New York Appellate Lawyer DUI Hit and Run Sentence Reduction

After attending a social gathering where alcohol was consumed, the client drove through a mixed residential and commercial area of Manhattan. 

While proceeding through an intersection, the vehicle made minor contact with a pedestrian who was lawfully crossing the roadway, resulting in non life threatening physical injury.

Believing the impact to be insignificant and failing to fully appreciate the injury at the moment, the client left the scene without providing identifying information or rendering assistance.

Law enforcement later identified the vehicle through witness accounts and registration records and located the client shortly thereafter. Upon arrest, officers requested a chemical breath test pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law §1194. 

Due to the client’s prior alcohol related driving history and fear of enhanced penalties, the client refused chemical testing, triggering an immediate license suspension and a separate DMV refusal proceeding under New York’s implied consent framework.

Prosecutors charged the client with Leaving the Scene of an Incident Resulting in Injury under Vehicle and Traffic Law §600(2)(a) and Driving While Intoxicated under Vehicle and Traffic Law §1192, while the refusal evidence was introduced in the criminal DWI case and addressed administratively through the DMV process.

The appellate submission emphasized the client’s acceptance of responsibility, genuine remorse, and proactive rehabilitation efforts undertaken after the incident.

Counsel argued that the trial court insufficiently weighed post conviction conduct demonstrating a reduced risk of reoffense, a factor recognized under New York sentencing principles when assessing whether continued incarceration serves legitimate penal objectives. 

Appellate counsel also noted that although the pedestrian’s injury satisfied the statutory element of “injury” under Vehicle and Traffic Law §600, it did not involve permanent impairment or serious physical injury, supporting a downward modification of the custodial term.

The record included completion certificates from a licensed substance abuse treatment program and alcohol abstinence counseling, proof of attendance at court approved impaired driving education programs, documentation confirming the voluntary sale of the client’s vehicle and surrender of driving privileges, and written statements acknowledging responsibility for the offense and expressing remorse toward the injured pedestrian. 

Each item was strategically framed to demonstrate that extended incarceration would not meaningfully advance rehabilitation or deterrence.

The appellate court reduced the custodial component of the sentence to a substantially shorter period of incarceration, followed by supervision and mandatory compliance with alcohol treatment conditions as permitted by law. 

Although the convictions remained on record, the modified sentence allowed the client to avoid prolonged confinement and to reintegrate into the community under strict legal oversight. 

The case illustrates how focused post conviction advocacy by a New York appellate lawyer can secure meaningful relief even in serious DUI related hit and run matters.