Four-Headed DUI Monster Stunned by Latest Round of Decisions pursued by California DUI Attorneys
If arrested for a DUI, you know the odds are stacked up against you as these are very difficult cases for a citizen's lawyer to prevail on.
In recent years, the trend has been for the legislature and the courts to take tough stands on Drunk Driving. The lengths at which MADD will go knows no boundaries. Rights of the accused have been diminished. In some cases, attorneys' defenses have been entirely taken away.
Until now.
The Four-Headed DUI Monster "PPDJ" has taken a few hits this year.
By way of background, PPDJ's 4 heads are the:
1) Police
2) Prosecutor
3) DMV
4) Judge
A DUI arrest means the person was first arrested by the Police, charged with DUI by the Prosecutor, suspended by the DMV and presided over - and often sentenced by - the Judge.
This usually means one DUI criminal defense lawyer deals with all 4 heads at one time or another. The few setbacks of the monster included two victories by premier San Diego DUI criminal defense attorneys.
A) The first - Lack of Accuracy / Margin of Error - case held:
Motorist prevails at DMV hearing when there is evidence that blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing device was producing readings .002 percent higher than a calibrated sample rebutted the prima facie showing by Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) that motorist's blood-alcohol level was .08 percent or higher based on two identical readings of .08 percent and the presumption that an official duty has been regularly performed, thus shifting the burden back to DMV, even though a test result reported as .08 percent could actually represent a BAC anywhere between .080 and .089 percent.
Nothing in the regulatory scheme requiring forensic testing agencies to ensure their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing instruments meet a minimum level of accuracy precludes a driver from introducing evidence that the instrument used to test his or her BAC deviated by some measure less than .01 percent of the true value, or precludes a trial court from considering such a deviation in determining whether an administrative license suspension is supported by sufficient evidence. 17 CCR § 1221.4(a)(2). The regulation requiring blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test results to be reported only to the second decimal place does not preclude a driver from offering evidence that a testing device deviated by hundredths of a percentage, in challenging an administrative license suspension. 17 CCR § 1220.4.
[Brenner v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 189 Cal.App.4th 365, 116 Cal.Rptr.3d 716, 10 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 13,284, 2010 Daily Journal D.A.R. 16,015 (Cal.App. 1 Dist. Oct 18, 2010) (NO. A126745), review denied (Feb 02, 2011)]
B) The second - California DUI Checkpoint - case held:
The Prosecuting attorney did not sustained the state's burden of proof in establishing the California DUI checkpoint factors under Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1321 as to at least (i) the role of supervisory personnel in prescribing the procedures to be used at the checkpoint, (ii) the rationale for selecting the particular location used for the checkpoint, (iii) the length of detentions, and (iv) advance publicity. Also noted was (v) the thin evidence of neutral criteria used when fewer than five cars were pulled over at a time.
[People v. Walter Alvarado, Filed 2/7/11 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION from the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, Case No. 6591, Superior Court No. 2404632]
C) The third - DMV procedural - case held:
The driver's due process rights were violated by San Diego DMV's Hearing Officer Jacqueline Denney because he was deprived of the opportunity to present a meaningful defense to the DMV's proceeding to suspend his driving privilege.
Petrus's DUI/DMV attorney received the blood test results only minutes before the commencement of the hearing at the beginning of which he objected to receiving discovery on the day of the hearing. The blood test showed a purported BAC of .18%. The hearing officer asked the DUI lawyer if he was ready to proceed and he said yes. The hearing officer then identified the exhibits she intended to introduce into evidence and asked if the driver objected. The DUI lawyer objected to the blood test report on the basis of discovery rules violation. The hearing officer overruled the objection and admitted the report into evidence. The DUI attorney then asked for a continuance, which was denied because counsel made no offer of proof as to why additional time and a continuance was necessary.
No offer of proof was needed as the court overturned the suspension. Due process requires full and fair administrative hearings that provide drivers a " ‘meaningful opportunity to present their case.' " Government Code section 11513 (b) states that each party has the right to rebut the evidence against him or her. Petrus had sufficient time to review the number indicating the blood alcohol content, but not an opportunity to rebut that evidence.
The court noted that in Glatman v. Valverde, the appellate court concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the forensic report was not prepared "at or near the time of the recorded event" because the record contained no support for the assertion that the analysts promptly entered the test results into the computer database, thus the suspension was set aside. [forensic report dated a week after the arrest].) Assuming arguendo Petrus had the opportunity to rebut, he is only required to present evidence that official standards were not observed similar to the licensee in Glatman, not the "marshalling of complex scientific evidence" to possibly set aside his license suspension.
[Edmond Petrus v.STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, No. D057523. San Diego Super.Ct.No. 37–2009–00101417–CU–WM–CTL, April 7, 2011.]
In sum, now with Brenner, Alvarado and Petrus, the Four-Headed Prosecutorial DUI Monster can be better kept in check.
Questions and Answers
Drunk driving is actually a significant problem and 1 which you could expect the authorities to not consider as lightly since they did some ages back again and that is why you would like San Diego DUI lawyer. Make no miscalculation, drunk driving is really serious enterprise and when you will be charged that has a DUI, the punishments may be quite severe, despite which state you come about for being billed in or in spite of any previous criminal information. That's why in these predicaments, it
If you live in San Diego, California, you might be arrested by police and sent to San Diego county jail. You could be stopped for a driving infraction and taken to jail. They could also come to your home or office.
Being arrested for a DUI can be a stressful predicament - especially if this if your first arrest. It's important to know that if you are arrested for a DUI, you have a right to a preliminary hearing.
If ever you have been falsely arrested for DUI, it is imminent and important for you to find a great DUI lawyer in San Diego. The San Diego DUI law follows the California law on DUI which is one of the strictest and most inflexible in the country.
San Diego DUI Bankrutcy Lawyer Personal Injury Criminal Defense Attorney CA
California DUI checkpoints must follow strict criteria set forth by the California Supreme Court in Ingersoll vs. Palmer. If the police do not follow these constitutional requirements outlined in Ingersoll, the checkpoint is not lawful. That means any evidence gathered during a San Diego California DUI arrest may not be...
Before we can answer the question of the role of Alcoholics Anonymous in restoring drivers licenses, it's helpful first to briefly review the Michigan drivers license restoration process and what you must prove.
In many cases, especially when the crime is publicly scorned (i.e. DUI, domestic violence, animal cruelty, sex offenses) yet a bona-fide defense exists, one should consider waiving a jury trial. The case is then tried to only the judge. This can make it easier to focus the case on evidence and argument that matters most toward a not guilty verdict, rather than spending a lot of time and effort persuading twelve jurors to put aside their biases.
When someone moves into an assisted living center, that person is likely not doing so with much in the way of excitement or happiness.
The Criminal lawyers Ottawa have special skills to fight out both simple and complicated cases and help you the best legal justice ever.
A professional criminal attorney in Los Angeles can surely get your name off the list of criminals in the city if you really are innocent. It does not actually matter if you go for a professional Los Angeles criminal attorney that charges lower or higher compared to others.
California DUI checkpoints must follow strict criteria set forth by the California Supreme Court in Ingersoll vs. Palmer. If the police do not follow these constitutional requirements outlined in Ingersoll, the checkpoint is not lawful. That means any evidence gathered during a San Diego California DUI arrest may not be...
Though not expressly stated in VC §§13353(c)(2) or 13557(b)(2)(B), other statutes and case authority establish that what is actually required in a DMV administrative per se hearing as a result of a California DUI arrest is proof that the person was “lawfully” arrested.
Laboratory analysts must now appear in court and submit themselves to cross-examination if their reports are admitted into evidence, according to a brand new ruling by the United States Supreme Court.
If you live in San Diego, California, you might be arrested by police and sent to San Diego county jail. You could be stopped for a driving infraction and taken to jail. They could also come to your home or office.
