Serving All of Hampton Roads Area | Free Consultation | Fixed Fees

About Us

Attorney Highlights

Defended Over 1,000 Prior DWI/DUI Cases

 16 years plus of Trial Courtroom Experience

Certificates in Field Sobriety Tests Training (and how to beat them)

2005 Graduate from a Top Ten National Law School (University of Virginia)

Regularly Recognized by Attorney-Run Organizations as Top 10 DWI/DUI Attorney in the Commonwealth



Recent Example Case Results


DISCLAIMER: The below listed Actual example Virginia DUI and DWI cases are presented for informational purposes only. Every case result depends on a unique variety of factors that are specific to a particular case.  An outcome in a previous case does not guarantee future results nor a predictor of what may happen in your case.



Defendant was charged with a DWI.  The defendant was seen by the officer crossing a solid white line and then driving in the middle of 2 lanes of traffic.  When stopped, the defendant had large amounts of vomit on herself.  She also had an open container in the vehicle.  The officer stated that she admitted to being extremely drunk, thanked the officer for pulling her over and for arresting her.  She failed the Field sobriety tests that were administrated to her.  After the arrest and while waiting to give a breath sample, she began to uncontrollably vomit, and no breath test was completed.  The defendant was not offered a blood test.

The defense took this to trial where the officer testified to the above.

Outcome:  DUI charge was DISMISSED.   Attorney John Naumovski presented little known Virginia case law and argued effectively as to why the proper conclusion in this case was for the court to grant a motion to dismiss.



Defendant charged with DWI (First) offense, Reckless Driving and Refusal.  The Commonwealth alleged that the Defendant hit a city street sign and did not stop at the scene of the accident.  That an officer on foot tried to stop the Defendant’s vehicle but the defendant continued to drive past him.  Once the Police were able to stop the Defendant’s vehicle and while the Police on scene were waiting for a DUI trained officer to arrive, the defendant was alleged to be in his car drinking alcohol.   The defendant failed the field sobriety tests offered and was arrested.   After the arrest and while waiting to give a breath sample, the defendant began to uncontrollably vomit, and no breath test was completed.  The defendant was not offered a blood test.

Outcome:  Attorney John Naumovski in negotiations with the prosecutor presented case law and argument as to why, even though the defendant may of been highly intoxicated, the Commonwealth should offer a reduction to a Reckless Driving charge.  The offer made by the prosecutor was to reduce the DUI to Reckless Driving, drop the Refusal and drop the other Reckless Driving Charge.  The defendant accepted the prosecutor’s offer.



Defendant charged with a DWI, first offense, with a BAC greater than .20, which if convicted would result in a mandatory minimum of 10 days in jail.  The allegations were that the defendant got into an accident; left the scene; swam across a lake that abutted his neighborhood; once he was in his neighborhood, he was found wandering around because he had trouble finding his own house.

Outcome:   Because of issues raised by the defense about the case, the Commonwealth agreed to a plea deal where the BAC was dropped and no active jail sentence.



Defendant charged w/ DUI drugs.  No blood draw was done, but Defendant did make admission of taking medication that could cause impairment.  There was also evidentiary issues as to the SFSTs.

Outcome:  Commonwealth agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving.



The defendant was charged with DWI (First) involving a 2 vehicle accident.  At trial, the Commonwealth introduced evidence that the Defendant had slurred speech, glassy eyes, and failed all the Field Sobriety Tests.  Due to the particulars of the case, attorney Naumovski was able to raise as a defense a rarely known decision from a 1960s Virginia Supreme Court case.

Neither the prosecutor not the court was familiar with the case and the Prosecution requested during the midst of trial a 2 week continuance so that it can research and prepare a brief to counter defense’s argument.  Upon resumption of trial after 2 weeks, the Prosecution conceded to the defense’s argument.

Outcome:  Defendant was found NOT GUILTY of the DUI.



Defendant charged with DUI (First) w/ elevated BAC of greater than .20.  Defendant’s actual BAC was close to .30 BAC.   Defendant allegedly almost hit 2 vehicles including an occupied marked police vehicle.   Defendant was looking at minimum mandatory jail time of 10 days because of the .20 BAC elevated BAC.

Outcome:  Defendant avoided the elevated BAC and minimum mandatory jail time, instead was convicted of simple DUI (First) with 1 weekend of jail.



Defendant charged with First offense DWI.  The defendant got into a one vehicle accident and fled the scene.  The blood draw showed a elevated BAC of .22 weight to body and which carries mandatory minimum jail time of 10 days upon conviction.

Outcome:  The defendant was found guilty of simple DWI with no elevated BAC and hence Defendant avoided the minimum mandatory jail time.



Defendant charged with 1st Offense DWI. The Commonwealth’s evidence was that the Defendant crashed his car, failed the field sobriety tests and blew a .18 BAC. The officers bodycam video was recording the entire interaction between the defendant and police.
If convicted of the above the defendant would of been facing a mandatory minimum of 5 days of active jail time.

Outcome:   Even though the Commonwealth’s evidence looked strong, attorney Naumovski was able to raise objections based on the confrontation clause (testimonial hearsay) with the Commonwealth prior to trial.

The Commonwealth agreed to reduce the charge to Reckless Driving and with no active jail time.



Defendant charged with Driving Under the Influence (First) with a BAC greater than .20.  The defendant caused a 2 vehicle accident.  Defendant did poorly on the Field Sobriety Tests.  After the arrest, the defendant blew 3.5x times the legal limit (blew .28 BAC).

Because of the high BAC and that the driving resulted in an accident, there was risk the court would impose greater than the 10 days of minimum mandatory jail time.

Outcome:  Due to the location of where the police found the Defendant’s vehicle, the defense was able to successfully challenge admission of the breath certificate.  Without the admission of the breath certificate, the Defendant avoided the mandatory minimum jail time.  At conclusion of the case, the defendant got no active jail time.





Recognized as Top 10 Best Lawyers in Virginia and Other Awards

Attorney John Naumovski has received numerous awards and recognitions from Multiple Legal Organizations throughout Virginia and Nationally.

For instance, in 2020, Attorney Naumovski was named top 10 DUI lawyer in Virginia for Client Satisfaction by the American Institute of DUI Attorneys.

Named Best in the City 2021, by City’s Best Awards

In addition, Attorney John Naumovski was named one of the top 10 Best Criminal Defense Lawyers under 40 for the state of Virginia  by NACDA.

In recent years, Attorney John Naumovski was recognized as one of the top Lawyers of the Year in the Hampton Roads area by Coastal Virginia Magazine.

Named a Top 10 Attorney in Virginia by National Academy of Criminal Defense Attorneys for 2021


In addition, he was nominated in 2014 to be a founding member of the American Association of Premier DUI Attorneys and rated as one of the top 100 DUI/DWI lawyers by National Advocacy for DUI Defense, 2015.

Named a Top 10 Attorney in Virginia by Attorney and Practice Magazine for 2021

Attorney John Naumovski has repeatedly been recognized by the National Trial Lawyers Association as one of the top 100 Criminal Defense Lawyers in Virginia.

Best DUI Lawyers in Virginia

Best Virginia DWI Attorney

In addition, repeatedly both the National Trial Lawyers Association and the American Society for Legal Advocates recognized attorney Naumovski as one of the top 40 under 40 Criminal Defense Lawyers in Virginia.

Attorney Naumovski has a perfect 10.0 AVVO Rating and the law firm itself has a A+ Better Business Bureau Rating.

To learn more about attorney Naumovski visit his individual page.

Understanding Differences between Virginia DUI and DWI

To start with, the terms:  drunk driving, driving while intoxicated, DUI and DWI are the same thing and all charged under 18.2-266 of the Virginia Code of 1950, as amended, and are used interchangeable on this website.   If you are under 21, then you may have been charged under 18.2-266.1.   If you are accused of being under the influence while boating (BUI), then the charge is under 29.1-738.

Read More

DUI Lawyers in Virginia

The law firm specializes in defending clients charged with criminal-traffic matters.   This website was designed specifically for individuals charged with DUI/DWI and provides answers that you may have about your

DUI Lawyers in Virginia

Pulled over? Alleged to be drinking too much?

charge, including, the law firm’s in-house developed  checklist of DUI Defenses or errors that Virginia law enforcement can make during a DUI.  After that, please contact the law firm (for a free initial consultation) and to start working on defending you against your charge(s).

The most important thing to remember is that a good DUI Defense doesn’t start the minute you walk into  a court room, but when you retain an experienced DUI/DWI defense attorney.


Virginia DUI Penalties

Virginia First Offense DUI

DUI/DWI first offense is a Class 1 criminal misdemeanor

Up to 1 year in jail


Read More


Second Offense DUI w/ 5 and w/ 10 years

Being charged with a second offense means that the Commonwealth Attorney has evidence showing that you been charged with a “substantial similar” DUI in the past 5 to 10 years.  The penalties for a 2nd offense DUI conviction are severe as they are enhanced compared to a first offense.


Read More


Third Offense DWI w/ 5 years and w/ 10 yrs

A Third Offense DUI in Virginia with respect to Penalties is based on whether the offense occurred within 5 years or within 10 years of the two prior offenses.


Read More


Is this the first time you been Arrested?

Being charged with a Virginia DUI (also known as a DWI) is a serious matter.  Most people charged with a DUI are arrested on the spot and for many individuals it is the first time they are having a substantial interaction with law enforcement and the judicial system.  It is a normal reaction for a person charged with a serious criminal-traffic offense, such as a DUI, to feel confused as to how to go forward and fearful of the consequences that can result from a DUI.


What Will happen at a DUI Trial?

At trial, it is up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty of the charge. In that effort, the prosecutor will attempt to present evidence showing impairment. Evidence includes what was gathered during interaction with the police and the breathalyzer test results (if one was taken) as well as eye-witness testimony if the DUI stems from an accident.


What does Driving Under the Influence mean?

Driving under the influence means that due to consumption of alcohol (or drugs, including prescription drugs) a person’s ability to drive was impaired to the point that they no longer could legally drive. The reason why the police give a breathalyzer test is to determine whether the results (.08 of BAC or higher) would create a presumption of impairment at time of driving. So for example, someone who blows a .08 is presumed to be impaired at time of driving. It should be noted that this is only a presumption and not a conclusion of law and as such may be refuted.

Defending a DUI Charge

Below is a description of the gathering of evidence by the police that is often used later in a trial:

When the police suspect someone of driving drunk, they first make a note as to whether the driver is committing a traffic violation(s) (speeding, failure to put on a turn signal, etc.) or because of weaving in a lane. Once the police note such driving behavior, they are permitted to pull over the driver. For DUIs originating from an accident, the police are permitted to arrive on the scene and question the persons involved in the accident (called the care taker rule).

Read More


Meet the Attorneys

John Naumovski, Esq.

Attorney Naumovski has obtained the same training, based on NHTSA, as Virginia State Troopers and Local Police with respect to the Non-Standardized and Standardized Fie


Mr. Naumovski is VERY good at what he does.

Former DUI Client

Highly Recommended

Former DUI Client

Awards & Accomplishments

Virginia DUI and DWI Defense Attorney

Virginia DUI and DWI Defense Attorney