The Law Office of Derek J. King successfully obtained a motion to dismiss in Sacramento Superior Court on May 14, 2010. The client was charged with two misdemeanor traffic violations based on driving with a suspended license, but due to Constitutional speedy trial violations, the District Attorney agreed to dismiss both cases.
On May 7, 2010, the Law Office of Derek J. King represented a DUI client in Modesto, CA, during a motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5. The defendant’s motion to suppress evidence was granted, and the case subsequently dismissed by the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s office.
Posted in Uncategorized
Those convicted of drunk driving may face a variety of penalties, ranging from fines and fees to incarceration. For first-time offenders in particular California counties, though, new penalties are coming. Beginning July 1, 2010, all individuals convicted of drunk driving in Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento and Tulare counties will be required to install ignition interlock devices on any vehicles they own or operate.
Ignition interlock devices are in-car breathalyzers; when a vehicle is equipped with such a device, the driver is required to blow into the device before starting the vehicle. It will not start if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration level is above a pre-set limit.
Although ignition interlock devices are not new, this is the first time these devices have been required for all offenders — including those with no prior convictions for DUI.
This change comes as part of a pilot program established by California Assembly Bill 91. Under AB 91, if the drunk driving incident does not result in any injuries, first-time offenders must use ignition interlock devices for five months. In cases involving injury, the device is required for a year. Time periods increase with subsequent offenses.
To ensure that interlock devices aren’t prohibitively expensive, AB 91 requires manufacturers to adopt fee schedules based on ability to pay. Anyone whose income is less than 300 percent of the federal poverty level will only pay a fraction of the cost of installing and maintaining the device.
Are Ignition Interlock Devices Really Necessary for Everyone?
According to the Office of Traffic Safety, alcohol-related traffic deaths have been declining in California. In 2008, there were 1,029 alcohol-related traffic deaths, down for the third year in a row. However, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, California’s drunk driving fatalities are still among the highest in the nation.
In 2005, New Mexico first demonstrated the efficacy of mandatory ignition interlock devices. According to the New York Times, the state experienced a 35 percent drop in drunk driving fatalities and a 65 percent drop in drunk driving recidivism after its mandatory ignition interlock law took effect.
Based on this information alone, it is easy to understand why ignition interlock devices garner public support. At the same time though, it is important to consider the full implications of installing these devices.
The pilot program reduces the costs of the devices, but they are still expensive. Moreover, the devices are intrusive and have the practical effect of public shaming. Every time someone has to drive — whether transporting clients for work purposes or simply leaving the grocery store — that person is required to blow into the interlock device.
Notably, this includes drivers who are not convicted of drunk driving. Oftentimes people share vehicles. These laws can place burdens on individuals who have done absolutely nothing wrong, but share a vehicle with someone convicted of drunk driving.
Fortunately, the California legislature has started with small steps in limiting the pilot program to four counties. The California Department of Motor Vehicles is expected to collect data on the pilot and report results of the experiment to the legislature by Jan. 1, 2015.
For people in these counties though, this means one more potential penalty to worry about when stopped for drunk driving. If you have been accused of driving under the influence, speak to a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney to discuss your concerns and protect your legal rights.
Article provided by Ahmed & Sukaram, Attorneys at Law
Posted in Uncategorized
A state senator was arrested this morning on suspicion of drunk driving in downtown Sacramento, authorities said.
State Sen. Roy Ashburn (photo left), R-Bakersfield, was booked into Sacramento County Jail by the California Highway Patrol.
A spokesman for the CHP said that Ashburn’s vehicle was observed weaving on L Street near 13th Street shortly before 2 a.m.
Ashburn was cooperative during the arrest and booking process. The officer observed signs of intoxication and Ashburn was administered a field sobriety test.
He was also administered a chemical test, which could be a breath or blood test for level of intoxication, the CHP spokesman said. Results of the test are pending.
Ashburn represents the 18th district, including Kern, Tulare, Inyo, and San Bernardino counties.
The legislator’s Web site said he has focused on creating jobs, reforming California’s welfare system, reducing crime and increasing public safety.
Schmerber v. California is perhaps the foremost authority which establishes the following precedent: if a forced blood draw is made in a safe manner and in a medically approved setting, the blood sample is admissible as evidence in a court of law. In other words, if a DUI suspect refuses to give a breath or blood test after they are taken to the police station, and physically resists the police and/or medical personnel administering the test, his or her blood may be forceably taken as long as the DUI suspect is safely held down and the blood is taken in a medically approved manner.
The Los Angeles police found Schmerber at an accident scene and smelled alcohol on his breath. The police also noticed other symptoms of intoxication both at the scene and at the hospital and decided to arrest him for drunk driving. They informed him of his right to have a lawyer present, to remain silent, and to have a lawyer appointed, if he could not afford one. While Schmerber was in the hospital, the police ordered a blood test to determine if Schmerber was intoxicated, even though Schmerber refused based on advice from his lawyer. The test revealed Schmerber was drunk at the time of the accident and the trial court admitted the test as evidence.
Schmerber was convicted and appealed the decision. Citing numerous constitutional right violations, he arguing that the blood test was administered against his will and its use as evidence obstructed due process of law granted by the Fourteenth Amendment. He contended that it also violated his right to refuse to provide self-incriminating evidence under the Fifth Amendment, and subjected him to unreasonable searches and seizures, violating his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
The Appellate Department of the California Superior Court agreed with the lower court, rejecting Schmerber’s arguments and upholding his conviction. Finally, Schmerber petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, still maintaining the police violated numerous constitutional rights. It was there that the U.S. Supreme Court stated that forced blood draws were in fact legal, as long as they were done in a safe, medically approved manner.
Read more: Schmerber v. California – The Accident, Arrest, And Conviction http://law.jrank.org/pages/23830/Schmerber-v-California-Accident-Arrest-Conviction.html#ixzz0ghSkZh6J
Posted in Uncategorized
Two new California laws involving Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) change the penalties faced by motorists convicted of DUI. One is a test program in four counties (including Sacramento) and requires the installation of IIDs. The other is statewide and allows people convicted of DUI the option of installing IIDs in exchange for shorter license suspensions. IIDs require that people blow into an alcohol detection device that prevents the vehicle from starting if any alcohol is detected.
AB 91: TEST PROGRAM REQUIRING IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICES FOR DUI CONVICTIONS
Assembly Bill 91 establishes pilot programs in Sacramento, Los Angeles, Alameda, and Tulare counties requiring all people convicted of DUI to install Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) on their vehicles beginning July 1, 2010. This test program runs through January 1, 2016, unless it is reauthorized, and possibly extended statewide, by the legislature and governor.
Under this new law, people convicted of driving under the influence (California Vehicle Code 23152) in these four test counties must install IIDs on all vehicles they use. The required period of installation depends on whether the driver has prior DUIs:
People convicted of DUI involving injury to another person (California Vehicle Code 23153) must install IIDs on all vehicles they use for these periods of time:
AB 91 does provide an exemption for people who drive vehicles owned by their employers. With court approval, an employer might not be required to install IIDs on company vehicles if the employee notifies the company that his/her driving privilege has been restricted.
SB 598: STATEWIDE PROGRAM ALLOWING OPTIONAL INSTALLATION OF IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICES IN EXCHANGE FOR SHORTER LICENSE SUSPENSIONS
Senate Bill 598 also takes effect July 1, but unlike AB 91 it will be enforced throughout California. It allows people convicted of a 2nd or 3rd DUI to have shorter driver’s license suspension terms if they install IIDs on their vehicles. Under current law, a second DUI results in a mandatory one-year suspension of driving privileges, while a third DUI results in a mandatory two-year suspension. Under the new law, a restricted license could be obtained 90 days after a second DUI and six months after a third DUI if the convicted driver agrees to have IIDs installed on his/her vehicles. A restricted license allows a person to drive in the course of employment and to and from alcohol eduction classes.
Posted in Uncategorized
CHP officials deployed 25 patrol units to scour freeways and surface streets in the area as part of a periodic program called RAID, which stands for Rapid Apprehension of Impaired Drivers, according to the Sacramento Bee.
Mike Bradley, a CHP spokesman, told the news source that arresting 60 drivers in one Sacramento night does not constitute an unusual event. “The south Sacramento area is a high-concentration area for alcohol and drug-related driving offenses. This is why Sacramento is one of the crash leaders in the state.”
He added that the police force typically arrests about 50 drivers for DUI charges in a single RAID effort. Most of the arrests are made between 11 p.m. and 2 a.m.
According to CHP officials, RAID is financed by anti-DUI grants from the California Office of Traffic Safety, which keeps statistics on Sacramento’s driving records and alcohol-related crashes.
Research by Mothers Against Drunk Driving estimates that one arrest for DUI is made for every 88 episodes of driving with a blood-alcohol concentration that is over the U.S. legal limit.
A former Sacramento County sheriff’s deputy who was arrested on charges of driving under the influence after plowing into a Starbucks in Natomas is facing a new DUI charge.
Lisa Gargano was involved in a traffic accident Saturday morning in front of the Old Navy store on North Freeway Boulevard in Natomas, according to Sacramento Police Department spokesman Officer Konrad von Schoech. She was arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence and released from custody Saturday evening, von Schoech said.
This latest collision occurred about four miles from the last crash.
Gargano was off duty when she allegedly drove her car into a Starbucks last September and injured an elderly woman. She was arrested on felony DUI charges and court proceedings resume on March 4.
Posted in Uncategorized
http://www.fromthecapitol.com/dui-ignition-locks-coming-to-sacramento-county-26
Do you drink and drive? Well you shouldn’t and if you get caught life will be a little more difficult in Sacramento County. If you are convicted of DUI you will be required to install and use a breathalyzer in your car for five months. This new law was signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this week and goes into effect July 1, 2010. Seventeen states already have similar laws, and some have shown notable drops in repeat drunken driving offenses.
The ignition interlock device will keep the car from starting if the driver’s breath shows more than a small amount of alcohol in the blood. This is actually a pilot program and will last six years. Other counties that are piloting the program include Alameda, Los Angeles and Tulare counties.
“We must do everything we can to ensure the public’s safety on the road,” Schwarzenegger said after signing the bill. “By installing ignition interlock devices we are making it harder for DUI offenders to get behind the wheel while intoxicated and we are working to save innocent lives.” While the self serving American Beverage Institute called the locks intrusive, most people agree with the new law. There are about 4,000 DUI convictions each year in Sacramento County.
Under the law, drivers convicted of a first offense will be notified by the state Department of Motor Vehicles that they must pay to have a device installed in any vehicle they drive, other than a motorcycle. For second-time DUI offenders, the monitoring period will extend to a year. A third conviction will require the device be installed for two years. Initial installation costs $75 to $100 and monthly monitoring costs are about $50.
For those that want to get around the lock let your friends know that it is illegal for another person to blow into the device for the offender. The devices also require drivers to retake the breath test at random times, she said.
In 2008, 30 percent of roadway deaths in California , more than 1,000 deaths, occurred in crashes where at least one driver had a blood- alcohol level over the legal presumptive limit of 0.08 percent, according to the state Office of Traffic Safety.
http://cbs13.com/local/nocioni.dui.kings.2.1511980.html
More Local NewsSACRAMENTO (AP) ―
Sacramento Kings forward Andres Nocioni has pleaded no contest to drunken driving and will serve two days of community service.
Attorney William Portanova entered the misdemeanor plea Monday in Sacramento County Superior Court on behalf of Nocioni, who was not present.
Nocioni was arrested about 2 a.m. Nov. 5 when a police officer noticed his car weaving in downtown Sacramento, hours after the Kings had lost a home game to the Atlanta Hawks.
Portanova says his client wants to “take his medicine and move on.”
As part of his sentence, Nocioni will serve two days in a work program operated by the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department. He also must complete a three-month alcohol class, pay a $480 fine and court penalties and serve three years’ probation.
|
