Sacramento Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

The California Vehicle Code has been amended to bring consistency to the handling of convictions for DUI and "wet reckless."

A wet reckless is a conviction for reckless driving involving alcohol. This can sometimes be negotiated by a defense attorney in cases that have problems or inconsistencies with the evidence or police procedure. The D.A.'s office, because it's not certain to get a DUI conviction, has an incentive to agree to the lesser offense of reckless driving involving alcohol. The defense attorney is willing to consider this option because the evidence, though problematic, still might lead to a DUI conviction if the case goes to trial.

A wet reckless has certain advantages over a DUI conviction, including no court mandated driver's license suspension, shorter probation period, lower fines, and shorter (or waived) jail sentence.

The disadvantages of a wet reckless are the possibility of higher insurance rates, the counting of a wet reckless as a DUI prior if you get another DUI conviction within 10 years, and, most importantly, the possibility that DMV can still suspend your license through its Admin Per Se hearing process.

What has changed as of January 1, 2012, is that a person who has a prior alcohol-related conviction and then gets a wet reckless can now be eligible for a restricted license after 90 days if he agrees to have an ignition interlock device (IID) installed on his vehicle. Prior to this, a person convicted of DUI could install the IID and end the suspension, but someone convicted of wet reckless could not even though wet reckless is considered a less serious offense. Vehicle Code 13353.3 now specifies that the IID option is available for someone who has "no more than two-prior alcohol-related convictions within 10 years."

The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) funds programs throughout the state aimed at DUI incidents. Two local programs illustrate the variety of these activities.

The County of Sacramento Probation Department just announced that it has received an OTS grant to increase supervision of people with multiple DUI convictions. The grant of $360,000 will be used for a variety of programs, including random testing for drugs and alcohol, home searches, and office visits. The goal, the department says, is to ensure that high risk individuals are in compliance with the terms of their probation.

A separate OTS grant in Placer County allows a variety of law enforcement agencies in that region to set up DUI checkpoints, warrant sting operations, and extra patrols around times of higher incidence of drunk driving, including the Fourth of July and the winter holidays.

As Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's approach, people are advised to give consideration to how they will transport themselves to and from holiday events. Be sure to arrange for designated drivers to protect your safety and the safety of others.

The California Assembly has passed a bill (AB 1389) that places limits on impoundment of vehicles by law enforcement at DUI checkpoints. The bill now moves to the state Senate for consideration.

The bill's author, Assemblyman Michael Allen (D. - Santa Rosa), asserts that the bill is necessary to provide uniform standards for checkpoints. He is particularly concerned that the number of vehicles impounded at checkpoints has increased dramatically in recent years and far exceeds the number of people actually cited at checkpoints for DUI. For example, in 2009, over 24,000 vehicles were impounded compared to approximately 3,200 DUI arrests. Supporting documentation from Allen emphasizes that these impoundments have been disproportionally in areas with concentrations of low income populations. The result, he says, is financial hardship for the people who lose their vehicles, as well as diminished effectiveness of community policing as people come to distrust law enforcement.

The bill seeks to incorporate into law the principles articulated by the California Supreme Court in Ingersoll v. Palmer (1987) and used by CHP pertaining to a DUI checkpoint's location and purpose. Checkpoints would have to be placed at locations with a history of elevated numbers of DUI arrests and at a time that would reasonably be expected to deter driving under the influence.

If a person goes through a checkpoint without his driver's license, the vehicle would simply be moved to a safe location off the roadway. The purpose of the checkpoints would be restricted to looking for signs of intoxication, though the bill would still allow impoundment of vehicles that were used to commit crimes or have evidence pertaining to a crime.

Former Sacramento police officer Brandon Mullock was charged on Wednesday with 34 criminal violations by the Sacramento District Attorney's Office.

These charges come nearly a year and half after discrepancies in some of Mullock's reports brought about an investigation by the D.A.'s office and the Sacramento Police Department. It all began after Mullock was arrested in January, 2010, for brandishing a weapon. A review of Mullock's cases brought to light inconsistencies between what was in some of his arrest reports and evidence provided by audio and video recordings made with equipment on his patrol vehicle. In September, 2010, the D.A.'s office decided to throw out 79 cases - mostly DUIs - which used Mullock's reports or testimony in bringing charges against the defendants. Some of these cases had already resulted in convictions. The D.A.'s office had to then arrange for refunds of fees and removal of driving suspensions.

The charges against Mullock include 10 counts of perjury and 24 counts of falsifying police reports and carry a potential prison sentence of nearly 24 years.

The Folsom and Roseville police departments have announced DUI and driver license checkpoints for this weekend.

The checkpoint in Folsom will take place on Saturday, April 30, near the intersection of River Rock Drive and Greenback Lane beginning at 7:00 PM and continuing until early Sunday morning.

The checkpoint in Roseville will also happen on Saturday, beginning at 9:00 PM and continuing until 2:00 AM. Its location has not been disclosed.

The purpose of these checkpoints is to look for signs of intoxication and check that drivers have valid licenses. See also our recent post on vehicle impoundment, which can happen when drivers can't produce valid license documentation. In 2010, over 17,000 vehicles were impounded statewide at DUI checkpoints.

As always, we encourage people to take the steps necessary to keep themselves and others safe if they plan to drink. Find a designated driver, be sure to have cash for a cab, and keep taxi phone numbers in your phone.

Some Alco-Sensor V breathalyzers used in Ventura County have been found to give inaccurate readings in a number of DUI cases in January through March of this year. The breathalyzer, which was put into use in January as a replacement for the previous generation Alco-Sensor IV, was used by all law enforcement agencies in the county as a "preliminary screening device" to determine in the field if a person was at or over the blood alcohol limit of 0.08%. Eight of the 128 devices purchased exhibited erratic readings.

The sheriff's department and other law enforcement agencies in the area have gone back to using the previous generation breathalyzer until the manufacturer - Intoximeter - comes up with an appropriate fix for the problem. Ventura County apparently paid over half a million dollars for the devices using monies from the California Office of Traffic Safety and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The District Attorney's Office is reviewing DUI cases involving the breathalyzers and will makes adjustments in the charges if necessary. Defense attorneys in the county say that this incident highlights the problematic nature of using devices like the Alco-Sensor because of inaccurate or inconsistent readings.

A report by California Watch documents the dramatic increase last year in the number of vehicle impoundments by California law enforcement agencies.

2010 was dubbed the "Year of the Checkpoint" by law enforcement throughout the state. With funding support coming from the California Office of Traffic Safety, police agencies conducted more than 2,500 checkpoints, which require drivers to stop and show their licenses.

The primary purpose of these controlled traffic stops is to check drivers for signs of intoxication. The data show, however, that for each person arrested for DUI, six vehicles were impounded.

The California Watch report claims that part of this increase - over 17,000 vehicles were impounded last year - can be explained by the financial incentive local agencies have to impound cars. Often, municipalities will charge drivers a fee to have their vehicles released from impound and will get a portion of the towing fees.

It should be noted that several cities - including San Jose, Oakland, and Berkeley - have changed their checkpoint policies to try to lessen the difference between their figures for DUI citation and vehicle impoundment.

The Sacramento Bee reports that only 12% of people convicted of DUI in Sacramento County since July 2010 have installed ignition interlock devices (IIDs) in their vehicles, even though a pilot program requires them to do so before regaining driving privileges. The Department of Motor Vehicles, which administers the program, says that the low compliance rate might be attributable to the fact many people convicted of DUI have not yet completed their license suspension period. But it does seem that some people are not having the IIDs installed as the law mandates.

The article also touched on a topic covered in previous posts on this blog: the possibility that the federal government might in the future require installation in new vehicles of devices that would be able to detect if a person's blood alcohol level exceeds the legal limit. These devices could be like the current models that require the driver to breathe into a tube or optical technology that scans a person's skin.

"Tough DUI Law Slow to Show Results," Sacramento Bee, March 14, 2011

The Sacramento Police Department plans stepped up enforcement pertaining to DUI and underaged drinking during the week leading up to St. Patrick's Day.

The effort will have three parts. The first targets consumption of alcohol by minors, as well as enforcement of laws that make it illegal to provide alcohol to people under the legal drinking age of 21 years. The second part will focus on enforcing outstanding warrants pertaining to past DUIs. The third part consists of increased DUI patrols throughout the city, as well as a DUI checkpoint that will take place next weekend at a location and time to be announced later.

As always, we recommend that if you plan on going out drinking, take a few minutes and determine who will serve as the designated driver. If you don't have a designated driver, set aside enough money to pay for a cab and keep the phone numbers for cab companies in your cell phone.

A Truckee man who pled guilty in Placer County Superior Court to a straight DUI has been sentenced to 25 years to life under California's three strikes law.

Douglas Doyle's prior criminal record included five misdemeanor convictions, four felony convictions, and four sentences to state prison. In 1987, he was found guilty of vehicular manslaughter involving alcohol after killing a Tahoe City teacher on Highway 89.

Doyle and his attorney had attempted to have two prior convictions removed from his record. The judge, however, denied that motion.

The Sacramento Police Department has announced that it will have a DUI and drivers license checkpoint tonight, Saturday, February 12. It will take place near the intersection of 24th Street and Florin Road, and start at 8:30 PM and last until early Sunday morning.

Uniformed Sacramento Police Department officers will check for valid drivers licenses, as well as look for signs of drivers who are under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

As always, we encourage people who plan on going out drinking to arrange for designated drivers and keep handy the phone numbers of cab companies.

Some San Diego area residents are advocating tougher penalties for juveniles charged with DUI.

Taya Chase - who was hit by a 17-year-old drunk driver on September 20, 2009 - and Erin Limonchi - whose mother was killed by the same driver later that morning - are calling on state lawmakers to change California law so that underaged drunk drivers will be tried as adults rather than juveniles.

Under current law, someone found guilty of DUI in a juvenile court could face time in a juvenile detention facility or other penalties. For the purposes of the criminal courts, the juvenile delinquency adjudication does not become part of an adult criminal record. For the purposes of DMV, the DUI does count against a person's driving record.

Someone found guilty of DUI in adult court, however, would face substantial fines, jail time, and restrictions of driving privileges. The conviction would also become part of the person's criminal record.

There is no indication yet that the legislature will take up this proposal.

The Wall Street Journal earlier this week published an interesting story that outlined technology that might be incorporated into future vehicles to improve highway safety. Some cars already have rear facing cameras and devices that warn drivers when they drift out of their lanes. But there are many other possible innovations, including technology that allows vehicles to communicate data about position and speed with one another and then warn drivers when the danger of a collision rises.

From the point of view of criminal law, the most interesting developments center on new technologies that would detect when a driver's blood alcohol percentage is above the legal limit of 0.08%. Current technology requires that drivers blow into a car-mounted breathalyzer, and these devices are installed only when mandated by law after conviction for DUI. The new devices might be able to scan the driver's skin using an infrared beam to check the amount of alcohol in the blood.

These innovations are still years away from being installed in vehicles. And once they are available, there are still privacy concerns that need to be debated. For example, would they be standard equipment on all vehicles?

If you have been arrested for driving under the influence, contact an experienced defense attorney to ensure that your rights are protected and you present the most effective defense.

If you end up with a conviction, however, and your arrest took place in Sacramento County, you will have to comply with Vehicle Code 27000, which requires people convicted of DUI in Sacramento, Los Angeles, Alameda, and Tulare counties to install ignition interlock devices (IID) on their vehicles. This pilot program will remain in effect through 2016, at which time the California legislature will determine whether it should be implemented throughout the state.

It's important to note that the Department of Motor Vehicles does under certain circumstances grant exemptions to the IID requirement. Specifically, you will not have to install an IID if: you do not own a vehicle; do not have access to a vehicle at your residence; and do not have access to the vehicle used when you were arrested.

There is a significant limitation to this exemption: You do not qualify for the exemption if you own a vehicle that does not run or for which you have an approved PNO (planned non-operation).

If you operate an employer provided vehicle in the course of your employment, you may continue to do so without having an IID installed in that vehicle as long as you notify the employer that your driving privilege has been restricted pursuant to VC 23700.

The California Highway Patrol has announced that it will implement a Maximum Enforcement Period throughout the state over the Christmas and New Year's weekends.

Specifically, CHP will have extra personnel on the state's highways from 6:00 PM on Friday, December 24 through midnight on Sunday, December 26. That will be followed by second period of heightened enforcement from 6:00 PM on Friday, December 31 through midnight on Sunday, January 2.

CHP personnel encourage anyone who plans to drink to choose a designated driver.

Even if you are not drinking but are just traveling to see family and friends, be sure to buckle your seat belt. CHP reports that half of the people killed in collisions within CHP's jurisdiction were not wearing seat belts.