I just got through reading the Uriega case. The way that I read the case is that the ten year rule applies to the length bewteen each prior conviction that is being used to enhance the offense to a felony DWI.

Therefore, if your offense occured on 3/1/04 and you had a prior offense in 2/1/00 and 1/1/89, you are now restricted to at best a DWI 2nd rather than a DWI 3rd (This is assuming that the 1/1/89 conviction had no probationary term that would bring to within 10 years of the 2/1/00 prior conviction).

What are other jurisdictions doing based on this opinion. Filing as DWI 2nd under this scenario, filing as DWI 3rds?

Is PDR forthcoming from the State?

check out this thread on your topic:

https://tdcaa.infopop.net/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=347098965&f=157098965&m=6593095876