by

A BETTER WAY TO TREAT DUIs

You have probably heard that the so-called “War on Drugs” has been lost. Increasingly law enforcement and the courts are recognizing that punishment does not resolve the offender’s drug addictions. New sentencing schemes are being developed that focus less on punishing the chronic drug offender than addressing the underlying cause of his or her arrest, i.e., drug addiction.

Although many people don’t put alcohol in the same category as drugs because alcohol is legal, it is actually one of the most potent drugs available. Some individuals are addicted to alcohol and it is a drug addiction even though we call it “alcoholism.”

Continue reading →

by

THE ONE DRINK AN HOUR RULE

Have you ever heard of the “One Drink an Hour Rule?” According to this rule, if have only drink per hour, your blood alcohol level (BAC) will remain under the legal DUI limit of .08%. (One drink is roughly defined as 1 1/4 ounce of hard liquor, one beer or one glass of wine.) Is this true?

Well, it depends. There is actually no hard and fast rule and a variety of factors can affect your BAC. Things such as your weight, whether you’re eating while you are drinking, and whether you are male or female will influence your blood alcohol level. For example, a female who weighs 110 pounds and has only two drinks in two hours will almost certainly have a BAC of over .08%, while a man weighing over 210 pounds might not register a BAC of over .08% until he has had four drinks during those two hours. Different body types process alcohol differently for several reasons, including body fat content and the concentration of the liver enzyme that breaks down the alcohol. Hormones may also be a factor.

Continue reading →

by

california supreme court holds that circumstantial evidence of intoxication may be considered in dui hearings

A driver was pulled over in Orange County by the CHP when the officer observed her car swerving erratically. Upon contacting the driver, the officer observed indications that she had been drinking alcohol. The officer performed various field sobriety tests on the driver, the result of which further indicated to the officer that the driver was under the influence of alcohol. The driver was placed under arrest and it was determined by a breath test that she had a blood alcohol level near the threshold legal limit of .08%. A later blood draw indicated a blood alcohol level slightly over the limit at .096%.

She exercised her option to have a DMV Administrative Per Se Hearing to challenge the automatic suspension of her driver license. At the hearing, an expert testified on her behalf. According to the expert, the blood alcohol tests suggested that here blood alcohol level was rising and that at the time of the stop, her blood alcohol level was not at the legal limit of .08%. The expert’s testimony is technical and not relevant for purposes here. Suffice it to say that the gist of the driver’s argument was that she introduced evidence of a fact that rebutted the presumption that she was driving under the influence but the administrative hearing officer and the trial court discounted that evidence (the expert’s testimony) in part by relying on the reports made by the CHP officers who stopped her. The Supreme Court was ultimately tasked with deciding whether the trial court erred by considering the circumstantial evidence established by the officers’ reports of their observations. On April 6, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its ruling where it held that the trial court did not err.

Continue reading →

by

Drugged Driving, A Growing Threat

 

Drugged driving is a dangerous trend on US highways. According to The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, there is a significant increase in drivers driving with illegal, prescription and over-the-counter drugs in their system. Part of this may be due to the fact that people don’t realize that, just because you have a prescription for a drug, doesn’t mean that it is legal to drive while under it’s influence. The same holds true for some over-the-counter drugs. While they are not illegal, if you are driving while under it’s influence and it affects your driving, you are driving under the influence.   The drug showing the greatest increase is marijuana or THC, most likely due to it’s recent legalization in some states. However, the two most common prescription drugs found in fatality and serious accidents are benzodiazepines and opiates.

 

Although drug-impaired driving is evident in all age groups, the focus seems to be on teens and seniors. According to the NHTSA, two-thirds of senior drivers take five or more medications daily that may affect their driving. Also disturbing is that approximately 23 percent of all fatally injured drivers who test positive for drugs are younger than 25.

Continue reading →

by

DOUBLE JEOPARDY? DUI ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS AND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT

An arrest for DUI with a blood alcohol level (BAC) over 0.08% triggers two entirely separate proceedings: 1) a DMV administrative per se hearing/determination with possible license suspension and 2) a criminal hearing that also carries a possible license suspension. It can happen that the DMV suspends a driver’s license pursuant to the DMV administrative per se determination and then a court conviction on the DUI triggers another license suspension. Usually, these suspensions will run concurrently, but not always.

How can a driver essentially be punished twice for the same offense? Isn’t this double jeopardy? Well, according to the United States Supreme Court, it is not. (Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. 93 (1997).) The reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s decision has to do with the nature of the “punishment.”

The DMV suspension is considered a sanction that is civil rather than criminal. The California Courts have held that the statutory provisions concerning the DMV administrative per se license suspension have the intent to protect the public rather than punish the licensee. Therefore, when a driver’s license is suspended administratively by the DMV, the driver is not being criminally punished. You might be thinking….well, if it walks like a duck…. but the courts have reasoned otherwise.

Continue reading →

by

BOATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE

California offers an abundance of outdoor activities. In the summer, we head out for the ocean, lakes and rivers with boats and jet skis in tow. Sunscreen? Check! Beach towels? Check! Beer in the cooler? Check! Designated boat driver? Ummm….

In California it is just as illegal to drive a boat while under the influence of alcohol or drugs as it is to drive a car. The laws concerning boating while under the influence are virtually the same as those for driving under the influence. You can be arrested for driving a boat, manning jet skis, or any motorized device, or, for that matter, manipulating water skis or similar equipment, if you are under the influence of any alcoholic beverage, drug, or combination of the two. In other words, the law encompasses more than just driving a boat; it’s illegal to operate or manipulate almost any equipment on the water while under the influence. Yes, you can be arrested for waterskiing or wakeboarding if you are under the influence while doing so!

Continue reading →

by

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A CALIFORNIA DRIVER IS ARRESTED FOR DUI/DWI IN ANOTHER STATE

Most states, including California, are members of the Interstate Driver’s License Compact (DLC), which is administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The DLC is an agreement between member states to share information about driver violations, including DUI/DWI driving convictions. Pursuant to the DLC, member states are required to report driving convictions to the state in which the driver holds a driver’s license.

Let’s say you are on vacation in Arizona, you go out for a night on the town and get stopped and arrested and eventually convicted of driving under the influence (DUI). Or let’s say you used to live in Texas but now live in California. Four years ago, you were convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) in Texas. In both of these cases and in almost any case where a California driver has an out-of-state DUI/DWI conviction on his or her record, it will be treated as a DUI on the California driver’s record as if the DUI conviction occurred in California.

In the case of our hypothetical California driver convicted of DUI in Arizona, the statute mandates the suspension or revocation (depending on prior DUI convictions) of the driver’s California license to drive, just as if the conviction occurred in California. In the case of the Texas driver who moved to California, the DWI conviction will remain on the driver’s California record just as if the driver had been convicted four years ago of a DUI in California . In both cases, the out-of-state DUI/DWI conviction will appear on the California driver’s record and will count as a prior DUI under California law.

Continue reading →

by

ORANGE COUNTY COURT CLERK BUSTED FOR “FIXING” DUI CASES

Many of us are familiar with the blatant corruption in some countries where you just pay off the cop that stopped you and be on your merry way. Well, Orange County apparently has its own version of corruption, a court clerk who we might call “The Fixer”.

According to news reports, an unidentified court clerk was fixing DUI charges… for a hefty fee. This clerk was charging thousands of dollars to drivers who were facing DUI and misdemeanor traffic cases in Orange County courts to alter their case record. Among the alterations were changes to case records to create fake plea bargains to a lesser charge, dismissed charges and lowered penalties.

The fixed cases go back to 2006 and are reported to involve over 1,000 cases. It was first discovered late this winter when a single missing document in a DUI case triggered an investigation. The deception was brazen as this clerk not only made up a plea bargain but also “assigned” to the defendants a defense attorney who never actually represented the defendant. The clerk achieved this fraud by figuring out how to enter the computerized court system and make the unauthorized changes.

Continue reading →

by

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA

 

Just as it is illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol, it is illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana. It does not matter if the driver has a Medical Marijuana Identification Card; it is still a violation to drive while under the influence of any substance, including marijuana, if that substance affects your ability to drive safely. The statute[1] itself is vague and requires the subjective observations of the officer.

An arrest for driving under the influence of marijuana is treated much the same as an arrest for drunk driving except that the arresting officer will not suspend the driver’s license to drive immediately upon arrest. However, if the driver is convicted of the charge, the court will inform the DMV of the conviction and the DMV will proceed on suspension of the driver’s license to drive and the driver will be required to take DUI classes.

But just how does the prosecution prove that someone was driving under the influence of marijuana? After the arrest, the driver’s blood or urine will be tested for the presence of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol). But detection of THC in a person’s system does not establish evidence that the driver was impaired by this substance. The compound THC, which is the chemical that causes a person to get “high” on marijuana, can stay in a person’s system long after the high has worn off. In fact, THC can stay in a person’s system for days. Therefore, it is not enough for the prosecution to establish that the person had THC in his or her system at the time of the arrest, there must be a connection between the THC levels detected in the driver’s system and his or her driving impairment. Even the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has stated that it is difficult to establish the effects of THC in a person’s blood and his or her driving performance.[2]

Continue reading →

by

Penal Code Section 191.5 defines Gross Vehicular Manslaughter as:

(a) The unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, in the driving of a vehicle, where the driving was in violation of Section 23140, 23152, or 23153 of the Vehicle Code, and the killing was either the proximate result of the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony, and with gross negligence, or the proximate result of the commission of a lawful act that might produce death, in an unlawful manner, and with gross negligence. A conviction of 191.5(a) is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for 4, 6, or 10 years.

(b)  The unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, in the driving of a vehicle, where the driving was in violation of Section 23140, 23152, or 23153 of the Vehicle Code, and the killing was either the proximate result of the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony, but without gross negligence, or the proximate result of the commission of a lawful act that might produce death, in an unlawful manner, but without gross negligence.  A conviction of 191.5(b) is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for 16 months or two or four years.

You may be charged with vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated if you: (1) Are driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol; (2) Your actions could result in the death of another; and (3) Someone is killed as a result of your negligence.

Continue reading →