David Diehl DUI

[Dan]

David Diehl, the offensive line stalwart for the New York Giants, was collared Sunday night after he smashed his ride into multiple parked cars — and he may have been driving drunk, police said.

Diehl was driving his black BMW when he slammed into the parked vehicles on Broadway at 31st St. in Astoria about 8:20 p.m., police said.

http://www.nydailynews.com/david-die...icle-1.1093248

[Lake Camelot]

http://www.amny.com/urbanite-1.81203...plea-1.4624074

[AzIlliniFan]

Originally Posted by Lake Camelot

http://www.amny.com/urbanite-1.81203...plea-1.4624074

What's alternative about it? He was a first time offender and hurt no one. Seems like a fairly standard sentencing.

[AutoPoster 3000]

Originally Posted by AzIlliniFan

What's alternative about it? He was a first time offender and hurt no one. Seems like a fairly standard sentencing.

I'm an Illinois law school grad who now lives in Queens, NY so I deal with these cases all the time.

You are right that this is a pretty typical plea agreement. He pleads guilty to the top aggravated DWI count (more than .18 BAC, a misdemeanor crime in New York) and also driving while impaired (less than .08 BAC, routinely charged in conjunction with the more serious offense, and a traffic violation, technically not a "crime" in the legal sense). The article explains the rest. If he complies with all the conditions, he gets the "alternative" sentence. If not, the court already has his misdemeanor guilty plea and is under no obligation to give it back to him, so the court can go ahead and sentence him to jail time (up to one year) or probation (up to three years) or whatever it wants.

But the key point to the "alternative" part for 90% of people is that if you comply with the conditions of the plea deal, the DWI count will eventually be vacated completely. That means when all is said and done, you get to walk away not having been convicted of a "crime." This has a lot of long-term ramifications for people because, among other things, when you are asked for the rest of your life if you have ever been convicted of a "crime," or whether you have a "criminal record," you can honestly answer "no" to that question. Obviously this is of critical importance for anyone who ever plans on applying for a decent job at some point in their life because you know that you are going to be asked that. A conviction for driving while impaired is the legal equivalent of a traffic ticket, so that's a pretty good outcome for someone who drove drunk and especially someone who smashed into parked cars.

[carmelillini]

Originally Posted by AutoPoster 3000

I'm an Illinois law school grad who now lives in Queens, NY so I deal with these cases all the time.

You are right that this is a pretty typical plea agreement. He pleads guilty to the top aggravated DWI count (more than .18 BAC, a misdemeanor crime in New York) and also driving while impaired (less than .08 BAC, routinely charged in conjunction with the more serious offense, and a traffic violation, technically not a "crime" in the legal sense). The article explains the rest. If he complies with all the conditions, he gets the "alternative" sentence. If not, the court already has his misdemeanor guilty plea and is under no obligation to give it back to him, so the court can go ahead and sentence him to jail time (up to one year) or probation (up to three years) or whatever it wants.

But the key point to the "alternative" part for 90% of people is that if you comply with the conditions of the plea deal, the DWI count will eventually be vacated completely. That means when all is said and done, you get to walk away not having been convicted of a "crime." This has a lot of long-term ramifications for people because, among other things, when you are asked for the rest of your life if you have ever been convicted of a "crime," or whether you have a "criminal record," you can honestly answer "no" to that question. Obviously this is of critical importance for anyone who ever plans on applying for a decent job at some point in their life because you know that you are going to be asked that. A conviction for driving while impaired is the legal equivalent of a traffic ticket, so that's a pretty good outcome for someone who drove drunk and especially someone who smashed into parked cars.

Appreciate the clarification.