DUI Blogger

Senator Bill Emmerson introduced a bill on February 18, 2011 that would significantly toughen the already tough California DUI penalties. The new law would delete the limitation that only allows prosecutors to enhance multiple driving under the influence (DUI) offenses if the subsequent DUIs occur within 10 years of the prior offense(s). If passed, SB 780 would allow prosecutors to enhance multiple DUIs regardless of when the prior DUI occurred.

SB 780 would also increase the penalties for DUIs causing injury for people with two prior DUI convictions from a minimum of 120 days up to a one year maximum in the county jail to a minimum of 120 days in the county jail up to three years in the state prison.

Senate Bill 780 would also change California hit and run law. Under existing law, a person who flees after committing vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence, or gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is subject to a penalty enhancement that adds an additional and consecutive five year term to the underlying crime. SB 780 would add murder to the list of crimes that would be subject to the five year consecutive state prison term enhancement for hit and run.

In California, driving under the influence cases what are known as “priorable offenses”. This means that every subsequent conviction increases your minimum sentence. Yet even as a priorable offense, most DUIs are typically prosecuted as misdemeanor offenses.

Your first, second, or third drunk driving conviction within a ten-year period will still be punished as a misdemeanor. And if you suffer any subsequent DUI convictions beyond the ten-year period, the sequence begins anew. This means that you can accumulate quite a few DUI convictions before the offense is charged as a felony…that is, unless you serious injure or kill another person as a result of your intoxication.

First-time California misdemeanor driving under the influence offenders are punished by a maximum six-month jail sentence, but generally do not spend any time in jail. Second-time misdemeanor DUI offenders face a minimum 96 hours in jail and a maximum one-year sentence. Third-time misdemeanor DUI offenders face a minimum jail sentence of 120 days to a maximum sentence of one year.

DUIs are among the most common type of California crime. And although they are typically misdemeanor offenses, an egregious case may be charged as a felony. A California felony driving under the influence conviction subjects an offender to a wide array of penalties.

If you are convicted of your fourth or subsequent drunk driving conviction within a ten-year period, you face 16 months to three years in a California state prison. If you are convicted of a felony DUI that causes injury, you face 16 months to ten years in prison.

If you are convicted of felony vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, you face 16 months to four years in prison. If you are convicted of felony gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, you face four to ten years in prison. If you have a prior alcohol-related vehicular manslaughter conviction or two or more prior DUI convictions, you face 15-years-to-life in the state prison. And this is the same sentence you face if convicted of felony second-degree murder, which may be charged if you kill someone while you were driving under the influence and have a prior DUI.

If your California DUI defense attorney can convince the prosecutor to reduce your felony DUI charge to a misdemeanor, you face a maximum one-year sentence in a county jail. This is simply one reason why consulting with an experienced DUI lawyer can be critical to your case.

Although it may not seem like a DUI has much in common with a child endangerment charge, the two are actually very closely related under California law. This is because any individual who is arrested for DUI (and who has a child under the age of 14 in his/her car at the time) is subject to a penalty enhancement. Depending on the circumstances, this enhancement could add between 48 hours to 90 days of additional jail time to the DUI sentence.

If the circumstances surrounding the DUI were particularly egregious, prosecutors could charge the defendant with a DUI and Penal Code 273a, California’s child endangerment law.

Penal Code 273a, California’s child endangerment law prohibits placing a child in a potentially dangerous situation. California courts have ruled that this includes placing a child in a car with an intoxicated driver. A child endangerment charge subjects an offender to up to six years in the California state prison.

The best way to avoid these severe penalties is to fight the underlying DUI charge. If you aren’t convicted of DUI, there is no criminal act to support the California child endangerment allegation.

Although many people think that a DUI conviction necessarily means a jail sentence, that’s not always the case. In fact, there are a variety of penalties…penalties called “alternative sentencing”…that the judge can impose in lieu of jail.

One of the less well-known types of DUI alternative sentencing is the SCRAM device (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor). The SCRAM device is a tamper-resistant ankle bracelet that tests the DUI offender’s sweat for alcohol concentration. This is done at least once an hour. Attempts to tamper with the SCRAM device are electronically reported to the regional monitoring center.

Some of the more common DUI alternative sentences include: community service, community labor (such as Cal-Trans roadside work), house arrest or electronic monitoring, and attendance at AA meetings.

It never hurts to ask for DUI alternative sentencing, and it always pays to have a DUI attorney who knows the most effective ways to convince the prosecutor and judge that these alternatives best serve the interests of justice.

As a Los Angeles DUI defense attorney, people frequently ask me the following question: If I’m stopped for DUI, should I take a blood/breath test or refuse to do so? And here’s how I respond: It depends.

If you can live without your driver’s license for a year, then politely refusing to submit to a chemical blood or breath test is a good choice. I say this because the California DMV will automatically suspend your driver’s license for a minimum of one year (more if it’s your second or subsequent DUI arrest) if you refuse to submit to a blood/breath test.

But if you can suffer that consequence because either (1) you can rely on friends/family to drive you, or (2) have a good public transportation system, prosecutors have a difficult time proving refusal cases. Often times the arresting officer can’t articulate exactly why he/she believed you were DUI. And even when he/she can, a good drunk driving defense lawyer can usually challenge those observations.

If you can’t give up your driving privilege, then take a test…but only at the station, not a hand-held test in the field. And opt for the breath test, as it’s much easier to effectively dispute the accuracy of breath test results over blood test results.

Hope this helps!

Since California has designated 2010 the “year of the DUI checkpoint”, California DUI arrests will undoubtedly be on the rise. And with DUI arrests come DMV driver’s license suspensions. This is a friendly reminder that you only have ten days to request a DMV DUI hearing in order to keep your driver’s license.

When you are arrested, the cop takes your driver’s license and replaces it with a pink paper. This pink paper acts as a temporary driver’s license, valid for 30 days beyond your arrest. Your driver’s license will automatically be suspended at that time if you don’t request a California DMV DUI hearing.

You only have ten days from the date of your drunk driving arrest to request this hearing. If you contact the DMV within this timeframe, your suspension will be postponed until your hearing. Typically your California DUI defense attorney will represent you at this hearing to explain to the DMV hearing officer why you were falsely arrested for DUI…and therefore should have your driving privilege reinstated.

In an effort to combat underage drinking and DUI, Arizona will set up DUI sobriety checkpoints to target underage drinkers returning from Mexico. If successful, other states will no doubt quickly follow suit. The legal drinking age is 18 in Mexico, although local establishments rarely, if ever, ask for anyone’s ID. This makes cities like Tijuana, Mexicali, Tecate, and Juarez popular hangouts for the “under 21” American crowd.

Teens from California, Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico frequent these Mexican cities to party, drink, and then drive home. If caught driving, these underage drinkers face a variety of penalties.

Continue reading "State Agencies Step Up Underage DUI Enforcement" »

As 2010 begins, California drivers face a new set of laws. There are two that deal specifically with California DUI law.

The first relates to California ignition interlock devices (“IIDs”). Ignition interlock devices are mini-breathalyzer instruments that prevent your car from operating unless and until you provide an alcohol-free breath sample.

As of July 1, 2010, any driver convicted of a DUI…even a first offense…must install an IID on his/her car in order to obtain a restricted California driver’s license (“restricted” licenses are discussed below). This law is a “pilot program” that will only be enforced in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Alameda, and Tulare.

Continue reading "New California Driving Laws for 2010" »

Because the holiday season results in an increased number of California DUI arrests, I thought I’d take this opportunity to remind you how the California DUI court process works in the unfortunate event that you are arrested for a DUI.

After the arrest, your first court date will be your arraignment. This is your first opportunity to plead not guilty and to obtain a copy of the police report. If you are charged with misdemeanor DUI, you don’t even need to appear in court, as your California DUI defense attorney can appear on your behalf.

Following the arraignment, there will be a series of pre-trial motions and hearings. It is during this time…which can last as long as several months…where you will receive more of the prosecution’s evidence, which is critical when trying to resolve your case during DUI plea bargaining.

Continue reading "Understanding the California DUI Court Process" »

Two men (ages 21 and 24) pleaded guilty to charges under Penal Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated last Friday in Pomona, California. The charges stem from an incident when a female passenger was killed last year when one of the men lost control of his car while they were street racing. Each man faces ten years in the California State Prison.

What distinguishes Penal Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated from Penal Code 191.5b “ordinary” vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is the level of culpability.

If the men hadn’t been racing…but were guilty of DUI and had an accident that caused the woman’s death…they could have alternatively been charged with DUI with injury or ordinary vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. Both of these charges are “wobblers” which means prosecutors have the discretion to charge the offenses as either misdemeanors or felonies.

Continue reading "Southern California Men Plead Guilty to Gross Vehicular Manslaughter while Intoxicated" »

Defensive superstar Carlos Dunlap of the Florida Gators was arrested for DUI early yesterday. Police approached his car when it was stopped at an intersection while he had a green light. Dunlap was allegedly found asleep, slumped over his steering wheel. As expected, the police reported that he failed his field sobriety tests. He also reportedly refused to submit to a chemical DUI blood or breath test.

At first glance, the “evidence” against Dunlap looks pretty bad. However, DUI charges are always worth fighting! Maybe he was suffering from a medical condition that caused him to pass out behind the wheel…maybe he was fatigued from practice which is why he “failed” his FSTs…maybe he was, in fact, DUI but the officers didn’t follow the proper legal procedures…procedures that compromised the integrity of the entire DUI case.

Continue reading "Florida Gators Carlos Dunlap Arrested for DUI" »

As if California DUI laws weren’t strict enough, commercial drivers face an even harsher set of drunk driving laws. Commercial drivers who are arrested for a California DUI not only risk a one-year suspension of their commercial driver’s license for a DUI, but possibly a lifetime suspension as well…even if the DUI wasn’t while the driver was driving a commercial vehicle.

California Vehicle Code 23152d prohibits an individual from driving a commercial vehicle with a BAC of 0.04% or greater. Commercial drivers are subject to this law, to the California DUI statutes that apply to the general population…that is, Vehicle Code 23152a driving under the influence and Vehicle Code 23152b driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater…and the law preventing an individual from refusing to submit to a California chemical DUI blood or breath test.

While a commercial driver faces the same general DUI penalties as anyone else, he/she faces an even greater driver’s license restriction. For a first DUI offense, he/she faces a one-year commercial driver’s license suspension. For a second offense, he/she faces a lifetime commercial driver’s license suspension. Such a suspension will obviously have a huge impact on a commercial driver’s ability to earn a living.

Continue reading "Commercial Drivers Face Tougher California DUI Laws" »

Over the weekend, Oahu started a new program. All those arrested for DUI in Oahu will have their “mugshots” publicly displayed on the Honolulu Police Department’s website. This project is a first of its kind for those who have only been arrested for DUI…and another example of how those arrested for DUI are afforded less constitutional protection than those arrested for other offenses.

As a Los Angeles DUI defense attorney, I find it horrifying, yet all too believable that this is happening. I know of no other crime where we take people who have been arrested for a crime and treat them as if they’ve been convicted of the offense.

Why is public humiliation okay for an individual who has only been arrested for DUI…a crime which, I might add, is frequently wrongly charged? Who, other than MADD…the program’s number one proponent…could possibly think that this is a good idea?

There is no evidence that this type of punishment serves as a deterrent. There is, however, evidence that this type of treatment is simply another example of how DUI suspects aren’t presumed innocent until proven guilty, but are presumed guilty until proven otherwise.

Officers will be participating in extra DUI patrols this holiday weekend. Don’t be surprised if you even run into a California DUI sobriety / driver’s license checkpoint as part of the state’s crackdown on driving under the influence.

As of now, there are at least three advertised California DUI sobriety / driver’s license checkpoints scheduled for this weekend.

On Friday, the California Highway Patrol and the El Dorado County Sheriff’s Department are teaming up to conduct a sobriety checkpoint on Friday somewhere on U.S. Highway 50 in Meyers. Traffic permitting, officers’ plan on stopping every vehicle that passes through the DUI roadblock.

Continue reading "Thanksgiving Weekend California DUI Sobriety Checkpoints" »

With every holiday comes increased California DUI patrols. Law enforcement beefs-up its patrol units to ensure that extra officers are visible to the public…both as a way of discouraging people from drinking and driving and to arrest those who they believe are DUI.

If you find yourself in the unfortunate position of being stopped for a California DUI investigation, try to keep the following tips in mind…they won’t necessarily get you out of a DUI arrest, but they will make it more difficult for the prosecution to convict you of DUI.

1. Be polite and respectful to the officer, no matter what.
2. Politely refuse the field sobriety tests (FSTs). Contrary to popular belief, these tests are not mandatory and rarely, if ever, help a DUI suspect.
3. Politely refuse to submit to a preliminary alcohol screening (PAS) test. Similar to FSTs, a PAS test is voluntary…unless you are under 21 or are currently on probation for a California DUI.
4. Do submit to a chemical DUI blood or breath test after you have been arrested…unless you don’t mind losing your California driver’s license for a minimum of one-year and spending at least 48 hours in a county jail. And finally,
5. Exercise your Constitutional right to remain silent. Although it’s contrary to human nature not to try to defend oneself, please resist all temptation to do so. Any statements you make can and will be used against you to incriminate you and/or attack your credibility.

Be safe everyone. Happy Thanksgiving!

Late Thursday night, early Friday morning, Alexandra Kerry (Sen. John Kerry’s 36-year old daughter) was arrested for DUI in Hollywood.

Kerry was reportedly pulled over because of expired registration tags. L.A.P.D. officers suspected her of driving under the influence and conducted a DUI investigation. After refusing an on-scene breathalyzer test (commonly known as a PAS test) and allegedly “failing” her FSTs, Kerry was arrested and booked into the Hollywood police station. Kerry then submitted to a DUI chemical blood test, the result of which revealed a BAC of 0.06%...0.02% lower than California’s illegal limit of 0.08%.

Although Kerry could technically face a charge for Vehicle Code 23152(a) which prohibits driving under the influence regardless of what her BAC was, it is more likely that the case will be dismissed or plea bargained down to a lesser charge.

Continue reading "Sen. John Kerry's Daughter Arrested for DUI Despite 0.06% BAC" »

Scott Caulfield faces up to fifteen-years in state prison and up to $100,000 in fines for felony charges of possessing a controlled substance and misdemeanor DUI…charges that were based on an anonymous caller’s tip.

The caller reported that Caulfield almost hit her and her husband head-on, causing them to swerve into a ditch to avoid the accident. The caller provided a description of Caulfield’s car as well as his location. With that, officers stopped Caulfield’s car and began a DUI investigation.

This type of investigation seems to go against the reasonable suspicion or probable cause standard that police must otherwise follow before they can initiate a traffic stop. The United States Supreme Court held long ago in Terry v. Ohio that an officer’s “good faith or inarticulate hunches” simply aren’t enough.

Continue reading "Anonymous DUI Tip Could Result in a 15-Year Sentence" »

Texas…one of the states that currently permits officers to perform forced blood draws in DUI refusal cases…has become even more aggressive with respect to its alleged DUI offenders.

The state used to permit officers to perform warrantless DUI blood draws when someone was seriously injured by the suspected DUI driver. Now police are authorized to perform these warrantless DUI blood draws when there is a DUI chemical test refusal and in any of the following cases:

1. Someone was injured severely enough that they required immediate medical attention


2. There was a child in the car


3. It was the suspect’s third DUI.

This is just another example of how this nation is becoming more of a police-state with respect to driving under the influence. It’s one thing to toughen the laws for convicted repeat offenders (a policy that I’m not advocating, by the way), but to toughen the laws with respect to those who have only allegedly violated the law is inexcusable.

Continue reading "Texas Police Expanding Forced Blood Draws" »

Shayne Lamas, the former “Bachelor” winner and star of the new reality series “Leave it to Lamas” was arrested Saturday night at a DUI checkpoint in Venice, California. Shortly thereafter, she personally issued the following statement-

"Early Saturday morning, after consuming one drink, I willingly drove through a mandatory check point on my way home with complete confidence of passing. However, the breathalyzer indicated that I was over the legal limit of blood alcohol content and was arrested onsite."

What is the lesson here? As any California DUI defense attorney will tell you, don’t ever make any unnecessary statements...ever! In fact, this is one of the most important tips to reduce the likelihood of a California DUI conviction.

The reason that this is so important is because any statements that you make can and will be used against you…the prosecution will make sure of it. While Lamas’s statements seem innocent enough, they will undoubtedly be used to impeach her credibility during DUI plea bargaining or at trial.

Continue reading "Reality Series Actress Shayne Lamas Arrested at California DUI Checkpoint" »

42-year-old Youn Lee will be sentenced on December 7, 2009 for California Vehicle Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. The sentence is based on a fatal hit and run DUI that Lee was involved in more than 4 years ago. He plead guilty to the charge on Tuesday.

Lee reportedly crashed his SUV into the center median of the 55 freeway in Santa Ana on October 18, 2005. Lee’s headlights were not on when 23-year-old Ryan Cook rear-ended him on his motorcycle. Cook was then thrown off his motorcycle where he was run over by several other vehicles. Lee left the scene before the police arrived.

The next morning, Lee, who was an executive at Hyundai, met with general counsel at Hyundai Motor America. After the meeting, he was driven to LAX by a colleague and supervisor where he flew to South Korea, leaving his wife and young child behind.

The Orange County District Attorney’s office filed charges against Lee in April 2007. In September 2008, the D.A. requested Lee be surrendered back to California for trial and/or punishment...a formal legal process known as extradition. In December 2008, Lee was arrested and returned to Orange County in January 2009.

Continue reading "2005 California Fatal Hit and Run DUI Offender Pleads Guilty" »

While everyone knows about the great weight-loss benefits of the Atkins Diet, few people know about the diet’s other big advantage…it’s a possible California DUI defense.

This is because low-carbohydrate / high-protein Atkins-style diets can fool DUI breath testing instruments. This is because most California DUI breath testing machines aren’t equipped with the technology to distinguish between isopropyl alcohol (the type of alcohol that is auto-generated by a body that is deprived of carbohydrates) and ethyl alcohol (the type of alcohol that we drink).

And while a cop isn’t likely to believe that your BAC is above the legal limit simply because you plead this defense, a judge and/or jury just may…especially when it is supported by validated scientific evidence.

Continue reading "The Atkins Diet...Weight-loss Sensation and DUI Defense?" »

Many people incorrectly believe that if you are arrested for a California DUI…and the police don’t read you your “Miranda rights”…that your DUI charges will automatically be dismissed. The fact, however, is that absent very specific circumstances, Miranda rights are generally not required as a part of a California DUI investigation.

Miranda rights, which typically consist of something along the lines of “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you at no cost…” are only required when you (1) have been placed under arrest, and (2) are being interrogated.

The first requirement needs little explanation. The second, however, does. An interrogation is different from a casual conversation. If the officer isn’t asking you questions that are designed to elicit incriminating responses, he doesn’t need to advise you of your Miranda rights.

But keep in mind…the police aren’t your friends. Don’t get caught up in conversation…it may just be an officer’s way of tricking you into revealing information without him having to advise you of your rights. If he can successfully do this, any statements you make will be used against you. Remember -- Miranda rights are generally not required as a part of a California DUI investigation. So don’t allow yourself to make statements just because you think your DUI case will be thrown out of court since the officer never “read you your rights”.

Continue reading "The Myth Surrounding Miranda Rights and California DUI Investigations" »

Tomorrow night, November 6, 2009, four Southern California DUI sobriety checkpoints are set to operate.

With respect to the first, the Palm Springs Police Department will reportedly conduct a sobriety checkpoint at an undisclosed location within in the city. The location and exact time will be announced just prior to the DUI checkpoint’s operation.

With respect to the second, the Escondido Police Department will operate a DUI / driver’s license checkpoint between 6:00pm and 1:00am.

As for the third, the Lake Elsinore Police Department will conduct a DUI checkpoint between 6:00pm and midnight.

Continue reading "November 6, 2009 Southern California DUI Sobriety Checkpoint Schedule" »

Thomas Dekker, who played John Connor on the Terminator television show, was arrested in California for DUI after hitting a 17-year old who was riding his bike in the San Fernando Valley. The Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office charged Dekker with two counts of misdemeanor DUI…Vehicle Code 23152a VC driving under the influence and Vehicle Code 23152b VC driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater.

Despite the fact that the cyclist was knocked off his bike and taken to the hospital for minor injuries, Dekker is still being charged with a “typical” DUI charge instead of a DUI causing injury.

Vehicle Code 23153 DUI with injury is generally reserved for situations where the defendant acted negligently in addition to driving under the influence. If, for example, Dekker was DUI and sped or otherwise committed another traffic violation…and injured the cyclist as a result…he would be more likely to face charges under VC 23153. There are, however, no reports of any negligent driving in connection with this DUI case.

Dekker was released from the Van Nuys Jail on $100,000 bail.

California Vehicle Code 23152b penalizes driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or greater. Unlike Vehicle Code 23152a “driving under the influence” people aren’t charged with this offense until after they’ve submitted to a chemical DUI blood or breath test that resulted in a BAC of at least a 0.08%.

The problem with this scenario is that, depending on the circumstances, the BAC that is reported could actually be the person’s BAC at the time of the DUI blood or breath test as opposed to his/her BAC at the time of driving. This theory is based on the scientifically validated rising blood alcohol DUI defense.

The rising blood alcohol DUI defense, also known as the on the rise DUI defense, acknowledges the fact that alcohol doesn’t enter your bloodstream immediately following consumption. On average, alcohol takes about 50 minutes to “absorb” into your bloodstream and may even take as long as three hours. So what does this mean?

Continue reading "Rising Blood Alcohol -- Understanding this California DUI Defense" »

As crazy as it sounds, you could in fact, be arrested for driving under the influence of Listerine, Nyquil, a few sips of a cocktail, or any other liquid or substance that contains alcohol. It’s not that you would necessarily be “under the influence” of any of these, but that they are all capable of producing an illegal blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or greater.

The reason this is possible is due to a condition known as mouth alcohol. Mouth alcohol is alcohol that remains in the mouth. When present, mouth alcohol can fool a DUI breath testing instrument. And although it typically dissipates quickly, it can linger, depending on the circumstances.

For example, the limited amount of alcohol that could be “burped” into a “normal” mouth will probably dissolve quickly. But that same amount of alcohol burped up by someone with dentures, for example, may take longer to dissolve.

Similarly, if someone had a tiny piece of alcohol-saturated bread trapped in his/her dental work, that alcohol could remain in the mouth for quite some time.

Continue reading "Driving Under the Influence of Listerine?" »

Yesterday’s Oprah show addressed mothers and drunk driving. Her show was most likely prompted by the recent tragedy involving Carmen Huertas who was allegedly driving with a 0.13% BAC when she lost control of her car, killing one of seven children who were passengers inside.

We coincidentally blogged that story on Monday (Mom Charged with Vehicular Manslaughter) and ended the article by stating that lobbyists would surely use it in their arsenal to pursue tougher DUI legislation.

Oprah’s show only increases that possibility.

Oprah’s guests included one of the girls who was thrown from Huertas’s car as well as the father of the child who was killed in the accident. She also used her national platform to call attention to some other recent heartbreaking accounts of mothers who drove drunk with children in the car…something she seems to believe is a more common phenomenon that we realize.

These events, coupled with the media’s attention to this issue, will undoubtedly prompt MADD and other anti-drinking groups to push for harsher DUI penalties.

Current California law holds that if you drive under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs with a child in the car, you will be charged with DUI and either Penal Code 273a child endangerment or an enhanced DUI sentence.

Continue reading "Oprah Addresses Mothers Who Have Been Accused of DUI" »

Last week, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office filed manslaughter, vehicular manslaughter, assault, and DUI charges against 31-year old Carmen Huertas. Huertas piled eight children (including her own daughter and fourteen-month old son) into her car to have a sleep over at her house. This was after she reportedly left a party with a BAC of 0.13%.

Before she drove off, her son was taken out of the car by the child’s father, Eduardo Henriquez. Henriquez knew Huertas wasn’t fit to drive and tried to stop her. When she wouldn’t listen, he removed his son from the car…but unfortunately not the keys.

As a result, three of the remaining seven children were ejected from the car when Huertas lost control, allegedly travelling 20 miles-per-hour over the speed limit. Before one of these eleven-year-old girls was killed, Huertas was apparently taunting the girls, demanding that they raise their hands if they thought they would make it home without crashing. Five of the children were not wearing seatbelts, and the three who were ejected weren’t even in seats.

Continue reading "Mom Charged with Vehicular Manslaughter" »

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Virginia case which held that officers will no longer be allowed to pull over suspected drunk drivers based solely on a caller’s tip. The court ruled that officers must personally observe suspicious behavior before stopping a driver for a DUI investigation. As the Los Angeles Times reported yesterday, this essentially means that impaired drivers are entitled to “one free swerve” before they can be pulled over by the police.

The Supreme Court’s ruling isn’t formal and doesn’t require other states to follow Virginia’s lead. It is, however, likely to invite more legal challenges to DUIs that are initiated by citizen tips.

Currently, Los Angeles and a host of other California cities, use electronic roadside message boards located on their freeways to tell drivers to “Call 911 to report drunk drivers”. Although California may still encourage its drivers to report suspected DUIs, a formal ruling on this case would make it so that those calls will not be enough to satisfy the Constitution’s requirement for a reasonable search.

Most states, including California, presently allow these types of searches, so long as the observed vehicle matches the description given by the caller.

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed several new bills that will go into effect beginning January 1, 2010. One of them is known as Assembly Bill 808, the Ambriz Act.

This law will require every person who either applies for a new driver’s license or who wishes to renew his/her license to sign a statement acknowledging the dangers associated with drinking and driving. While that may not sound so harsh on its face, it sets the driver up for being prosecuted for second-degree murder if he/she is involved in a deadly DUI accident.

Until this bill goes into effect, only those who have suffered prior DUIs can be charged with California DUI second-degree murder, also called Watson murder…and even then, there must be additional facts to support a finding of malice. Without malice, there can be no murder.

Continue reading "Schwarzenegger's Targeting More than First-Time DUI Offenders" »

Last week, California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a new bill that will go into effect July of next year. Under this new law…known as Assembly Bill 91…first-time California DUI offenders will be required to install ignition interlock devices (IIDs) on every car they own or operate.

This legislation is starting out as a pilot project in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Tulare, and Alameda counties. If successful, it will ultimately go into effect statewide.

A California ignition interlock device is essentially a mini-breathalyzer machine that attaches to the steering column in your car. In order for your car to start, you must provide an alcohol-free breath sample.

The IID also periodically requires “rolling” samples while you are driving. This is one way to help ensure that the driver is the person blowing into the instrument. It should be noted that asking someone else to blow into your IID…and blowing into someone else’s IID…are both crimes.

California ignition interlock devices are costly. Some companies charge as much as $100 to install the devices and then another $2.50 a day to maintain them. Under this new law, those who are unable to afford the device may only be required to pay a portion of its cost.

A court-ordered alcohol/drug education program (otherwise known as California DUI school) is a mandatory condition of a DUI probation sentence.

Depending on whether it is your first, second, or subsequent DUI conviction…or even your first or second California wet reckless conviction…the judge will sentence you to between 12 hours and 30 months of DUI school.

The length of the programs, the curriculum of the programs, and the fees of the programs are all drastically different. However, all DUI programs do share several common characteristics.
First, you must enroll in a California DUI school within 21 days of your DUI sentence.

Second, you must provide proof of enrollment and completion by the dates that the judge orders you to do so. Failure to abide by these terms could result in a California bench warrant and/or a DUI probation violation.

Continue reading "California DUI School" »

Last week, Minnesota Viking’s Cedric Griffin pled guilty to misdemeanor DUI. There are a couple of things that are interesting about this case.

The first is that Griffin was arrested after he voluntarily pulled over…apparently because he believed he was too impaired to drive. The second is that the judge must have taken that into consideration when he sentenced Griffin for driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or greater.

The plea stems from incidents that took place last August when Griffin and others all parked their cars at a hotel…which was only about five minutes from Griffin’s home…and hired a limousine to pick them up to take them out. After they returned to their cars, Griffin began driving home. After a couple of minutes, he pulled over, reportedly because he didn’t feel it was safe to continue. Moments later, he was approached by a police officer who subsequently arrested him for DUI.

Continue reading "Minnesota Viking's Cedric Griffin Pleads Guilty to DUI" »

Every year, the California legislature introduces new laws that relate to driving. In 2009, several of these new laws directly related to driving under the influence.

One of the newer California DUI laws deals with DUI probation violations. California’s zero-tolerance law states that you will automatically lose your driver’s license if you are on probation for a DUI and are caught driving with any measureable amount of alcohol in your system, or refuse to submit to a chemical blood or breath test to determine your blood alcohol concentration (BAC).

Another 2009 California DUI law pertains to DUI school. Prior to this year, if you suffered a second wet reckless conviction, there was no requirement that you attend DUI school. However, since 2009, if you find yourself in this situation…or in a situation where you are convicted of a “wet” and have a prior DUI conviction…you must attend a minimum nine-month drug/alcohol education program.

Continue reading "2009 California DUI Laws" »

Last week, a Malibu judge agreed to expunge Mel Gibson’s now infamous 2006 DUI. That was the incident where Gibson not only threatened the Los Angeles County Sheriff who stopped him but also blamed the Jews for all the world’s wars.

Despite Gibson’s anti-Semitic rant and other bizarre behavior, the judge granted his California DUI expungement because he completed his court-ordered probation.

You are eligible for an expungement under California’s DUI expungement laws if:

1. you were placed on probation,


2. you successfully completed that probation,


3. you aren’t currently serving a sentence for another crime,


4. and you have no other pending criminal charges.

Continue reading "Mel Gibson's Infamous DUI Expunged" »

A common question that those who have recently suffered a California DUI ask is, “How is my DUI going to affect my car insurance?” Although this is a difficult question to answer without knowing the specific facts of your case, there are a few things that we know for sure.
The first is that California insurance law prohibits your auto insurance carrier from taking any action against you midterm. This means that even if you suffer a DUI the day after your new policy goes into effect, your car insurance company can’t drop you or raise your premium until your policy is up for renewal.

The second is that California law mandates that all DUI convictions are visible to auto insurance companies for ten years following your California DUI arrest. Perhaps the most significant part of this law is the fact that you are ineligible for a “good driver” discount for the duration of that period.

Continue reading "How is My DUI Going to Affect My Car Insurance?" »

Most people think they have a pretty good understanding of California’s DUI penalties. Lose your license for a year or so…possibly go to jail…pay a fine…attend DUI school…

While these punishments do, in fact, comprise the bulk of a California DUI sentence, they do not include perhaps, one of the most burdensome penalties of them all…obtaining an SR 22.

A California SR 22 is a form that you must request from your auto insurance carrier. It verifies that you meet California’s minimum requirements for auto liability insurance. It also alerts your insurance company to the fact that you just suffered a DUI.

The California Department of Motor Vehicles requires you to provide an SR 22 in order to (1) get a restricted license following a license suspension / revocation, or (2) fully reinstate your driving privilege.

Obtaining a California SR 22 can be quite costly. You must pay to file your SR 22…you must pay DMV fees to reinstate your license…you may have to switch insurance carriers if your current carrier won’t issue an SR 22 (and many won’t)…and, following a DUI conviction, you will not qualify for a good driver discount for ten years following your arrest.

Continue reading "And You Thought a Jail Sentence Was Bad..." »

31-year old William Sommer was sentenced to two years in jail following his third DUI conviction. What makes this story somewhat unusual is that he was driving a snow machine at the time.

Cases like these remind me that it is good to reiterate that the crime is driving under the influence. “Driving” -- in the legal world -- is pretty synonymous with “controlling”. This means that you can be convicted of a DUI while you’re riding a bicycle, boating, flying, riding a tractor, or even a toy scooter, depending on the laws of the state in which you live.

Sometimes driving doesn’t even mean driving…it simply means being able to control a vehicle. Take, for example, the case where someone is sleeping in his/her car, with the engine running, car in park. If you are in a position where you could ultimately, hypothetically control the car…and drive away…you could be prosecuted for a California DUI.

The best advice is to refrain from operating anything that could possibly be construed as a moving vehicle if you’ve been drinking. Silly as it sounds, it could be best free legal advice you’ll ever get.

Roger Avary, the Oscar-winning co-writer of “Pulp Fiction”, was sentenced last week in the Ventura Superior Court to one-year in a county jail, five years formal probation, and over $5,000 in fines for a California DUI he suffered early last year. Avary was driving his Mercedes over 100 mph when he crashed into a telephone poll. The accident ejected his wife from the car and killed his passenger.

Avary pled guilty to Penal Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter and DUI causing injury. He also admitted allegations that he caused multiple victims to suffer great bodily injury during the commission of the crime. A “great bodily injury” is a significant or substantial injury…if inflicted, the defendant usually suffers an enhanced jail or prison sentence.

Just based on the great bodily injury allegations alone, Avary could have been sentenced to five years in the California State Prison. The gross vehicular manslaughter charge (which is typically a felony) invites a four, six, or ten-year prison sentence. This means that Avary could have been sentenced to a prison term of between nine and fifteen-years if you add up all of his exposure.

Continue reading "Pulp Fiction Writer Convicted of Misdemeanor Gross Vehicular Manslaughter" »

Last week Robert Moran, 43, a former deputy with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department was officially sentenced to three years of informal probation and to six months in a county jail for his June 2008 DUI. He was arrested for that DUI when he crashed his department-issued SUV into another car after he ran a red light, and injured the people in the other car.

Moran has already almost completed his jail sentence by serving his time on house arrest, which is also commonly referred to as electronic monitoring. House arrest is a DUI penalty that enables you to serve a jail sentence at home, rather than in jail. This DUI penalty is not available under all circumstances…you must specifically request it and the judge must approve it.

So let me get this straight. An L.A. sheriff who injured two people when he drove a department issued car while under the influence, after running a red light gets a break on his sentence? Someone who, no doubt, has used his “special training” to detain, arrest, and help convict others of the same offense?

Gotta love the hypocrisy embedded in the California justice system…

Kim Fullenwider, 53, was arrested in Ojai, California, on suspicion of drunk driving after making a U-turn in front of an approaching pick-up. Although there were no reported injuries, Fullenwider was driving a school bus full of children at the time of the 7:30 a.m. incident.

The 19-year bus driving veteran was booked into the Ventura County Jail on misdemeanor charges of (1) California Vehicle Code 23152a Driving under the Influence, (2) California Vehicle Code 23152b Driving with a Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or above, and (3) Penal Code 273a Child Endangerment.

Lucky for the 25+ kids on board that no one was hurt. Even luckier for Fullenwider was the fact that none of those kids (nor the driver of the truck who hit her) were injured or even killed.

If the scenario had been different and any or all of those individuals suffered injuries or were killed, Fullenwider could have been charged under California Vehicle Code 23153 DUI with Injury, or under California Penal Code 191.5(b) Vehicular Manslaughter while Intoxicated.

Continue reading "Ojai School Bus Driver Arrested for DUI" »

Prosecutors and Judges have an enormous amount of discretion when it comes to imposing California DUI penalties. If you’re sentenced for a DUI, your punishment can range anywhere from spending no time in jail to spending up to ten years in the California State Prison, depending on whether (1) it’s your first, second, or subsequent offense, (2) you’re charged with misdemeanor or felony DUI, (3) anyone was injured as a result of your DUI…and the list goes on and on.

And if you’re charged with a DUI that resulted in another’s death, you could ultimately be charged with murder.

Regardless of whether you are charged with misdemeanor or felony drunk driving, California courts consider a host of other questions that may include:

• Was there a child in the car?


• What was your BAC?


• Did you refuse to submit to a chemical blood or breath test?


• How fast were you driving?

Continue reading "The Extreme Range of California DUI Penalties" »

DUI penalties are always a hot topic. Recently, there is one area in particular receiving quite a bit of buzz.

Several states, including Ohio, Minnesota, and Iowa currently require DUI offenders to display unique license plates to draw attention to their convictions. These states believe this type of punishment not only serves as a DUI deterrent, but also signals law enforcement to pay particular attention to the driving patterns of the individuals driving these cars.

While this may, in fact, serve as a public deterrent, I can only imagine what the ACLU and other civil liberties organizations have to say about this…

It will be interesting to see which, and how many, other states will follow suit.

In any event, the best way to avoid this embarrassing (and possibly illegal) DUI penalty is obviously to avoid drinking and driving. That said, the next best alternative is to know the most useful tips to avoid a California DUI conviction.

If you have the misfortune of being stopped for a California DUI investigation, the most important things to remember are to remain calm and be polite.

Continue reading "Will California DUI Offenders Soon Be Branded By a Scarlet Letter?" »

Jacoby Jones pled guilty to a DUI charge stemming from an incident last year. When arrested, Jones had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.13% and was found asleep in his car (with his foot on the brake while the car was in drive).

Jones is receiving a first time DUI “diversion” sentence which basically means that if he completes his probation terms, the case will be dismissed and the conviction erased from his record. These terms include appearing in several public service announcements, attending a year-long alcohol class, and installing an ignition interlock device (which is a mini-breathalyzer instrument) in his car.

California offers no similar first time DUI penalty.

Continue reading "Houston Texan Jacoby Jones Pleads Guilty to DUI" »

Last Thursday in New York, 41 year-old Melonie Lender, a middle school assistant principal, was arrested for DUI. Not only was it 6:40 in the morning, but she was on her way to work and had her 10-month old son in the backseat. In addition, Lender reportedly has two prior alcohol-related driving convictions.

In California, if you are caught driving under the influence and have a child under the age of 14 in your car, you will likely be charged with Penal Code 273 (a) child endangerment in addition to the underlying DUI.

Depending on the circumstances surrounding your California DUI arrest, such as your driving pattern, whether you were involved in an accident, your blood alcohol concentration (BAC), and your prior criminal history, you may face up to one year in the county jail or up to six years in the California State Prison…and you could also potentially lose custody of your child(ren). Keep in mind these are just the penalties for the child endangerment charge. In addition to these penalties, you still face sentencing for your DUI.

Lender, like so many others, has an alcohol addiction, or at least an alcohol problem, which is revealed by her actions. If any of her conduct sounds all too familiar…or like the life of someone you care about…know that help is available.

As summer ends and school begins, underage drinking becomes more prevalent. Students in college -- and even high school -- are returning to the party scene…which means that underage drinking will be on the rise.

Underage drinking is nothing new and, for many, is the norm. Students living in dorms, fraternity and sorority houses, in off-campus apartments, and even with their parents frequently get drunk and/or high. Oh…to be young again.

However, with age comes wisdom, and with wisdom comes the recognition that we aren’t invincible. So if you’re under 21 listen up! Not only is it possible for the police to arrest you for drunk driving, it’s possible for them to arrest you for driving with any measurable amount of alcohol in your body. This is what’s known as California’s zero tolerance policy.

Continue reading "College Students Beware...If You're Under 21 and Arrested for a California DUI, You Can and Will be Prosecuted" »

Jack Alvord, 61, was sentenced to 22 months in prison by a Portland judge when he plead guilty to DUI, reckless driving, and to third degree assault. Alvord, who was driving with a BAC of 0.30%, hit a blind man who was walking on the sidewalk (pining him between the car and a utility pole) before driving off. Alvord was then chased by fourteen people who caught him less than a mile away.

What’s noteworthy about this case is the fact that Alvord and the man whom he left with a broken pelvis and two broken legs are now friends.

Alvord was extremely remorseful for his actions. He voluntarily checked himself into a 30-day residential alcohol treatment center, urged his insurance company to pay a $1.25 million settlement, and has pledged that once he completes his prison sentence, he will speak to others in an effort to educate them about the dangers of drinking and driving.

Continue reading "Defendant’s Remorse Gets Him a Lighter Sentence" »

Chemical test refusals in California DUI cases are commonplace. In fact, many California DUI defense attorneys will “suggest” that if you are pulled over for a DUI…and can live without your license for one year…politely refuse to perform any FSTs and politely refuse to submit to a chemical blood or breath test.

If the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) has its way, the option of refusing a California DUI chemical test will soon cease to exist.

NHTSA is eagerly awaiting the results of a one-to-two year study currently being conducted in Idaho and Texas where police officers are being trained to draw blood from DUI suspects who refuse to submit to chemical testing. Arizona, who has been employing this tactic for almost 15 years, has seen its DUI refusal rate drop by more than 50%.

Although the U.S. Supreme court held that forced blood draws are constitutional in DUI refusal cases…can the same be said for their reliability? Absolutely not.

Continue reading "Chemical Test Refusals in California DUI Cases...A Thing of the Past?" »

The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that Roger Walsh, 57, was sentenced to life in prison for killing a woman in a wheelchair while he was DUI. Neither the fact that the woman was in a wheelchair nor the fact that she was killed is what makes this case remarkable.
What does make this case remarkable is the fact that this was Walsh’s 19th drunk driving conviction.

This is clearly an extreme case, but it begs the question…what are the appropriate methods of punishment and/or rehabilitation for repeat DUI offenders who have an obvious addiction to alcohol?

California DUI school is one component of a DUI sentence, regardless of whether it’s an individual’s first, second, or third drunk driving conviction. For repeat DUI offenders with a true addiction, these classes aren’t the answer.

Continue reading "Canadian Man Receives Life Sentence for DUI" »

Most people convicted of a California DUI get probation. This usually lasts from three to five years, and includes certain "terms and conditions." Violating the terms and conditions subjects the person to a probation violation, and possible jail time.

One standard term of probation in California DUI cases is that the person "not operate a motor vehicle with any measurable amount of alcohol in your system." This means if the person gets stopped and blows even a .01 BAC, he is in violation of his probation. In other words, he cannot drink and drive, period.

In reality, most people on California DUI probation violate this term. Most are at least social drinkers, and they continue to drink and drive, but are just much more careful. But by doing so, they take a considerable risk. A probation violation can subject them to six months or more of jail time.

Continue reading "Zero Tolerance Law in DUI Probation" »

Riverside remains one of the few counties in California to impose jail time systematically for first-time DUI offenders. Those convicted of first offense DUI generally receive between six to ten days of jail. This could be served at the Robert Presley Detention Center or Southwest Detention Center, or most of the time the person could opt for work sentence instead of actual jail time.

Riverside DUI lawyer Mike Scafiddi believes the policy is unduly harsh. "All counties impose some jail time for repeat offenders. But Riverside is one of the few counties that gives jail time for all first-time DUIs, even when there are no aggravating circumstances."

The sentencing policy is consistent with Riverside's reputation as being very conservative and tough on crime. The Riverside D.A.'s office seeks jail or prison time on most cases. A typical conviction in Riverside results in harsher sentences than a conviction for a comparable crime in a neighboring county.

California Vehicle Code 23109 defines the misdemeanor crime of “speed contests” or “exhibition of speed.” Quite literally, this means a motorist on a highway racing against another vehicle or a timing device. We usually call this activity “drag racing” or “street racing.”

Prosecutors do indeed charge Vehicle Code 23109 for people arrested for actual exhibition of speed. But the statute is also commonly used as a lesser offense agreed to through California DUI plea bargaining. That is, prosecutors often agree to reduce DUI charges to a “speed ex” in an effort to settle the case.

Generally speaking, a defendant prefers a speed ex conviction to a DUI. The speed ex does not trigger a license suspension, and carries no mandatory penalties such as DUI school or jail time. Moreover, a speed ex does not count as a “DUI prior” on one’s record. If the charge gets reduced to a speed ex, and the defendant subsequently picks up another DUI, the new DUI will get treated as a first offense.

Continue reading "Reducing a DUI Charge to “Exhibition of Speed”" »

Much of the negotiations between prosecutors and DUI defense attorneys involve reducing a DUI charge to a wet reckless or a dry reckless. Both of these reduced charges fall under California Vehicle Code 23103, the statute defining reckless driving.

The difference between the two is that a “wet reckless” is a special form of reckless driving in which the record of conviction specifies that alcohol was involved. The “wet” version of reckless driving counts as the functional equivalent of a DUI conviction.

Suppose, for example, that a person pleads guilty to a reduced charge of wet reckless. Now suppose he gets arrested and convicted of a DUI charge within 10 years. The new DUI will count as a second offense, and second-time penalties are exponentially greater. Even though the first DUI got reduced to a wet reckless, the law still treats it as a prior DUI conviction.

Continue reading "Wet Reckless vs Dry Reckless Charge Reductions" »

California's implied consent law requires those lawfully arrested for DUI to submit to a blood or breath test to measure their BAC. Yet many arrestees refuse to take either test and thus get charged with a DUI with "chemical test refusal." Are "refusers" better off?

It depends. They face good news and bad news. The good news is that prosecutors generally loathe taking refusal DUI cases to trial. They lack the most damning piece of state's evidence: a blood or breath test revealing the defendant's BAC. Many prosecutors prefer to plea bargain refusal DUI cases on terms more favorable to the defense. Or if the case does go to trial, the accused usually has a better shot at a "not guilty" verdict.

Now, for the bad news. If the refuser loses his DMV hearing, a one-year driver’s license suspension will be imposed. And there's no provision here for a restricted license. It's just a hard, outright, one-year suspension. Get caught behind the wheel: go to jail.

Continue reading "To Blow or Not to Blow? That is the Question" »

Most people arrested for DUI in California get charged with two offenses: Vehicle Code 23152(a) driving under the influence, and Vehicle Code 23152(b) driving with an excessive BAC (defined as .08 or higher). Although both crimes make up California DUI law, they define separate offenses. Moreover, it’s possible to commit each without committing the other.

A person violates Vehicle Code 23152(a) by driving when he is impaired by alcohol or drugs. This impairment may exist at various BAC levels. For instance, a driver who is especially sensitive to alcohol may become impaired at a .05 BAC. If proven, he would be in violation of 23152(a) VC, but not 23152(b) VC, since his BAC is still below the legal limit.

Conversely, a driver with a high tolerance for alcohol may have a .11 BAC, yet still not yet be “impaired” in his driving abilities. This driver would be in violation of 23152(b) VC, but not 23152(a) VC. His BAC may be excessive, but he’s nevertheless sober enough to where he’s not “under the influence.”

Stated another way, a low BAC is not necessarily a defense to a “driving under the influence” charge. And actual sobriety is not necessarily a defense to an “excessive BAC” charge. But regardless of technicalities, a low BAC or evidence of sobriety make it difficult for the prosecutor to prevail in any California DUI case.

Although most California DUI cases get charged as misdemeanors--involving fines, DUI school and sometimes a short jail sentence--in certain instances prosecutors can charge a California felony DUI.

The consequences for a person convicted of felony DUI are significantly more serious. First, a misdemeanor DUI carries only a maximum sentence of six months to a year of county jail--though most offenders do little or no jail time. By contrast, a felony DUI can land a person in California state prison for 3 years of longer. Second, a felony DUI conviction resulting in probation will require felony probation and formal supervision by a probation officer.

Prosecutors may charge felony DUI in only three instances. First, a California DUI causing injury or death may be filed as a felony (or in more serious death cases, vehicular manslaughter). Second, a Fourth Time DUI may be charged as a felony. Finally, if a person has a prior felony DUI conviction for any reason, any subsequent DUI charge may be filed as a felony.

Like with all criminal cases, felony DUI often gets plea-bargained down. A prosecutor may start a case by filing the charge as a felony. But after recognizing weaknesses in the evidence, and negotiating with defense counsel, he/she often will agree to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor in exchange for a guilty or "no contest" plea.

The Riverside District Attorney's Office is now asking for 90 days of SCRAM on first time DUI cases where the defendant's BAC measures more than .15.

The SCRAM is a tamper-proof device that a person wears around his ankle. It measures alcohol from the wearer's sweat emitted throughout the day. The device then transmits the reading to a regional monitoring center--which reports the results to the court.

Many counties require the SCRAM device for repeat DUI offenders or very egregious cases. However, Riverside County looks to be one of the first to be seeking this penalty even in 1st time DUI cases where no accident is involved.

According to Riverside DUI attorney Michael Scafiddi, Riverside County is one of the more strict places in the state when it comes to drunk driving prosecutions. The local courts routinely impose 6 to 10 days jail even in 1st offense Riverside DUI cases--although most people can serve these days doing labor as opposed to actual time in the Riverside County Jail.

The SCRAM device can be an effective tool for courts to treat defendants with serious alcohol problems. But it may be an excessive requirement for many 1st time DUI offenders...not to mention an invasion of the person's privacy and a substantial expense (as the defendant must pay the cost of the program).

The Marine Corps Times reported in an article on January 6, 2009, that Lance Corporal Quintin Garza, 21, pleaded not guilty to California DUI charges stemming from a fatal New Year’s Day crash on a San Diego County road.

Prosecutors allege that Garza was driving through a winding stretch of El Camino Real near Rancho Santa Fe when his vehicle collided with a parked SUV owned by Gaudencio Reyes-Quintana. Reyes-Quintana’s vehicle was stuck in the mud, and California Highway Patrol officers believe that Reyes-Quintana was standing outside of the vehicle when Garza crashed.

Garza’s attorney notes that the vicinity was foggy that night with areas of drizzle, which along with curvy roads and limited sight lines may have contributed to the car accident. Garza himself was unconscious when police officers arrived at the scene.

Continue reading "Camp Pendleton Marine Pleads Not Guilty To DUI Crash" »

A San Diego man accused of leading police on a wild-goose chase that ended up in a jump off of San Diego’s largest bridge and the death of a police dog will face trial, authorities have confirmed. Among other things, Cory Byron is charged with evading officers, DUI, and harming a police animal. The chase, which took place on New Year’s Eve, traversed the streets of San Diego before culminating in a jump off of the Coronado Bridge while a police dog was gripping Byron’s arm. The dog died; Byron sustained a collapsed lung and other injuries and was rescued by Harbor Police after his plunge into the San Diego Bay.

Byron, who has previous DUI convictions, will face a complex criminal case that spans several areas of law. His case will hinge on whether he was aware that he was sending Stryker, the police dog, to his death, and will be complicated by the relative lack of legal precedent in similar cases. Though the incident lasted just a few seconds, it could forever affect Byron’s future: he will face four years and four months in state prison if he is convicted at his upcoming trial.

Continue reading "San Diego Man Will Face Trial for Police Dog Death" »

Patrick Valenzuela, a prominent horse racing jockey and the youngest jockey ever to win the Santa Anita Derby, has had his racing license revoked after a recent DUI arrest. The California Horse Racing Board revoked his license after the arrest and reported that it did so because the conditional racing license it had issued was only issued on condition of Valenzuela abstaining from alcohol altogether.

Valenzuela’s history of drug abuse and other substance issues led to the conditional license, which also requires random drug testing. He has already been suspended eight times in connection with drug abuse. Valenzuela’s DUI arrest took place on December 20 in Upland, California.

The Valenzuela arrest and license suspension highlights an often-overlooked consequence of DUI arrests – their affect on a person’s day-to-day activities such as job and community reputation. Though Valenzuela’s DUI was not yet proven, his mere arrest was enough to give the California Horse Racing Board pause. The “zero-tolerance” attitude of many employers and professional organizations towards DUI gives those accused an even stronger motivation to seek a watertight DUI defense or, at the very least, a lawyer who can protect their personal rights as they navigate the often-confusing world of California DUI law.

A good California DUI lawyer can help you keep your license and keep you out of jail. They have access to expert witnesses who can disprove or call into question official “evidence” and can conduct a thorough investigation into the particulars of your case. And they know the system well enough to understand its main players and its particular ins and outs. The experienced attorneys at Neil Shouse & Associates are aggressive in the courtroom and sympathetic to your side of the story. We’re committed to keeping our clients on the road and out of jail. Have you been arrested on suspected DUI? Act now – don’t approach your DUI hearing by yourself. Call today for a completely free and totally confidential phone consultation.

John Joseph Taskey, aged 46, has pleaded not guilty of second-degree murder, gross vehicular manslaughter, driving under the influence of alcohol and causing injury, and driving under the influence with prior DUI convictions. His trial will begin April 10 in San Diego Superior Court. Taskey, who has five prior DUI convictions and served time in state prison for the last offense, was on parole when he allegedly struck and killed 76-year-old Rosa Degerman with his truck. The Deputy District Attorney states that Taskey’s blood alcohol content (BAC) was 0.10 at the time of the injury – two percentage points higher than the legal state limit of 0.08.

Taskey is in jail on $1 million bail and will await trial for second-degree murder. The severity of his accusations highlights an unfortunate complication of DUI arrests that are related to car accidents causing injury or death. Criminal charges like the murder and vehicular manslaughter accusations can be added on to the DUI charge, complicating the underlying DUI case and presenting a whole range of issues to the defendant and his or her legal team. In a case such as Taskey’s, it is unlikely that a jury will respond favorably to a man already showing a long-term track record of DUI offenses. However, the right DUI lawyer could get some or all charges dismissed on procedural issues, help uncover evidence that exonerates Taskey, and/or engage in plea bargaining with the District Attorney to lessen the severity of any required jail time or other punishment.

Due to the many ins and outs of California’s legal system, it is never a good idea to “go it alone” when it comes to DUI accusations. Even if you are being accused of your first DUI, the way in which you handle your first offense could affect your freedom and treatment down the road. That’s why it’s so important to find the right California DUI defense attorney to take up your case. The lawyers at Neil Shouse & Associates aren’t just experienced – they’re committed to preserving the freedom and personal rights of each and every client. Contact us today for a free, confidential phone consultation.

Often, we talk about lives lost and the emotional devastation that all parties suffer as a result of a drunk driving arrest. What most people don’t realize is the tremendous financial impact they will have to endure if convicted of operating a motor vehicle under the influence. According to an article posted on InsWeb, an insurance association Web site, drunk drivers must be prepared to cough up about $10,828 in total costs.

The first noticeable difference after a DUI conviction is skyrocketing insurance rates, the article states. Expect your car insurance rates to range between $3,600 and $6,600 a year.
Depending on how long a DUI remains on your state’s driving record, these rates are known to continue for up to seven years. Any additional incidents or tickets could make them shoot up even more, almost triple those rates.

Depending on the state you live in, additional costs range from:

Towing: $300 - $1,200
Bail: $250 - $2,500
Fines and Court Fees: $500 - $2,500
Attorney Fees (average): $2,500
Mandatory Education and Treatment: $350 - $2,000
Electronic Home Monitoring: $150 - $2,250
Ignition Lock: $730 - $2,800

Continue reading "A DUI Could Break Your Wallet, If Not Ruin Your Life" »