A drunk driving attorney with the shortest license limit might have a better chance of winning an appeal than a lawyer with more experience, according to an article published in the New York Times.
The article states that drunk driving lawyers have been winning more cases than lawyers with a license plate that exceeds 50.
It is the first time a Times article has reported on the subject.
A spokeswoman for the New Jersey Bar Association, which represents New Jersey’s bar association, said she could not comment on the study.
“I have no comment on that specific story,” said Kathy Zuckerman, a spokeswoman for New Jersey Attorney General Stephen T. Wolf.
In an interview, Zuckertman, who has represented a number of clients accused of drunk driving, said her office does not comment specifically on cases.
She said she believes the study is not necessarily accurate.
“If you want to get a drunk driving case, you have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt,” Zuckers said.
She added that the average time to win an appeal is only three years, compared with 10 years for DUI lawyers.
“There is not a lot of evidence out there about whether a drunk driver is better off getting a DUI defense lawyer,” Zucker said.
In her experience, drunk driving attorneys have a much better chance at winning an appeals case than a bar lawyer, Zucker added.
But Zucker said the study also doesn’t prove that attorneys with less experience are more likely to win.
“The evidence is not conclusive,” Zuckingerman said.
The Times article states: “The average time for an appeal of a drunk-driving case is three years.”
The Times analyzed the time to a successful plea-bargain agreement, the length of time for trial, and the number of appeals filed in New Jersey and nationwide.
It also calculated the number and length of appeals from drunk driving convictions.
A lawyer who is less experienced has a better record than a seasoned attorney, but it’s unclear if the difference is related to the length and type of appeals, the Times article said.
A study by the Bar Association of New Jersey in 2013 found that lawyers who are more experienced are more successful at appealing drunk driving cases.
But the Bar’s research did not look at how many drunk driving prosecutions were overturned or whether they were overturned because of the lawyers’ legal experience.
A 2012 study from the New England Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers also found that experienced drunk driving prosecutors are more than twice as likely to be successful in an appeal, although that study did not examine how many cases were overturned.
But even if the attorneys are better prepared, they are less likely to have success in the appeal, the study said.
It added: “For many cases, it is impossible to determine the likelihood of success with the attorney or the defense.
Many litigants, who are represented by experienced lawyers, may not have the resources to pursue a timely appeal.”
The study also did not find evidence of a benefit to attorneys with more than one drunk driving conviction.
“We have to be realistic, and when we look at this as an individual client, I don’t think there is a significant benefit to being a lawyer who has more than a single conviction,” said David R. Johnson, an attorney and co-author of the study, which was conducted by the Law School Review Institute and was funded by the Ford Foundation.
“It’s a matter of having a solid defense and being prepared to defend it.”
Johnson, who is also a lawyer at Jones Day, a law firm that represents people accused of drunken driving, acknowledged that some attorneys may have a bad experience with alcohol.
“A lot of the people who come to me are not good drunk drivers, and they have been drinking, and I try to make sure that they know that,” he said.
But he said that in general, the vast majority of people who are accused of being drunk drivers don’t have an alcohol problem, and he said there are a few exceptions.
“In terms of the numbers of drunk drivers who are prosecuted and the cases that are overturned, that’s because the criminal justice system is really good at trying these cases,” he added.
For example, prosecutors in Texas are able to charge defendants with drunken driving who had three or more convictions.
Johnson said he thinks it is fair to assume that people who have drunk driving arrests don’t show up to court for drunk driving appeals.
“Some people, in their drunken driving arrests, may be in a car with another person who was drunk and they were driving with them, and that is not in their record,” he explained.
“But that’s not necessarily a reason why a judge would throw a case out.”
The New York Attorney General’s Office, which is also handling drunk driving charges, does not collect data on attorneys who have no convictions, according a spokesman.
A spokesman for the Bar did not respond to a request for comment.
A representative for the bar said they are not aware of any recent studies that show attorneys