Companies like Budweiser, Heineken, Corona, and Guinness are known for using humor to gain your attention and promote their products.

However, we’re not laughing at one of Heineken’s most recent ads about its non-alcoholic beer that’s been making the rounds.

A man is sitting in his parked car, drinking Heineken’s 0.0 beer while watching a cop walk up behind him. The cop starts writing the man a ticket, which the man assumes is because he’s drinking a beer in his car. The cop points to the no parking sign and hands the man a ticket. The commercial ends with the slogan, “Now you can. Before driving.”

Sure, it’s a comical commercial, but why aren’t we laughing? The answer may surprise you.

Heineken’s new 0.0 beer boasts an ABV of 0.03%, which makes it non-alcoholic. In other words, you would need to drink dozens and dozens of these beers before alcohol could accumulate in your blood to generate anything close to NY’s legal limit of 0.08. This also means that it’s unlikely to impair your ability to drive. But Heineken said you could have one before driving!

Here’s the problem with that. Heineken claims that their non-alcoholic beer tastes just like a beer. That means it smells like a beer too. Sometimes, the odor of an alcoholic beverage is all that an officer will need to start an investigation and possibly arrest you for DWI.

Law enforcement officers are trained in DWI detection, which starts as early as observing the operation of vehicles on roadways. When a driver commits a traffic infraction like speeding, crossing traffic lines, or parking illegally, particularly at night and on weekends, that cop is likely assuming that alcohol is the cause of the traffic infraction. One of the first questions the officer will likely ask you if you’ve been drinking. If you’ve had a Heineken non-alcoholic beer, how do you respond? No? Yes, but it was non-alcoholic? Where do you think that’s going to get you?

As soon as you say yes or the cop smells what he or she assumed is the odor of an alcoholic beverage, the cop will have you out of the car in no time flat, especially if you do what this guy in the commercial does and show him the beer.

Frankly, cops will get you out of the car for further DWI investigation and field sobriety testing on as little information as the odor of an alcoholic beverage after having stopped you for a traffic infraction.

At that point, you’ll be put through field sobriety testing. Having consumed only non-alcoholic beer, one would think the driver would be fine to perform these tests. However, factors such as nerves, weather, injuries, and confusion could make the driver fail these field sobriety tests. These failed tests may very well lead to your arrest and eventual transport to the police station for further testing.

Now at the station, you have two options, to take the test or refuse. Naturally, this is the subject of much debate.

If you take the breath test and pass, that cop may still charge you with Driving While Ability Impaired, which doesn’t require a blood alcohol content to prove and is less severe than DWI, or with any other traffic infractions, you may have committed. If you refuse the test, especially if you’re frustrated at the thought that you’ve been subjected to this investigation, you’ll likely be charged with misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated and be forced to attend a refusal hearing with DMV where you could lose your license for 12+ months.

While there are plenty of defenses to raise in a situation such as this, the fact of the matter is you don’t want to deal with a DWI charge. Don’t listen to Heineken and think you can have some of their 0.0 beer and then get behind the wheel.

If you find yourself in a situation that requires a defense attorney, give the capable attorneys at the Nave Law Firm a call at 315-285-6283 or 518-649-9281.


related articles

Nave Law wins suit against City of Albany to protect Reverend’s civil rights.


As part of Nave Law Firm’s efforts to give back to the communities we practice in, our own Derek Andrews took action after reading a Times Union article about a local woman’s plight against a local government who stonewalled her efforts to obtain body camera recordings of an incident that involved her.


In 2019, uniformed members of the Albany Police Department wearing body cameras forcibly removed Reverend Cheryl Hawkins, a street-reach minister in the New York Capital District, from a public park as she preached and sang Christian hymns, for which she had received a special event permit from the City of Albany. That removal violated her constitutionally-guaranteed rights to free expression. As part of a lawsuit, her civil rights attorney requested those body camera recordings from the city through New York’s Freedom of Information Law but was rebuffed, having been told that they were protected and confidential because of Civil Rights Law Section 50-a.


Mr. Andrews helped both Ms. Hawkins and her civil rights attorney by filing an Article 78 special proceeding, a type of lawsuit, against the City of Albany and the Albany Police Department, claiming that they violated Ms. Hawkins’ right to free access to body camera recordings of that incident.


Although the city produced those recordings before the conclusion of the lawsuit, Judge David Weinstein of the Albany County Supreme Court agreed with Mr. Andrews’ arguments when he issued a decision at the end of 2020 stating that Ms. Hawkins had substantially prevailed and that the city was unreasonable in originally denying her access. That last part meant that the city Times Union Article, which resulted in a five-figure settlement. Ms. Hawkins will now continue her lawsuit against Albany for violating her civil rights.


When asked for comment by Reverand Hawkins, she responded:

“Mr. Andrews saw the Times-Union Newspaper Front Page Huge Article (February 17, 2020). He then contacted my attorney and wanted to see how he could help.  He felt that I was facing an injustice.  I was already paying another lawyer big money to represent me, and I could not afford a second law firm.  Derek then spoke with the leadership team with Nave Law Firm, and the team decided to take the case at no cost to me.  

I was so grateful that he believed in me enough to advocate for me and cared enough to help me at no cost.

The best part is that he WON THE CASE; he even won the city’s and the cop’s appeal filed in Albany County after winning the case.”


Nave Law Firm is grateful for the opportunity to have assisted Ms. Hawkins in her pursuit of justice.



Read More

Decriminalizing Possession of Hard Drugs

Oregon seems to be leading the way in the war . . . on the war on drugs while New York falls further behind. In a more sizable margin than either Biden or Trump would secure in this election, nearly 59% of citizens in Oregon voted to decriminalize possession of small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and cocaine.

Their decision also supported greater access to treatment for those who need it, which is paid for by the tax proceeds from marijuana sales. New York took a step in the right direction when they decriminalized possession of marijuana last year, but they remain several steps behind a large swath of the country that has legalized marijuana possession outright, including our next-door neighbors. While legislators and Governor Cuomo are interested in legalization, it’s unlikely to happen in the next year or two. Here’s why the legalization of marijuana, and other drugs, is worthwhile: not only would it ameliorate years of disproportionate effects of criminal drug possession on communities of color but it would give those with addictions greater access to higher-quality treatment. It also wouldn’t hurt to make some money by taxing those “products,” which could prove to be cleaner and safer than those cut with harmful and toxic chemicals. By the way, we certainly don’t mean to imply that it should be legal to drive while impaired by a drug, whether it’s legal or illegal. Please don’t do that.

We’re only suggesting that the war on drugs was misguided and that Oregon, and other states who are following suit, are headed in the right direction. Let’s convince New York to do the same.

Read More

New York State Driver’s License Issues

After receiving notice that your New York driver’s license has been revoked or suspended, it is easy to feel overwhelmed and uncertain about how to respond. During this difficult time, it is important to remember that you have the opportunity to fight for your driving privileges. An experienced New York driver’s license attorney can support you during this process. It also helps to arm yourself with as much knowledge as possible about suspended and revoked licenses in New York State.


Reasons People are Summoned to Hearings in New York

Various factors might lead a person to be summoned to appear before the New York Department of Motor Vehicles for a hearing, but some of the most common reasons include:


  • Alcohol-related offenses like drunk driving.
  • Involvement in a deadly accident or an accident that resulted in a serious injury.
  • Refusing to submit to a breath test.
  • The accumulation of too many points on a person’s driver’s license.
  • Traveling at high speed.
  • Medical review.
  • Failure to pay tolls.
  • Driving under the influence of alcohol when under 21.

Suppose your license has been revoked or suspended. In that case, a skilled traffic attorney can help create a plan to get back to driving as soon as possible while also helping you address fines, points,and limiting how the event will impact your motor vehicle insurance moving forward.


Restricted/Conditional Licenses in New York


Even though license suspension is a common result of many driving-related offenses in New York, drivers are still sometimes able to obtain either conditional or restricted licenses for purposes like commuting to work or school, transporting children to daycare, attending court-required classes, and traveling to medical appointments.


One of New York’s driving law’s most confusing areas is the difference between conditional and restricted licenses. The Department of Motor Vehicle issues conditional licenses to qualified drivers whose New York driver’s license was suspended or revoked due to an alcohol or drug-related violation. The Department of Motor Vehicles can also issue a restricted use license to a driver who qualifies and whose license is either suspended or revoked due to violations or incidents that are not alcohol or drug-related.


Suppose a person in New York State has had a conditional or restricted license issued within the past five years. In that case, the Department of Motor Vehicles will sometimes issue a restricted license provided the individual’s license was not revoked for alcohol use, criminal violations, or drug use.


If a person has not had a conditional or restricted license issued within the last five years, the individual might be eligible to complete an Impaired Driver Program. On successful completion of this program, an individual will receive a “Notice of Completion,” which in some cases will result in a person’s license being automatically restored or a person becomes eligible to apply for a new license. Remember, however, that a person will be dropped from the program and unable to obtain a conditional license if he or she does not attend class, does not satisfactorily participate, or does not pay program fees.


Multiple Alcohol or Drug-Related Driving Convictions

If your license is revoked and you have three or more DWI/DWAI-Drugs/DWAI convictions on your license, the DMV may be denying your ability to get relicensed. There are specific rules about your ability to get relicensed when this occurs.


If you have three or four alcohol/drug-related convictions, the DMV will likely deny your ability to get relicensed for a minimum of 5 years. If you have a serious driving offense on top of the three or four alcohol-related offenses, the DMV will deny your ability to get relicensed FOR LIFE.


If you have five or more alcohol/drug-related convictions, the DMV will deny your ability to get relicensed FOR LIFE.


If your license has been revoked because of multiple convictions, a skilled traffic attorney can help create a plan so you can get back.


Numerous Suspensions on Your License

If your license is suspended because you failed to answer traffic infractions or pay a fine, you could be charged with a misdemeanor or even a felony the next time you get pulled over.


The reason for this is because every time you fail to answer a traffic infraction or fail to pay a fine, the Court will put a SCOFF, or a suspension, on your license.


You must speak to an attorney about your license status if you fall into this category. An experienced attorney will know how to handle and take care of the suspensions on your license so that you can drive free and clear.


How a New York Driver’s License Attorney can Help

Whether you need counsel at a DMV hearing, it is your first time DWI, you failed to answer a traffic infraction, or you have multiple convictions, an experienced attorney can help you get your license back.


Contact an Experienced Driver’s License Attorney

If you are convicted of a driver’s license offense in New York, you can end up facing some serious consequences. One of the best ways to handle these charges is to retain the assistance of an experienced attorney. Contact Nave Law Firm at 855-349-NAVE (6283) today.

Read More