A habitual DUI offender has been given a strict message from a judge and sentenced to a maximum of five years in prison, with a minimum of six-months, after his fifth DUI conviction, as reported by The Times Argus.
B.G., 52, was found guilty of felony DUI as it was his third subsequent charge.
The DUI charge stemmed from a May 2010 incident that began when B.G. was pulled over by a Washington County sheriff's deputy due to a broken headlight. The deputy immediately noted that B.G. smelled of alcohol and he admitted to drinking before driving. As he was arrested – after unsuccessfully trying to talk the officer out of it – he said he was "screwed."
Attorney David Sleigh, representing B.G. during the trial, argued that his client's 0.172 percent blood alcohol reading was taken on a machine that had failed to be maintained properly. He added that the Department of Health agreed that there were several issues about the machine's proper functioning. At least 10 its first machines, according to Sleigh, had been ordered back by the department due to malfunctions.
The machine under dispute, a DataMaster DMT, analyzes the breath of a possible drunk driver.
However, Greg Nagurney, the Deputy State's Attorney, countered by stating that there had been no evidence since this past February that showed any malfunctioning of the DataMaster DMT.
B.G. had the support of at least a dozen family members and friends in court. This kind of backing was allegedly meant to further Sleigh's argument that his client was a "good guy."
One of B.G.'s family members, his stepdaughter B.B., told the court that B.G. was like a father to her when her own had died in a car wreck a few years back.
Nagurney, not compelled to dispute B.G.'s character, said, "He's the kind of guy who makes my job difficult. I look at him and I see, but for an issue with alcohol, someone that we wouldn't be here about today at all, ever."
However, Nagurney said, B.G.'s character doesn't change the facts of the case. And one of the facts were that in 1979, 1986, 1996 and 2005 B.G. had been convicted of DUI.
In requesting that the court give B.G. a one to five year sentence, Nagurney added, "I have to weigh (B.G.'s character) against my responsibility to the citizenry in the state of Vermont. With each one of these cases, this could have been a much different situation. There could have been a victim here. There could have been an accident. There could have been an injury. There could have been a death."
Sleigh asked for a three to five year prison sentence – and that it all be suspended. He requested that his client, instead, be referred to an intensive substance abuse program and be detailed to work for 30 days with a crew.
According to Sleigh, the lighter sentence would allow his client to get the help he needs.
Judge Thomas Zonay said, "In the final analysis, the court believes that a sentence that would be suspended, or even with a zero minimum as recommended by the Department of Corrections (in their presentence investigation), would fail to provide the necessary deterrents and punishment. This court believes that a term of incarceration in this case will directly serve to send a message of deterrence to Mr. (B.G.) in a way that he has apparently not received before in the prior four times. This will also send a general deterrence to those who understand that you may not drink or drive once, let alone five times."
If you are facing criminal charges stemming from DUI, DWI, OUI or OWI contact a DUI attorney to help you with your defense and ready you for court.