There are two types of Massachusetts traffic tickets or citations: civil and criminal. Civil citations are issued for traffic violations such as speeding, following too close, failure to stop for a red light or stop sign, failing to stay within marked lanes, which is also known as a marked lanes violation, having an open container of alcohol in a vehicle, and other minor Massachusetts traffic offenses.

Criminal citations are issued for more serious offenses such as operating to endanger, leaving the scene of an accident, attaching plates, compulsory insurance violation (driving uninsured), reckless driving, and driving on a suspended license, which is also known as operating after suspension or revocation.  Both criminal and civil infractions can result in the suspension or revocation of your Mass. License or right to drive in Massachusetts under the 7 surchargable event law, habitual traffic offender law, or the Mass. law which will automatically suspend your license for additional time if you are caught operating after suspension or revocation.  A conviction for driving without insurance will also trigger a mandatory loss of license.

If you are given a criminal citation, you must NOT send the citation to the Registry and the police officer who issues you the citation should not give you an envelope with the RMV’s address on it. Instead, if you would like to contest the citation at a Clerk-Magistrate hearing, which is strongly recommended, you must check off the appropriate box on the back of the ticket and send it to the Clerk-Magistrate’s office of the appropriate district court within 4 days of receipt of the citation. The police officer who issued the citation should have written the court address in a box in the corner of the ticket.

If you send a criminal citation to the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles, instead of the appropriate court, you may lose your right to a hearing and the case will proceed to a criminal arraignment.  If you are trying to appeal a civil citation for offenses such as speeding, you must send the citation to the Registry of Motor Vehicles, using the envelope provide, within 20 days of receipt. You should check off the appropriate box to request a hearing. Once you pay a citation, you cannot later dispute responsibility. Payment of a Massachusetts traffic citation is considered an admission of guilt and the ticket can be used against you to suspend your license and increase your insurance. 

Pursuant to a little known law, being involved in a traffic accident in Massachusetts can result in the suspension of your driver’s license. Under the Massachusetts 7 surchargable event law, any Massachusetts driver who accumulates 7 surchargable events within any three (3) year period, will have his or her driver’s license automatically suspended for 60 days.  Most traffic tickets and all at Massachusetts at fault accidents are considered surchargable events. At fault accidents which result in automobile insurance surcharges are those involving a single car or those where the accident is caused by one vehicle turning in front of another car or rear-ending a vehicle. 

The Registry of Motor Vehicles will not issue any type of work or hardship license in the case of a 7 surchargable event suspension. However, it may be possible to challenge the license suspension by going to the RMV Board of Appeal.  The Board has the power to revise and vacate 7 surchargable event suspensions and it can authorize the issuance of a Massachusetts hardship license.

If you have accumulated a combination of 5 or 6 citations or accidents, you should be extremely careful so as to avoid a 7 surchargable event suspension. If you have received a notice from the Mass. RMV stating that your license will be suspended for 60 days because you have accumulated 7 surchargable events, you should contact a Suspended License Lawyer.  We may be able to prevent the suspension, get you a hardship license, your get your full license reinstated.

If you are currently serving a Massachusetts license suspension because of a drug conviction, a recent Mass. Supreme Judicial Court ruling could give you relief. You may be able to reverse your conviction on the grounds that the prosecution relied only on a drug certificate and did not call the chemist who tested the alleged illegal drug. This ruling could have a huge impact on Massachusetts drug convictions and the license suspensions and revocations which these drug convictions triggered.

The state’s highest court ruled that the prosecution, in Massachusetts drug cases, routinely violated the rights of defendants by not calling the chemist as a witness to testify regarding the chemical analysis which he or she performed. Instead, for years, the prosecution relied only on certificates signed by the chemist or laboratory analyst. In Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the failure to produce the live witness and subject him or her to cross examination violates the confrontation clause of the United States Constitution.  In the recent case of Commonwealth v. Vasquez, the Massachusetts SJC ruled that this legal principle can be applied retroactively to Massachusetts drug cases, even when defense counsel failed to object to the introduction of the drug certificate without the chemist’s testimony at the time of trial.

Reversal of an underlying drug conviction will, as a matter of law, result in an automatic reversal of the resulting license suspension. This means that if your Mass. License or right to drive in Massachusetts was suspended or revoked due to a drug conviction such as possession with intent to distribute, distribution, drug possession, school zone violations, and similar offenses related to Class A, B, C, D, or E controlled substances, you may be able to get your license back by challenging the underlying Massachusetts drug conviction. Reversal of the conviction woudl give you a full and unrestricted license. You would not need a hardship or 12 hour license.

It is a criminal offense to drive a vehicle in Massachusetts while your driver’s license or right to operate is suspended or revoked. Driving on a Suspended License can have serious consequences which can last for years. A conviction for operating after suspension in Massachusetts will result in an additional automatic and mandatory license suspension, possible jail time, fines, fees, and an increase in your automobile insurance rates. Driving on a suspended license may also disqualify you for being considered for a hardship license, issued by either the Registry of Motor Vehicles or the RMV Board of Appeal. Being arrested for driving on a suspended license can be embarrassing, inconvenient, and very expensive. Often, your vehicle will be towed and your license plates can be confiscated. 

Some types of license suspensions carry minimum mandatory jail sentences.  For example, if your license was suspended or revoked for drunk driving, which is also known as DUI or operating under the influence, Massachusetts DUI law imposes a minimum mandatory 60 days in jail, with more jail time possible. Also, a conviction for operating after suspension can result in a 4 year loss of license under the Mass. Habitual Traffic Offender law.  

It is easy to get caught driving on a suspended license. Most Massachusetts police cruisers are equipped with laptops which are connected to the Registry of Motor Vehicles. If a police officer runs a routine check on a license plate, it will automatically tell the officer if the Registered owner’s license is suspended or revoked. Also, some cruisers are now equipped with automatic license plate recognition (ALR) systems which can automatically query license plates and report on the vehicle owner’s license status.  Also, many people with suspended licenses get stopped for minor moving and equipment violations.

A Suspended License Defense Lawyer can help you avoid some of the consequences and penalties associated with operating after suspension or revocation. There are various defenses which may be available, depending on the individual facts and circumstances of your case. These include lack of notice and an improperly applied suspension. Also, if your license has been reinstated since it was suspended, that can sometimes be used to your advantage. Finally, a good license suspension lawyer may be able to plea bargain your case so you can avoid jail time and an additional license suspension.

Massachusetts DUI Law allows for the issuance of limited 12 hour work or hardship licenses for the purposes of allowing a DUI offender to get to work, school, or medical appointments. Hardship licenses are also available for certain other Massachusetts license suspension such as those imposed for 7 surchargable events, drug convictions, and being a habitual traffic offender. In some cases, it is possible to get a hardship license by going before the Registry of Motor Vehicles. In other cases, the hardship license applicant must go to the RMV Board of Appeal. The Board is an administrative agency which has the power and authority to reverse, modify, or annul any decision of the Registrar.

I continue to see numerous clients who try to represent themselves at the Massachusetts RMV Board of Appeal denied hardship licenses for simple and preventable reasons. In this post, I will explain the importance of pre-hearing case preparation, so as to increase your chances of getting a Massachusetts hardship license from the RMV Board of Appeal.

First, it is important to realize that you are appearing before the Board of Appeal because there is something about your case that prevents the Mass. RMV from issuing you a hardship license. Maybe you have an extensive driving record, have not completed the required alcohol program, have not served enough time, have a license suspension for which the RMV cannot grant you a hardship license or some other reason prevents hardship relief at the Registry level. If this is the case, you should carefully prepare for your Board of Appeal hearing. Appearing before the Board of Appeal unprepared can result in the Board voting to affirm your license suspension with no re-apply date. If this happens, you may be forced to serve the whole suspension and you may not be able to get a hardship license.

First, it is absolutely essential to obtain and carefully review your driving record. Ideally, this review should be done by a Massachusetts DUI Lawyer or lawyer specializing in hardship licenses. Driving records can be difficult to understand, especially when the reader might not know what to look for. Any outstanding parking tickets, excise tax, traffic citations, speeding tickets, and other financial obligations must be paid prior to getting your license back and they should be paid in advance of your Board of Appeal hearing. Outstanding items such as these may reflect poorly and harm your chances of success.

Secondly, any outstanding National Driver Registry (NDR) out of state issues must be cleared. The Board of Appeal does not grant relief on Massachusetts suspensions imposed because a Massachusetts license holder has had his or her license suspended in another state or jurisdiction. Proof of clearance should be admitted at the time of your Board of Appeal hearing. You must also submit this to the Mass. Registry of Motor Vehicles from thirty (30) days from the date of issuance.

Third, the Board of Appeal will generally not hear your hardship license appeal if you have open and unresolved criminal cases which involve the operation of a motor vehicle or would cause your license to be suspended or revoked upon conviction. You should wait until open cases such as this are resolved. In most instances, this also applies to pending traffic tickets or citations. When a ticket is issued in Massachusetts, it is reflected on the recipient’s driving record. It will show as “incomplete” until the ticket is paid or resolved in court.

Fourth, you must make sure that you have served enough time to be considered for a hardship license. In second offense DUI cases, you must serve one year of the 2 year loss of license. In 3rd offense OUI cases, you must serve 2 years of the 8 year license suspension, and in 4th offense DUI cases, you must serve 5 years of the 10 year revocation. Habitual traffic offenders must serve at least 1 year of the 4 year revocation and you must serve ½ of the suspension time if your license is suspended for a drug conviction.  Going before the Board too soon may hurt your chances of success.

Finally, those trying to get a hardship license from the Board of Appeal must present required documentation showing a legitimate need to drive and that putting the driver back on the road with a hardship license will not jeopardize public safety. It is advisable to include letters of recommendation, proof of employment, proof of completion of drug or alcohol programs, and a letter from probation or parole.

Following the advice contained in this post may increase your chances of success at the RMV Board of Appeal. However, one of the best ways to increase your chances of success is to hire a qualified Massachusetts DUI lawyer or license reinstatement attorney.

On January 1, 2006, the ignition interlock requirement of Melanie’s Law (Chapter 122 of the Acts of 2005) when into effect. The law requires anyone with 2 or more driving under the influence convictions or alcohol program assignments on his or her record to use an ignition interlock device while on a Massachusetts hardship license and for 2 years after getting a full license reinstatement. The interlock requirement applies to any second or subsequent Massachusetts DUI suspension which was in effect on or after January 1, 2006.

The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles takes a very broad view of who is interlock-required and the Mass. RMV enforces the interlock law with a zero tolerance approach. However, not everyone who the Registry determines is interlock-required must actually have the device.  Drivers who had come off of a hardship license, had their hardship hours removed, or were issued a new and unrestricted Massachusetts Driver’s License prior to January 1, 2006 cannot be legally required to use the ignition interlock device, because of OUI convictions which occurred prior to 2006.

For those Massachusetts drivers, with two or more DUI convictions, and who had hardship or suspended licenses as of January 1, 2006, the use of the ignition interlock device will be mandatory. However, there is an exception for non-residents. Those who do not live and drive in Massachusetts can be excused from Mass. interlock restrictions, upon presentation of acceptable proof of non-residency and an affidavit wherein the driver states that he or she does not live in Massachusetts.

Anyone who is legally interlock-required must not drive any vehicle which is not equipped with a certified ignition interlock device. A conviction for this offense carries a minimum mandatory 6 months in jail, a mandatory file ranging from $1,000 to $15,000, and an automatic 10 year license suspension.  

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently affirmed that the Mass. Board of Appeal has considerable power and discretion when deciding whether or not to grant a hardship license. The Mass. Appeals Court recently upheld the Board’s decision to deny hardship relief to a candidate who had a substantial driving record and made the mistake of representing himself before the Board and the Court.

The Board’s decision to deny a hardship license was based on an extensive record of motor vehicle violations, which included multiple citations for driving without insurance, and numerous traffic tickets for operating on a suspended license. The Board also considered that the Appellant had been previously given a hardship license and he re-offended. I should note that the Board takes a very dim view of anyone who commits additional violations while on a hardship license. The Board believes that someone who is granted a hardship license, which is considered “extraordinary relief” should be on his or her “best behavior.”

The Board has records of all of the cases which it hears and it also is provided with a detailed registry record which shows the issuance of previous hardship licenses. Anyone who comes before the Board being granted a Massachusetts hardship license, either by the Mass RMV or Board of Appeal should be mindful of this.

The Board's decision to grant or deny reinstatement, or a request for a hardship license, is given significant deference and on review. The Court focus on whether the board's decision was unsupported by substantial evidence, or constituted an abuse of discretion. This is very difficult to prove on appeal. Therefore, if you are trying to get a Mass. Hardship license, your best chance of success is to try to win at the Registry or Board of Appeal level. I am aware of no reported decision where any court overruled the Board’s exercise of discretion on the question of whether or not to grant a hardship license. Again, the best way to get a hardship license is to win at the Registry or Board of Appeal hearing. Once denied relief, it is unlikely that a superior court judge will reverse the Board’s discretionary decision. To summarize, the chances of reversing a Massachusetts hardship license denial in Superior Court are slim to none.

Although hardship license appeals are usually losers in Superior Court, it is often possible to win cases where the Board of Appeal and/or the Mass. RMV have made errors of law. I have an excellent track record of success in this area. If the Registry and/or the RMV Board of Appeal has misapplied the law or made a legal error, it is often possible to win.

Pursuant to G.L. c. 90 § 34J, automobile insurance is mandatory in Massachusetts and it is illegal to drive an uninsured motor vehicle or allow an uninsured motor vehicle to remain on a public or even private way. The goal of the Massachusetts compulsory insurance law is to insure that drivers and passengers involved in accidents will have an opportunity to receive financial compensation for personal injuries and property damage. The Massachusetts Insurance Law applies to drivers and “all persons who own or control such vehicles as owners.” Unbeknownst to most, a conviction for having an uninsured motor vehicle in Massachusetts can have serious consequences.An uninsured motor vehicle violation is a criminal offense and it will result in an automatic license suspension ranging from 60 days in length for the first offense and 1 year for a second offense. These license suspensions are mandatory and the Mass. RMV will not grant a hardship license. The only way to get hardship relief is to apply to the RMV Board of Appeal. However, effective plea negotiations or other legal tactics which challenge the sufficiency of the evidence can often be used to avoid being convicted of this offense in court. 

Uninsured charges will appear on a Massachusetts Driving Record as "No Liability Policy." In addition to a mandatory license suspension of either 60 days or 1 year, a conviction carries a sentence of not more than 1 year in the house of correction and a fine of not less than $500.00 and not more than $5,000.00. There is no way to simply pay a citation for "no liability policy." If you are cited for this, you will have to appear in court as a criminal defendant and you are entitled to be represented by a lawyer.

In the case of Ronsethal v. Registry of Motor Vehicles and RMV Board of Appeal, the Superior Court upheld the Ignition Interlock Device requirements of Melanie’s Law.

The facts of the case are as follows: Mark Rosenthal was arrested twice for operating a motor vehicle under the influence (OUI). His first offense occurred on April 3, 1985. He admitted to sufficient facts in Lawrence District Court and was placed on probation and assigned to an alcohol education program pursuant to G.L. c. 90, § 24D. Rosenthal complied with the conditions of his probation and was discharged on March 11, 1987.

On July 9, 2005, Rosenthal was arrested for a second OUI offense. He pled guilty or admitted to sufficient facts in Woburn District Court and was given a second chance first time offender disposition pursuant to G.L. c. 90, § 24D. The court suspended his license for forty-five days, placed him on probation for one year, and assigned him to an alcohol education program. Because Rosenthal refused to submit to a chemical breath test at the time of his arrest, the court suspended his license for an additional year, pursuant to c. 90, § 24(1)(f)(1).

On August 23, 2005, Rosenthal obtained a hardship license permitting him to drive between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. The hardship license was due to expire on August 29, 2008. Rosenthal became eligible for full reinstatement of his license in July 2006, but continued to drive on the restricted hardship license until August 2008. Beginning January 1, 2006 (and effective in July 2006 when Rosenthal became eligible for reinstatement), substantial changes had been made to Massachusetts' OUI laws to require that persons with two or more OUI convictions install a certified IID on each vehicle that they own, lease or operate as a precondition to having a driver's license restored. On August 25, 2008, Rosenthal sought to reinstate his license at the Registry of Motor Vehicles and was refused a full license unless he agreed to install an IID in his vehicle. He renewed his license with the twelve-hour operating restriction.

On January 22, 2009, Rosenthal requested a hearing with the Registry to remove the twelve-hour restriction. The Registry denied his request and issued a notice that effective February 22, 2009, Rosenthal's license to operate would be revoked unless he agreed to install an IID in accordance with the statute. Rosenthal appealed to the Board. On April 15, 2009, the Board upheld the Registry's ruling that Rosenthal must install an IID before his license will be restored in full.

Rosenthal argues that applying the IID requirement of Melanie's Law to him constitutes an illegal retroactive application of the law because his actions and convictions occurred before January 1, 2006, when Melanie's Law went into effect. However, Rosenthal did not become eligible to reinstate his license until July 2006, and he did not try to remove the hardship restrictions until August 2008.

In Gordon v. Registry of Motor Vehicles, 20 Mass L. Rptr. 563, 563 (Mass.Super.2006), plaintiff Joseph W. Gordon's license had been suspended as the result of two OUI convictions. Despite Gordon's eligibility to reinstate his license in full on December 17, 2005, he did not apply until January 3, 2006, two days after Melanie's Law became operative. In denying his request for a preliminary injunction enjoining the Registry from enforcing the IID provision of Melanie's Law against him, the Superior Court held that "the act triggering the application of Melanie's Law to the plaintiff was Gordon's application for a new license, not his previous OUI offenses."

The Court in Rosenthal also ruled that the RMV Board of Appeal correctly concluded that the IID requirement as applied to Rosenthal does not violate due process, double jeopardy or ex post facto principles.

This case reaffirms the rule that if you have 2 or more OUI convictions on your record and you are reinstating your license, or coming off of a hardship license, on or after January 1, 2006, you will be required to use the interlock device for at least 2 years. There is no way around this.

Many clients have inquired about the Mass. RMV’s license reinstatement procedures such as the amounts of Massachusetts license reinstatement fees and whether or not a driver who is reinstating his or her license will have to take a written test, apply for a learner’s permit, and re-take the road test in order to get a license. The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles requires re-testing and re-licensing in cases where a Massachusetts resident is reinstating his or her license after it has been suspended or revoked for 1 year or more. The Registry also requires a written test, learner’s permit, and road test in cases of Mass. Junior Operator License Violations.

As a final point, anyone who is reinstating or coming off of a hardship license with 2 or more DUI convictions on his or her record, after January 1, 2006, will be required to have the ignition interlock device.