DUI With Injury Lawyer Las Vegas

Being impaired does not automatically make the defendant the proximate cause of the accident. If the other driver ran a red light, made an illegal turn, or was otherwise at fault, the causal link between the defendant’s impairment and the injuries may be broken. Accident reconstruction evidence, traffic camera footage, and witness testimony can all support this defense.

The prosecution must prove that the defendant’s conduct caused substantial bodily harm. The defense may argue that the victim’s injuries were pre-existing, exaggerated, or caused by factors unrelated to the accident. Medical records, independent medical evaluations, and expert testimony are critical tools in challenging the nature and extent of the alleged injuries.

Alcohol absorption takes time. If the defendant consumed alcohol shortly before driving, their BAC may have been below the legal limit while actually behind the wheel but risen above 0.08 by the time testing occurred. This “rising BAC” defense uses pharmacokinetic evidence to demonstrate that the defendant’s BAC at the time of driving was lower than the test result suggests.

Law enforcement must follow specific procedures during a DUI investigation, including establishing reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop, administering field sobriety tests according to standardized protocols, and advising the defendant of their rights. Violations of these procedures can result in suppression of evidence, which may weaken or eliminate the prosecution’s case entirely.

Reduction is difficult but possible in certain circumstances. NRS 484C.430 restricts plea bargaining — prosecutors cannot dismiss the charge in exchange for a plea to a lesser offense unless the charge is not supported by probable cause or cannot be proved at trial. However, if the defense can demonstrate weaknesses in the BAC evidence, challenge the proximate cause element, or raise viable defenses, the prosecution may agree to reduce charges to reckless driving under NRS 484B.653, which carries a significantly lower sentencing range of one to six years.

Comparative fault is a viable defense in DUI injury cases. The prosecution must prove that the defendant’s impaired driving was the proximate cause of the victim’s injuries. If the other driver contributed to the accident — by running a stop sign, driving distracted, or making an illegal lane change — that fact undermines the causal link the prosecution must establish. Evidence of shared fault does not automatically result in dismissal, but it strengthens the defense position in negotiation and at trial.

Yes. A conviction under NRS 484C.430 triggers a mandatory three-year driver’s license revocation under NRS 483.460. This revocation period does not begin running until you are released from prison. After the revocation period ends, you must obtain SR-22 insurance and may be required to install an ignition interlock device as a condition of reinstatement. Visit our DUI penalties page for a complete breakdown of license consequences for DUI offenses in Nevada.