for some alcohol-related offenses, but eligibility depends on your specific charge, prior record, and how much time has passed. If expungement is a goal, it is worth discussing as part of the overall strategy, not as an afterthought years later.
Stay calm. Do not volunteer information or explain yourself to police beyond basic identification. Exercise your right to remain silent and ask for an attorney. The statements people make trying to explain the situation are often the most damaging part of the prosecution’s case.
The information on this page is provided for general informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Ben Hall Law. Every case is different. The facts, evidence, and law applicable to your situation may lead to a different outcome than what is described here. Reading this page does not mean Ben Hall Law represents you or has any obligation to you.
If you have been charged with an OWI or any other criminal offense in Michigan, you should consult with a licensed Michigan attorney about the specific facts of your case before making any decisions. Time-sensitive deadlines, including the 14-day implied consent hearing window, can affect your rights and options. Do not rely on general legal content as a substitute for advice from an attorney who knows your case.
Ben Hall Law is licensed to practice law in the State of Michigan. Results described or referenced on this site are not guaranteed and do not represent typical outcomes. Prior results do not guarantee a similar result in your case.
