A lawyer caught drink-driving in Christchurch after receiving her Covid jab has failed in her bid to get discharged without conviction.

The lawyer was fined $400, ordered to pay court costs of $130 and disqualified from driving for six months.

Interim name suppression was lifted when she appeared in the district court on Tuesday.

But last week, defence counsel Aja Trinder said her client would appeal the suppression decision and filed a memorandum in court seeking continued interim name suppression until the appeal was determined – preventing publication of her name.

The woman was stopped at a police checkpoint in Avonside in July and recorded a breath-alcohol level of 494mcg. The legal adult limit is 250mcg.

Trinder told the court her client accepted she had been drink-driving in relatively peak-hour traffic.

The summary of facts stated the lawyer was stopped at about 6.30pm on Kerrs Rd.

She told police she had consumed two large glasses of wine earlier and was on a return trip from getting her Covid vaccination.

Trinder said her client was fully compliant with police and apologetic.

The commercial property solicitor had “reached a low point” in her life before the incident and was suffering from personal issues.

• Former All Black prop Carl Hayman caught drink-driving, four times over the limit
• ‘Appalling’: Drunk driver almost seven times over limit
• Auckland cop who destroyed own drink driving evidence sentenced

Her discharge application was advanced on the basis that she and her partner wanted to move to Canada or the United States to live and work.

While there was no exact timeframe, community magistrate Sally O’Brien accepted there was an intention to travel and they intended to do so towards the end of 2023 or start of 2024.

She also acknowledged entering Canada with a drink-driving conviction was more difficult as there were additional requirements and nothing was guaranteed.

Said Trinder: “There will be a real and appreciative risk she will face difficulties entering Canada and the United States and passing the bar.”

While she was satisfied the process would be difficult and uncertain, the community magistrate did not grant a discharge as she did not believe the consequences were out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending, which she had set at just below moderate.

Regarding final name suppression, Trinder said the publication of her client’s name would have a “detrimental effect” on her mental health.

While current supports were “working wonders” according to her client’s partner’s affidavit, the young lawyer was still in the early stages.

“[She] knows her own mind better than those around her, and [name publication] would have a significant adverse effect on her,” Trinder said.

The woman’s current employer said her job at the firm would not be affected, but said publication may have a detrimental effect on her development as a lawyer.

O’Brien acknowledged the woman had personal issues, but did not grant name suppression as there was not enough evidence to show her current mental state and what would happen if her name was published.

-starnews.co.nz