California DUI - Marijuana issues

Arrested for California DUI - Marijuana Impaired?

A California DUI Attorney can help with the California DUI / Drugs science.

There is a critical need for definitive testing for the presence of THC and THC-OH.

THC and THC-OH are active and disappear within hours of the last marijuana use. If no recent use of marijuana, then no California DUI impairment based on marijuana.

California state DUI labs routinely look only for THC-A, the Inactive Metabolite which can be found for many weeks or even months after the last marijuana use.

If there is THC and/or THC-OH in the urine, it still does not show driver impairment.

However, the lack of THC and/or THC-OH shows non-impairment.

The concentrations of THC and THC-OH generally correlate to impairment, albeit imperfectly.

The highest THC blood concentrations often found are generally in driver-induced fatal California DUI accidents.

Consult a California DUI Lawyer for more information.

A Hunch is Not a Proper Reason for a California DUI Stop

California DUI Lawyer update

A Ninth Circuit court stated that a person was stopped unlawfully by Deputy Paonessa of the Sacramento Sheriff’s department.

The Deputy saw the temporary registration tag on the car but claimed “very often” those tags are forged.

California DUI police still need “reasonable suspicion” to stop a car.

California DUI arrestees and all Americans are protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution to be free from unreasonable searched and seizures.

This was a California cop who saw a temporary tag displayed BUT felt like it could be a forgery because they “very often” are! But the Ninth Circuit Court said: “We are unwilling to conclude it is always reasonable to stop a car that does not have any license plates but has a temporary operating permit, because that would effectively mean it is always reasonable to suspect that a temporary operating permit is invalid.” [People v. Hernandez, 21 CA3rd 445]

The Fourth Amendment still applies to cases involving California Drunk Driving.

California DUI Attorneys - take a deep breath.

California DUI - DMV Hearing Officers' Functions Must Be Separate

California DUI Attorney Update

California DUI Lawyers should note the change
re: California DUI - DMV Administrative Per Se
Hearings:

This states California DMV hearing officers, who
handle California DUI Attorneys' clients' DMV
hearings should not also be an investigator,
prosecutor or advocate in the California DUI -
DMV proceedings.


The California Hearing Administrative
Practice (CEB) manual, section 6.21 now states:


… The adjudicative function is to be separated
from the investigative, prosecutorial, and advocacy
functions within the agency (Govt Code section
11425.10(a)( 4) and that the presiding officer may
not have served as an investigator, prosecutor, or advocate
in the proceedings (section 11425.30).


Having an administrative agency sit as investigator, evidence-gatherer, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner violates the law.

Every California DUI Lawyer should be attacking the DMV scheme, which is on all fours with the ABC scheme [Dep't of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd., No. S133331 (Cal. November 13, 2006)], inter alia, as follows:

Due to the inherent conflict of interest in serving as both a prosecutor and a judge in the same proceeding , and because of increased pressure by DMV management on DMV hearing officers to uphold its administrative suspension orders, the licensee objects based upon Federal Due Process and Equal Protection Grounds [Dept. of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board (November 13, 2006) __ Cal 4th __ S133331; Withrow v. Larkin, (1975) 421 U.S. 35, 46-47, Kloepfer v. Commission on Judicial Performance, (1989) 49 Cal.3rd 826, 835] and respectfully requests that an independent administrative law judge be appointed to preside over this hearing. Licensee does not waive his/her constitutional rights to due process of law, and he/she does not consent to having an employee of the DMV, untrained in the law, rule upon this matter.


The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control's procedure for adjudicating
whether licensees violated the terms of their licenses -- wherein a
prosecutor prepares a summary of the evidentiary hearing and recommended
resolution, which he then provides ex parte to the ultimate decision maker
or decision maker's advisor -- violates the California's Administrative
Procedure Act's bar against ex parte communications.
http://caselaw. lp.findlaw. com/data2/ californiastatec ases/s133331. pdf

How long did California DUI Officer Detain You?

California DUI Attorney case: Prolonged Detention Results in Suppression of Evidence

In a recent case which should help California DUI Lawyers, a man was stopped by a police officer who made a pretextual stop based on his trailer hitch ball purportedly blocking vehicle's license plate. The stop was made to investigate his drug suspicion. Officer asks for and receives license and registration.

Officer conducted status check for warrants and information. While officer waited for dispatch to respond, he asked driver if he would "step out and speak to me."

Officer then interrogated driver for 5 to 10 more minutes. Then asked for consent to search vehicle. Driver gave consent.

When officer found nothing, he asked driver for consent to search his person for drugs or weapons. Driver consented and drugs found.

Court of Appeal correctly applied rationale of People v. McGaughran (1979) 25 Cal.3d 577 and other cases, and distinguishing unrelated case law, thereby suppressing the evidence for this prolonged detention. [People v. Deleon (H029563, Sixth Appellate Dist., 4/2/07]

California DUI - DMV Driver Safety Office information

California DUI Driver Safety Offices

Arrested for a California DUI & your California DUI Lawyer will have to contact DMV within 10 days


There are 12 DMV Driver Safety Offices located throughout California for those drivers' California Drunk Driving Attorneys requesting California DUI - DMV administrative hearings or scheduled for departmental re-examinations.

These offices are listed alphabetically.
Simply go to http://www.dmv.ca.gov/fo/fotocds.html in order to obtain detailed information for the Driver Safety office in that California city.

City of Commerce California
El Segundo California
Fresno California
Irvine California
Oakland California
Oxnard California
Sacramento California
San Bernardino California
San Diego California
San Francisco California
San Jose California
Van Nuys California


These California DUI - DMV Administrative Per Se Hearing / Driver Safety offices do not provide basic driver licensing or vehicle registration services. Please visit any DMV Field Offices if you need these services.

Contact a California DUI Attorney for questions on how to contact California DMV.

California DUI Prosecutors rely on a plethora of resources to go after " Drunk Drivers "

California DUI Attorney book information - Drunk Driving books for Prosecutors


California DUI Lawyers are split in two categories:

California DUI Defense Attorneys
v.
California DUI Prosecutors (usually DUI DA's).

California Drunk Driving Defense Attorneys are up against a very high-powered, resource-enriched group of California DUI Prosecutors.

These California DUI Prosecutors are highly trained to convict people charged with DUI or Drunk Driving.


Sample of California DUI books available for California Drunk Driving Prosecutors:

Basic Trial Techniques for Prosecutors


INTRODUCTION:

Every attorney and every case is unique; there are very few hard and fast courtroom techniques and strategies. You must develop your own style and adapt your strategy to each individual case. However, there are maxims or guidelines you should consider in developing your own style and strategies. This monograph is designed to assist you to make appropriate, informed decisions ,by providing differing perspectives, examples and tips.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Drug Evaluation and Classification (DEC) Program

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION:

The DEC program is employed by hundreds of law enforcement agencies at the local, state and federal levels and by private industry. In addition, the program is endorsed by numerous civilian associations and organizations.

To successfully explain the evidence and issues to jurors in Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) and DRE cases, prosecutors must understand the basics of the DEC Program. This publication is designed to provide prosecutors with a basic understanding of the drug evaluation and classification process.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drug Toxicology for Prosecutors

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION: A Horse of a Different Color

Drug impaired drivers kill and maim thousands of people each and every year in the United States. Unfortunately, prosecuting drug-impaired drivers is a daunting task. Jurors, who are very familiar with alcohol’s effects, signs and symptoms, often know little or nothing about other drugs. Tainted by crime shows like CSI: Miami, they may have unrealistic expectations about the nature and quantum of available proof. Unlike alcohol, most states do not have “per se” limits for drugged driving.

To successfully explain the evidence and issues to jurors in Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) cases, prosecutors must understand the basics of drug toxicology.This publication is designed to provide prosecutors with a basic understanding of drug pharmacology and testing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alcohol Toxicology for Prosecutors

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION: USING THE SCIENCE OF TOXICOLOGY AS A SWORD

This publication serves as a guide to the basic principles of toxicology and the role of experts in this science. Patrick Harding, Toxicology Section Supervisor in the Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, brings to these pages more than 25 years of experience in the field of Forensic Alcohol and Other Drugs and on the Board of Directors of the International Association for Chemical Testing. He has testified in more than 500 cases and garnered a national reputation as a lecturer to law enforcement officers and prosecutors.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crash Reconstruction Basics for Prosecutors

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION: MAKING TOUGH DECISIONS

This publication serves as a primer for prosecutors on the basic science, investigative techniques and what questions to ask. Thanks to Professor John Kwasnoski, author and nationally-recognized expert on crash reconstruction, much of the mystery, myth and mathematical phobias surrounding this material will be dispelled.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus - The Science and the Law: A Resource Guide for Judges, Prosecutors and Law Enforcement


This comprehensive publication provides you with an understanding of HGN and its use to detect impairment due to alcohol and certain other drugs. This resource guide explains: how HGN correlates to alcohol and certain other drugs, how it differs from other types of nystagmus and how HGN's reliability has been tested and established in the courts. This guide assists prosecutors to successfully establish the scientific reliability of HGN under the Frye or Daubert standard and provides a comprehensive source of HGN case law from across the country. In addition, the guide contains a bibliography of research studies and articles regarding HGN, as well as, predicate questions for use with police officers, SFST instructors, optometrists, emergency room physicians and research psychologists.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Between the Lines
The National Traffic Law Center's quarterly newsletter, Between the Lines, highlights current issues, events and resources pertaining to the enforcement, prosecution and adjudication of highway safety laws. (No charge)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breath Testing for Prosecutors

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION

Law enforcement officers and prosecutors around the world rely on breath alcohol testing to investigate and/or prove their DUI and DWI cases. They use preliminary breath testing devices (also known as pre-arrest breath testing devices or “PBTs”) and passive alcohol screening devices to identify impaired drivers, evidential breath testing devices (EBTs) to prove their guilt, and ignition interlock devices to ensure that they do not drive under the influence again. These devices share similarities in sampling and, to some degree, in the analytical methods they use. All of them are capable of producing reliable results. However, EBTs are held to much higher administrative standards than screening devices; and are subjected to strict administrative controls and safeguards, including regular inspections and accuracy checks. This paper addresses EBTs only.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prior Convictions in Impaired Driving Prosecutions

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) “approximately 1.4 million drivers were arrested in 2001 for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics.

In a perfect world, a prosecutor could type in the defendant’s name and date of birth and instantly discover the person’s entire driving record, including any prior convictions for DWI. However, in the real world, prosecutors often search numerous locations to determine whether a prior conviction exists, and if it does, where and when it occurred.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overcoming Impaired Driving Defenses

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION: The Art of Anticipating Defenses

Many prosecutors may bristle at an analogy which reduces the criminal justice system to a steeplechase, but this analogy speaks an obvious truth. To successfully prosecute hard core impaired drivers, prosecutors must clear statutory and constitutional hurdles. Prosecutors must demonstrate that every element of the crime has been established beyond a reasonable doubt and that none of the defendant’s constitutional rights were violated.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Admissibility of Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Evidence

Targeting Hardcore Impaired Drivers
INTRODUCTION: THE BEST FIELD SOBRIETY TEST

The HGN test is admissible in a majority of courtrooms in the country. The foundational hurdles placed before prosecutors in many jurisdictions are high, but prosecutors must be willing to fight for HGN’s admissibility.



This publication is currently out-of-print.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Edition

Prior Convictions DUI Prosecutions

This invaluable publication eases the burden of obtaining the documentation necessary to prove prior DUI convictions from other states. Prior Convictions in DUI Prosecutions contains all the information needed to obtain certified copies of prior DUI convictions quickly and easily, including: how to obtain out-of-state driving records showing prior convictions; how to obtain certified copies of conviction from convicting courts; case citations interpreting DUI laws from other states; and text of DUI statutes from every state from 1999-2005.

Please contact LEXIS Law Publishing at 800-562-1197 for price and order information.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

California DUI Lawyers are split in two categories:

California DUI Defense Attorneys
California DUI Prosecutors (usually DUI DA's).

California Drunk Driving Attorneys are up against a very high-powered, resource-enriched group of California DUI Prosecutors. These California DUI Prosecutors are trained to convict people charged with DUI or Drunk Driving.

A California DUI arrestee should know what she or he is up against.

Helmandollar California DUI result Saves License

A Helmandollar plea includes an agreement between the California DUI Attorney and the California DUI Court Prosecutor to have a hearing which results in an Acquittal of California Vehicle Code Section 23152(b) count - driving with a .08% BAC. Under Vehicle Code 13353.2(e), California DMV must reinstate the accused's license. (Helmandollar v. DMV (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 52.)

The California DUI hearing is a bench trial on the (b) count. The California DUI Prosecutor agrees not to present any BAC evidence on the (b) count. It is a unique way short of actually stipulating to the (b) count that he or she can still give you and what you may want. Otherwise, your California Drunk Driving Attorney is gearing up for a California DUI trial.

In related news, Boise State football player Jon Helmandollar was arrested over the weekend for DUI & driving recklessly - allegedly hitting a curb and getting a flat tire. Helmandollar allegedly failed a field sobriety test. DUI Officers claim the BSU player was under the influence of something. But they won't know exactly what, if anything, until results of a DUI toxicology test come back from the state lab. Helmandollar was booked at the County jail for DUI.

Legal Rights at a California DMV Administrative Hearing

What are your legal rights at a San Diego California DMV administrative hearing?

You have the right to be represented by a California attorney or other representative, at your own expense. Representation by a California lawyer is not required but it certainly desirable.

You have the right to review the evidence and to cross-examine the testimony of any witnesses for the department, and to present evidence and witnesses on your own behalf, as well as the right to testify on your own behalf if your California Defense Lawyer suggests.

Following the San Diego California DMV hearing, you have the right to be provided a decision in writing. Should the decision resulting from the hearing be against you, you have the right to request the department to conduct an administrative review of the decision, as well as the right to appeal the decision to superior court.

San Diego California DMV charges a $120 fee for a Departmental Review following an Administrative Per Se (APS) hearing pursuant to California Vehicle Code §§13353 and 13353.2. Questions regarding this should be directed to a California DUI / DMV Defense Attorney.

Requests for the administrative review or to appeal the decision in a California court must be made within a certain time period dependent on the type of hearing and as described in the Vehicle Code. These time periods and other specific information concerning your rights will be stated on the notice containing the hearing decision.

Most-wanted California DUI list

California DUI Defense Lawyer news

A list of most-wanted California DUI drivers is now on the Internet.

The Recidivist California DUI Program targets California DUI arrestees who have at least one prior California DUI, get arrested for another California DUI and fail to show up in court, resulting in bench warrants for their arrest.

17 California DUI cases went online Thursday, with photographs and brief descriptions at http://www.da.saccounty.net/DUIRecidivist under the heading "Most Wanted DUI Offenders."

Igor Stebakov is wanted for an alleged California drunk driving accident in August 2004 that killed a man at Madison Avenue and Sunrise Boulevard. Stebakov initially was booked on a California DUI, but the charge was upgraded after the injured man died.

Kenneth Noblitt had two prior DUI convictions. He was arrested on a subsequent California DUI and failed to appear. He supposedly moved to San Diego. San Diego California DUI police went to Noblitt's mother's house but without luck.

Some California DUI warantees might see themselves on the Web site and turn themselves in, or go to a California DUI lawyer .

California DUI Checkpoint news - Southern California Drunk Driving Checkpoint Friday

July 19, 2007

California DUI Lawyer news - Southern California DUI checkpoint this weekend


WHITTIER California

The Whittier Police Department will hold a California Drunk Driving / California DUI checkpoint Friday and Saturday in the area of Florence Avenue and Orr & Day Road.

The California DUI / California Drunk Driving checkpoint will run from 10 p.m., Friday to 3 a.m., Saturday.

Police will also be checking for unlicensed motorists or those who are driving with a suspended license. Any driver found driving with an invalid license may have their vehicle impounded for 30 days and be issued a citation.

For more California DUI Checkpoint information, call Sgt. Dan Lowe at (562) 945-8256.

If stopped at a California DUI Checkpoint, consult a California Drunk Driving Defense Attorney who can advise you whether that California Drunk Driving roadblock is constitutional or not.

Airbag Can Cause Falsely Elevated California DUI Breath Test

Scenario: California DUI Accident causing airbag to open

The Tyndall Effect causes False California DUI Breath Test Result

July 18, 2007


California DUI Accident causes airbag to deploy.

When an individual later blows into a breath machine using infrared
analysis like the Intoxilyzer, the talc and/or cornstarch is
introduced with the breath sample into the breath analysis chamber.

When the infrared light is shown through the chamber, the light is then
dispersed because of this "Tyndall Effect."

Ultimately, the California DUI Breath Test reading is highly erroneous. When attempting to qualify and quantify for ethyl alcohol, the reading is mistakenly wrong.

When the Intoxilyzer released its 5000 model in the 1980s, the airbag/Tyndall Effect was not a likely issue due to a lack of airbags in vehicles. However, with the mandates for airbags and expansion of their usage within the vehicle, the Tyndall Effect is a major factor in BrAC accuracy. Blood testing is the preferred, more appropriate method to combat the Tyndall Effect.

Individuals have reported regurgitating and spitting out the powdery airbag
substance for two to three hours and more. (See e.g. Andreas Madlung, The Chemistry
behind the Airbag: High Tech in First-Year Chemistry, 73 J.Chem.Educ. 347
(1996).) Epidemiological studies confirm the Tyndall effect - an airbag causes a falsely elevated breath test. Blood draws confirm the Tyndall effect in these studies.

A California Drunk Driving Attorney can help with this issue.

California's DUI Legal Definition - Test within 3 Hours of Driving & Requirements to Follow California DUI Testing Regulations

California Drunk Driving / DUI Attorney - Required Proof in a California DUI case:

To prove that the defendant is guilty of the crime of driving with .08% or more by weigh, the People (Prosecutor) must prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle; and
2. When (he/she) drove, the defendant’s blood alcohol level
was 0.08 percent or more by weight.

If the People have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a
sample of the defendant’s blood or breath was taken within three
hours of the defendant’s driving and that a chemical analysis
of the sample showed a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent
or more, the jury may, but are not required to, conclude that the
defendant’s blood alcohol level was 0.08 percent or more at the
time of the alleged offense.


This explains a rebuttable presumption created by statute. (Veh. Code, § 23152(b); Evid. Code, §§ 600–607.)

The California Supreme Court has held that a jury instruction phrased as a
rebuttable presumption in a criminal case creates an unconstitutional
mandatory presumption. (People v. Roder (1983) 33 Cal.3d 491, 497–505
[189 Cal.Rptr. 501, 658 P.2d 1302].) In accordance with Roder, the
instructions have been written as permissive inferences. In addition, it is only
appropriate to instruct the jury on a permissive inference if there is no
evidence to contradict the inference. (Evid. Code, § 604.) If any evidence
has been introduced to support the opposite factual finding, then the jury
“shall determine the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact from the
evidence and without regard to the presumption.” (Ibid.)

Therefore, the court must not give the legal instruction paragraph that begins with
“If the People have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a sample of” if
there is no substantial evidence that the defendant’s blood alcohol level was
at or above 0.08 percent at the time of the test.


If the evidence demonstrates that the person administering the California drunk driving test or agency maintaining the testing device failed to follow California's Code of Regulations, Title 17, the cout must give the jury the following additional instructions:

[In evaluating any test results in this case, you may consider
whether or not the person administering the test or the agency
maintaining the testing device followed the regulations of the
California Department of Health Services.]


If the evidence demonstrates that the person administering the test or agency
maintaining the California DUI testing device failed to follow the title 17 regulations, the court must give the above instructions that begins with “In evaluating any test results in this case.” (People v. Adams (1976) 59 Cal.App.3d 559, 567 [131 Cal.Rptr. 190] [failure to follow regulations in administering breath test goes to weight, not admissibility, of the evidence]; People v. Williams (2002) 28 Cal.4th 408, 417 [121 Cal.Rptr.2d 854, 49 P.3d 203]

California DUI Attorneys, courts and juries often focus on these important points of law.

California Drunk Driving Lawyer to determine if you were still absorbing alcohol while driving

California DUI Defense Attorney inquiries:

In order for your alcohol level to be accurate and reliable in a California DUI case, the test result should be representative of your true blood alcohol level at the time of driving (vs. the time of the test).

Were you tested during the absorptive or during the post-absorptive phase?
Was your body still absorbing alcohol at time of driving?
Did your body complete absorption of alcohol at the time of the test?

Your California DUI breath or blood test will most likely be unreliable if administered while you were still actively absorbing alcohol.

If you were still aborbing alcohol at the last time you were driving, your alcohol level would have to be lower at the time of driving than at the time of the California DUI test later taken at jail or the police station.

If you had your last alcoholic drink prior to driving, this is a critical factor.

It can take 30 minutes to 3 hours for full alcohol absorption.

If there is food that has not yet digested, this could further delay absorption.

Because of this absorptive phase factor, the results of your California DUI blood or breath test could be inaccurate or unreliable.

Many factors are to be taken into consideration by your experienced California DUI Lawyer.

California DUI with Injury - what does the State have to prove?

California DUI Lawyer - jury instruction

California DUI Causing Injury

DUI - Driving Under the Influence Causing Injury (Veh.
Code, § 23153(a))

The defendant is charged with causing injury to
another person while driving under the influence of (an alcoholic
beverage/ [or] a drug) [or under the combined influence of an
alcoholic beverage and a drug] [in violation of Vehicle Code
section 23153(a)].

To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must
prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle;
2. When (he/she) drove, the defendant was under the influence
of (an alcoholic beverage/ [or] a drug) [or under the
combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and a drug];
3. While driving under the influence, the defendant also
(committed an illegal act/ [or] neglected to perform a legal
duty);
AND
4. The defendant’s (illegal act/ [or] failure to perform a legal
duty) caused bodily injury to another person.

A person is under the influence if, as a result of (drinking [or
consuming] an alcoholic beverage/ [and/or] taking a drug), his or
her mental or physical abilities are so impaired that he or she is
no longer able to drive a vehicle with the caution of a sober
person, using ordinary care, under similar circumstances.
[An alcoholic beverage is a liquid or solid material intended to be
consumed that contains ethanol. Ethanol is also known as ethyl
alcohol, drinking alcohol, or alcohol. [An alcoholic beverage
includes 125
§ 109 or Bus. & Prof. Code, § 23004, e.g., wine, beer>.]]
[A drug is a substance or combination of substances, other than
alcohol, that could so affect the nervous system, brain, or muscles
of a person that it would appreciably impair his or her ability to
drive as an ordinarily cautious person, in full possession of his or
her faculties and using reasonable care, would drive under similar
circumstances.]
[If the People have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant’s blood alcohol level was 0.08 percent or more at the
time of the chemical analysis, you may, but are not required to,
conclude that the defendant was under the influence of an
alcoholic beverage at the time of the alleged offense.]
[In evaluating any test results in this case, you may consider
whether or not the person administering the test or the agency
maintaining the testing device followed the regulations of the
California Department of Health Services.]
[The People allege that the defendant committed the following
illegal act[s]: .
To decide whether the defendant committed name[s] of offense[s]>, please refer to the separate instructions that
I (will give/have given) you on (that/those) crime[s].]
[The People [also] allege that the defendant failed to perform the
following legal (duty/duties) while driving the vehicle: (the duty to
exercise ordinary care at all times and to maintain proper control
of the vehicle/ ).]
[You may not find the defendant guilty unless all of you agree that
the People have proved that the defendant (committed [at least]
one illegal act/[or] failed to perform [at least] one duty).
;
[You must all agree on which (act the defendant committed/ [or]
duty the defendant failed to perform).]

[But you do not have to all agree on which (act the defendant
committed/ [or] duty the defendant failed to perform).]]
[Using ordinary care means using reasonable care to prevent
reasonably foreseeable harm to someone else. A person fails to
exercise ordinary care if he or she (does something that a
reasonably careful person would not do in the same situation/ [or]
fails to do something that a reasonably careful person would do in
the same situation).]
[An act causes bodily injury to another person if the injury is the
direct, natural, and probable consequence of the act and the injury
would not have happened without the act. A natural and probable
consequence is one that a reasonable person would know is likely
to happen if nothing unusual intervenes. In deciding whether a
consequence is natural and probable, consider all the
circumstances established by the evidence.]
[There may be more than one cause of injury. An act causes bodily
injury to another person only if it is a substantial factor in causing
the injury. A substantial factor is more than a trivial or remote
factor. However, it need not be the only factor that causes the
injury.]
[It is not a defense that the defendant was legally entitled to use
the drug.]
[If the defendant was under the influence of (an alcoholic
beverage/ [and/or] a drug), then it is not a defense that something
else also impaired (his/her) ability to drive.]

2100 i

California DUI Lawyer question: Is anonymous tip enough to stop California drunk driver?

California DUI CHP traffic officer Julian Irigoyen was traveling southbound on Highway 99 north of Bakersfield. He received a dispatch report of a possible intoxicated driver “weaving all over the roadway.”

The subject vehicle was described as an ‘80s model blue van traveling northbound on Highway 99 at Airport Drive. Officer Irigoyen saw the blue van, activated his lights and stopped the van to investigate whether the driver was DUI.

Susan Wells, driver of the van, had constricted pupils and a dry mouth and was immediately suspected of being California DUI - under the influence of illegal drugs. She failed California DUI field sobriety tests and was put under arrest. She tested positive for THC, cocaine, and opiates. Heroin and syringes were found in the van. Wells was charged and convicted of possession of heroin and driving under the influence of a controlled substance. She was sentenced to 16 months in state prison.

Wells’ California DUI lawyer challenged the conviction claiming that an anonymous and uncorroborated citizen’s tip of a possibly intoxicated highway driver “weaving all over the roadway” is insufficient to raise a “reasonable suspicion” that justifies stopping the vehicle.

The California Supreme Court decided this important first-impression case by first noting that for vehicle stops, reasonable suspicion is sufficient. Reasonable suspicion can arise from less reliable information than required for probable cause — the standard for personal and home searches. The leading case on anonymous phone tips is Florida v. J.L., handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. In the J.L. case an anonymous tipper claimed a young African-American man in a plaid shirt standing at a particular bus stop was carrying a gun. The high court held the tip insufficient for an arrest — not enough information and a violation of the 4th Amendment protections against illegal searches and seizures.

The California Supreme Court found Susan Wells’ California DUI stop was justified by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. The tipster’s information regarding the van and its location was sufficiently precise justifying an immediate stop to protect both the driver and other motorists. This significant case lowers the threshold for California DUI vehicle stops.

Dissenting opinion
These justices dissented finding that in a vehicle stop case an anonymous uncorroborated tip is insufficient to justify the California DUI stop. The minority justices felt the 4th Amendment and citizens’ rights to privacy trump the ever-growing problem of California drunk drivers.

Your California drunk driving jury trial

In your California drunk driving case, the time may come: a California DUI jury trial date.

Whether or not you desire your California drunk driving case to go to California DUI trial, this trial date will give you one final chance to resolve the California Driving Under the Influence case.

If you decide that you want a California DUI jury trial in your case, your California DUI Attorney trial fees will have to be in full 10 days prior to the California DUI jury trial date.

Payments for a California DUI jury trial are not a viable option.

Begin planning for a California DUI trial now as your aggressive California DUI Lawyer will not be cheap.

California DUI jury trials typically last about 3 to 9 days.

The California DUI jury trial process is a lengthy one.

The first thing to handle are the California DUI Lawyer motions in limine to exclude, preclude or limit California drunk driving evidence.

Then California DUI jury selection or California drunk driving voir dire process begins.

In California DUI cases, there are 12 person juries and usually 1-2 alternate jurors as backup jurors.

All 12 California DUI jurors must agree in order to convict for a California DUI and it will take only one to hang the jury requiring a California drunk driving mistrial.

California DUI Lawyer's criminal court procedure

July 12, 2007

The California DUI criminal case

Your first California DUI criminal court appearance is known as your California DUI arraignment.

This is the time you find out what California DUI - related charges are filed, your California DUI Lawyer enters a Not Guilty plea on your behalf and the California DUI case is continued for pretrial/readiness purposes.

This allows your California Drunk Driving Attorney to request Discovery (evidence) from the Prosecutor. During the following weeks, your California DUI Attorney conducts investigation and analysis of the facts in your California DUI case.

Once received, the evidence including the California DUI police report is forward to you. (Many times the California drunk driving documents are already available from DMV assuming a timely request for hearing was made within 10 days of the California DUI arrest.)

On or before the pretrial conference, a number of things may happen:

• obtaining California DUI evidence,
• possible negotiation of strengths & weaknesses of the California DUI case,
• possible pretrial meeting with the California DUI Prosecutor, and
• scheduling of future California DUI court appearances.

California Deparatment of Insurance to Expand Low Cost Auto Insurance Programs

California DUI Attorney news

July 10, 2007

Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner to Expand Low Cost Automobile Insurance Program to Nine Additional Counties

Commissioner Poizner announced his final determination of need for the program in: Solano, Marin, Santa Cruz, Madera, Napa, Yolo, Mendocino, Kings and Lake Counties

SACRAMENTO California- Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner today announced his final determination of need for the California Low Cost Automobile Insurance program in Solano, Marin, Santa Cruz, Madera, Napa, Yolo, Mendocino, Kings and Lake Counties. The program is expected to go into effect in early September, once rates are set in each of the newly added counties.
Commissioner Poizner's announcement follows a series of community town hall meetings in each of the nine counties to examine the need for the program. Based on those meetings and a determination of need analysis conducted by the California Department of Insurance (CDI), the Commissioner determined that the program should be expanded to include these nine additional counties.
"Driving without insurance is illegal, and nearly 100,000 motorists in these nine counties are uninsured," said Commissioner Poizner. "Many drivers simply cannot afford insurance, but uninsured drivers put all travelers at risk. The expansion of this program in nine additional counties will better enable Californians to comply with the law and protect all motorists from potential losses."
Motorists driving without insurance can have their vehicle registrations suspended as part of SB 1500, a new law designed to reduce the risk of economic losses sustained as the result of collisions involving uninsured motorists.
The low cost auto insurance program provides eligible low-income good drivers with auto liability coverage for under $400 a year and as little as under $300 a year in many counties.
The California Low Cost Automobile Insurance Program initially begun in 1999 as a pilot program in Los Angeles and San Francisco. A new law, SB 20, also authorized the Commissioner to launch the program throughout the state upon his determination of need in each county. Beginning in April 2006, the department began expanding the program statewide. The program is now available in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Alameda, Fresno, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Contra Costa, Imperial, Kern, Sacramento, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Stanislaus, Merced, Monterey, Santa Barbara, Sonoma, Tulare, and Ventura Counties. With the inclusion of Solano, Marin, Santa Cruz, Madera, Napa, Yolo, Mendocino, Kings and Lake Counties, the Low Cost Auto Insurance Program will be available in 31 California counties.
Since its inception, over 33,000 policies have been issued. Program policies are issued by California licensed insurers and the program is administered by the California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan. Rates are set in each county so that premiums are sufficient to cover losses and expenses in each county to ensure the program is self-sustaining.
To be eligible for the program, an applicant must be a "good driver" - no more than one at-fault property damage only accident, or one point for a moving violation in the past three years; and no at-fault accident involving bodily injury or death in the past three years; and no felony or misdemeanor conviction for a violation of the Vehicle Code.
Additionally, family income cannot exceed 250 percent of the federal poverty level ($25,525 for a single person, $34,225 for two persons and $51,625 for a family of four). The value of an insured vehicle must not exceed $20,000. For more information about the program, call 1-866-60-AUTO-1 (1-866-602-8861)

Please visit the Department of Insurance Web site at http://www.insurance.ca.gov. Non media inquiries should be directed to the Consumer Hotline at 800.927.HELP. Callers from out of state, please dial 213.897.8921.

Moderate alcohol consumption generates significant life extending benefits - California DUI news

California drunk driving lawyer news:

July 12, 2007

The Archives of Internal Medicine claims moderate drinking may lengthen life while excessive drinking may shorten it.

The study is based on a survey of 34 large studies analyzing data from more than 1,000,000 people and 94,000 deaths.

The study defined moderate drinking as drinking up to four drinks a day for men and two drinks a day for women. The study concluded such moderate drinking was found to reduce the risk of death from any cause by about 18%.

But data suggests that when these standards are exceeded, Dr. Augusto Di Castelnuevo, from Catholic University of Campobasso, states “things radically change.” The reason for the different number of drinks between men and women has to do with the manner in which alcohol is metabolized.

Women, who drink two alcoholic beverages, experience the same effects from alcohol as men who drink four. This discrepancy also led the scientists to determine that women who drink more than two drinks a day run a higher chance of liver disease and cancer.

The study concluded that drinking small amounts of alcohol during meals reaped the most significant health benefits. This conclusion was in keeping with other scientific studies indicating that the “Mediterranean Diet” was healthy.

The ultimate finding was that small amounts of alcohol generate significant life extending benefits.

So a moderate amount of alcohol consumed before driving may be both legal ( and not cause a California DUI or California Drunk Driving ) and generate life extension prospects.

California DUI Lawyer seeks continuance of Nicole Richie drunk driving case

LOS ANGELES DUI news, California DUI

July 10, 2007

Nicole Richie's California Drunk Driving Lawyer appeared in court to request a delay of the celebutante’s trial on a California DUI charge.

Richie’s California DUI Lawyer / California Drunk Driving Attorney was expected in court tomorrow for a hearing on the case, but turned up earlier today, instead. The “Simple Life” star’s California DUI lawyer — Shawn Chapman-Holley, an associate of Richie’s original lawyer Howard Weitzman (he was also Paris Hilton’s original DUI attorney) argued Richie’s case should be continued because an expert was unavailable to testify in the California DUI trial.

The motion explained that defense witness Dr. Terence Sean McGee was unavailable to testify immediately. They claim “his testimony will be critical to Miss Richie’s case,” in the filing as he can “challenge the prosecution’s scientific evidence and the conclusions reached by the drug recognition expert.”Dr. McGee will be available, the defense asserts, in August.

A judge did not immediately rule on the filing, but ordered the parties involved to return to court on Wednesday to argue the motion and continue the California DUI case.

If the motion is denied, the next stage of the case will be a California DUI / drunk driving jury trial.

California DUI even if your BAC is under .08% - Retrograde Extrapolation

If you take a test at the police station or jail and your BAC is under .08%, can you still face a California DUI / California drunk driving charge?

Yes. You can and will be charged with California DUI and possibly with .08% or over.

San Diego County California prosecutors will attempt to prosecute such a California DUI using DUI prosecution experts' opinion that drivers are impaired at .05% BAC and/or using the “retrograde extrapolation” theory.

Under this California DUI theory, you could have metabolized the alcohol in your system before authorities could measure it, and that the value measured once the paperwork and booking was complete was lower than the legal limit, and lower than what would have been measured at the time of driving.

This retrograde extrapolation theory allows the prosecutor to attempt to guess your BAC value which could have been earlier based on the findings of later tests.

This flawed method of testing is based on a number of subjective criteria:

The time you began drinking alcohol
The amount, type, and rate of alcohol you consumed
The amount, type, and rate of any food eaten
The time since you stopped drinking
Your weight and gender
An indication of your "tolerance" and drinking experience
Physical observation of you at the time
and/or
The state of your physical and emotional condition at the time.

Should you even hire a California DUI Lawyer?

Reasons to retain a California Drunk Driving Attorney or California DUI Lawyer Specialist:

• 
  To have top, aggressive representation which means the best possible quality outcome in your California DUI case.

• 
  If your case is filed as a California misdemeanor, California law permits the California DUI Lawyer to attend all of the California DUI court appearances on your behalf.

• You will not have to miss work and you will not have to suffer the stress of appearing in California DUI court.

• To resolve your California DUI Lawyer case to your satisfaction without you ever having to set foot in the California DUI courtroom.

• 
  The more experience your California DUI Attorney has with California DUI cases, the better your result!

California DUI deaths over weekend

California drunk driving lawyer news:
07-07-07 Two Hayward California men were killed today when their car slammed into a pine tree in what investigators suspect was a California drunk driving / DUI accident.

Questions if California DUI hand-held breath test

Did California DUI officer tell it is a voluntary field test? Did California DUI officer continuosly observe you for 15 minutes before you blew? Did Cal. DUI cop have to get gadget out of vehicle after coordination tests? Did California drink driving officer show or tell you the numerical results? Your California DUI attorney will help answer these questions.

Minimize your Risk of a California DUI or California Drunk Driving

Minimizing Your Risk of Being Convicted of a California DUI or California Drunk Driving

Saving Your Driving Privileges In California

When questioned for a California Drunk Driving or California DUI before arrest, you are not in custody for the purposes of Miranda warnings. If you politely refuse to answer any of the cop's questions concerning the California DUI investigation, either before or after the arrest, then there won't be any statements that can be used against you in California DUI court.

California DUI Field Sobriety Tests are completely voluntary. If you perform them, you may be arrested anyway. It may be better not to give the cop evidence that will be used against you in court. You can politely refuse to do the Field Sobriety Exercises.

Refuse to take the preliminary alcohol screening test. If you are older than 21, the test is voluntary and you have the right to refuse this type of breath test.

When given a choice of blood, breath or urine test after arrest, choose a urine test if it is available. It is the most unreliable; however, the officer may only offer a blood or breath test.

If no urine test is available, choose a breath test. The breath machines are not 100% accurate and there are many possibilities for error. See California DUI & Drunk Driving Defenses to San Diego County Breath Test at http://www.SanDiegoDrunkDrivingAttorney.net .

Contact a friend or relative from jail as soon as possible so they can hear you speak and note your state of sobriety.

Always be polite and respectful to the police officers. How you are perceived by a jury is extremely critical.

Some jurisdictions video the arrest, breath testing and/or booking process. Always be on your best behavior.

Make a detailed list of all the events before being stopped up to and including being released from custody.

Retain an experienced California DUI/DMV defense attorney to represent you. Only an experienced California DUI/DMV defense attorney is able to spot your favorable issues and present them to prosecutor, judge , jury, or California DMV hearing officer.

Remember, the best way to avoid a California DUI conviction or California DMV suspension is to not drink and drive in California.

Purchasing a Portable Breath Tester will also assist you in determining your alcohol level before you drive.

The way our California DUI laws are going, even if you've had only a small amount of alcohol and you are not impaired, as long as you smell like alcohol your chances of being arrested for California drunk driving are very high. Being arrested for California DUI does not automatically result in a conviction or loss of your driver's license. Protect your California DUI lawyer rights and save your California license.

These Top Ten California DUI tips are designed to provide accurate and authoritative information. It is not designed to render legal opinions. Contact an experienced California Drunk Driving Attorney for opinions.

July 4th California DUI Lawyer - Enforcement Way Up

California DUI Lawyer update

California DUI Police focus on preventing California drunk driving

July 4, 2007

California Drunk Driving and Bay Area DUI law enforcement is teaming up over the Fourth of July holiday to keep roads safe from California drunk drivers.

Officers will be trying to arrest California DUI offenders before incidents occur that may end in injuries or fatalities.

All California Highway Patrol will have increased staff during July 3rd and 4th as well as the upcoming weekend.

Probable Cause must first exist for a California DUI

California DUI Drunk Driving Attorney news:

July 3, 2007

PC to contact or stop the motor vehicle is always a possible issue in a San Diego California DUI case.

Without proper legal cause to detain or stop a San Diego California DUI suspect, any evidence obtained as a result of the stop (all California drunk driving evidence except driving observations) should be suppressed. Suppression means the San Diego DUI court cannot consider the evidence. This includes suppression of any blood and/or breath test evidence in the San Diego California drunk driving case. The San Diego California DUI prosecutor must justify the investigatory detention.

If there are not objective and articulable facts upon which to warrant detaining the driver beyond a brief stop, then a motion to suppress could be made by the San Diego California DUI lawyer.

In a San Diego California DUI case, there are hundreds of potentially applicable federal and California cases interpreting what constitutes sufficient probable cause to justify stopping, detaining, and arresting a driver. That is why it is important to consult with a San Diego California DUI attorney.

http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net

Police Officer gets popped for California DUI / California Drunk Driving

LOS ANGELES California DUI news:

July 2, 2007

Los Angeles Police Department traffic division officer was arrested during the weekend for investigation of California DUI / driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Brian Lawrence Gossh, 27, was arrested in Van Nuys, booked into jail Sunday and then released. Even cops get California DUI's.

DUI can be Murder in California

STOCKTON California DUI news

Luis Lua Sr. was allegedly DUI or driving drunk yet again, according to prosecutors, when he allegedly rammed into the rear of a van stopped at a North Wilson Way signal last year, killing 9-year-old Marcus Rocha.
It's not likely Lua will repeat his mistake, said San Joaquin County Deputy District Attorney Kevin Ford, who is prosecuting Lua under a 1996 law that carries the same 15-to-life prison sentence as those convicted of second-degree murder.
Ford said Lua, 51, is the first defendant he knows of in San Joaquin County prosecuted under Courtney's Law, named for 15-year-old Courtney Cheney of Roseville, who was killed in 1995 in an accident caused by a man with numerous drunken-driving convictions.
The law more than doubles a prison sentence for motorists convicted of gross vehicular manslaughter who have two or more previous convictions for California DUI /drunk driving or one prior conviction for vehicular manslaughter.
Lawmakers enacted the bill out of a frustration for repeat offenders who received punishment that they deemed too light, Ford said. Lua is scheduled to go to trial in August in the San Joaquin County Superior Court. He remains at the County Jail. San Joaquin County Deputy Public Defender Paul Schultz did not respond to calls seeking comment.
In the Sept. 23 accident, Marcus was in the family minivan's back seat. His mother, who drove, stopped at a red light on North Wilson Way at Newton Road, Ford said.
Lua was driving on a suspended license, and he had a blood-alcohol level of 0.23, nearly three times the legal limit. Lua had four California DUI /drunk driving convictions since the mid-1980s, making him eligible for prosecution under Courtney's Law, Ford said.
Lodi's Dale Eisner also awaits trial under a stricter law. He is accused of being drunk when he caused a fatal collision Dec. 22 on Highway 12 that killed Pierre Ackermann, 27, and left his wife, Faith Ackermann, with a mental capacity of a 4-year-old.
Eisner is charged with second-degree murder because prosecutors said he had been convicted of drunken driving six months before the fatal accident. At that time, Eisner had to sign a statement acknowledging he could be charged with murder if he caused a fatal accident while under the influence.
Franz Kegel, a spokesman for the Stockton chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, said he favors stringent punishment for drunken drivers. Kegel lost his two daughters 22 years ago to a drunken driver, who also died in the accident.
Kegel said he focuses on those survivors who have to live on in the wake of a DUI / drunken driver's fatal decision to get behind the wheel while allegedly DUI.

How can you find a qualified California DUI Lawyer ?

California DUI Lawyer Information

How Can You find a Qualified California DUI Attorney?

Various types of lawyers try to handle California Drunk Driving cases including public defenders, general practitioners, criminal defense lawyers, and DUI Specialist attorneys.

A California public defender is a California attorney provided at little or no cost to provide defense services to people who financially are unable to hire a private California lawyer. Most California counties do not offer public defenders services unless you are unemployed, significantly under-employed and/or have no assets.

Some excellent questions to begin ask when searching for a California DUI lawyer include:

What are his or her California DUI attorney's qualifications?

Is he or she a Specialist member of the California DUI Lawyers Association?

Is he or she a member of the National College for DUI Defense?

Whether or not you ultimately end up hiring a California DUI Specialist attorney, it is a smart idea to speak to a California DUI Specialist lawyer in this highly complex field.

You can read more -Why use San Diego County's Specialist in DUI and DMV Law http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net/why.html . Or try a Free California DUI Evaluation at http://www.sandiegodrunkdrivingattorney.net/survey.html .