Contact a local lawyer now for a FREE consultation!  

(800)384-5297

One thing you should know about a DUI arrest is that every DUI case is different, each with their own unique circumstances.  When it comes to deciding the penalties for a DUI charge, the judge and/or looks at many factors.  There are certain factors, however, that can enhance a DUI charge in California including:

Having minors in the vehicle with you at the time of arrest Being under the legal drinking age (The legal age is 21 in most states.) Any prior DUI charges Causing an accident, injury, or death to other people Having a BAC (blood alcohol content) of .20% greater than the legal limit Speeding or reckless driving

In the state of California enhancements are usually added on when the charges are initially filed, but they can be added at a later time if the case is still pending and the enhancements won’t threaten the driver’s right to a fair trial. These additional allegations must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt or the sentence cannot be enhanced.  If you are found to be guilty of these additional allegations, you can probably see higher fines, longer jail sentence, longer mandatory DUI education, longer driver’s license suspension, and a more restrictive probation.

If you have been arrested for drunk driving and your case includes any one of the circumstances mentioned above, it may be beneficial to hire an experienced California DUI defense lawyer who specializes in DUI cases.  A lawyer can investigate your case and make sure that your right to a fair trial is upheld in court.

Originally published here.

The availability of global positioning systems and other computerized navigation aids can shave life-saving minutes off an ambulance trip. But use of the same gadgets that help first responders save lives is sometimes responsible for loss of lives. While systems like GPS are used by ordinary drivers as well as first responders, the risk of their use with emergency vehicles is heightened due to the high speeds at which such vehicles frequently travel. A few seconds of diversion have a greater probability of deadly consequences when speeds are high and braking distances increased.

Experts routinely remind drivers not to take their eyes off the road, and this is even more important for drivers of emergency vehicles travelling at high speeds. Even a momentary glance at a tech device can have tremendous consequences.

For example, a sheriff’s deputy in St. Clair County, Ill., wasn’t even speeding when he received dispatch instructions and entered the address into his cruiser’s computerized mapping system in June 2007. That momentary distraction caused the cruiser to crash into another vehicle, causing serious injury to the driver.

]]>

In April 2008, when an ambulance driver in West Nyack, NY diverted his eyes momentarily to glance at a GPS, it was his partner who was left paralyzed. More recently, a New York paramedic nearly struck a pedestrian with his speeding ambulance when he tried to drive and enter information into his onboard computer simultaneously.

Multiple studies have shown the dangers of distracted driving. Distracted driving is not only responsible for 80 percent of all vehicle crashes; it’s more dangerous than drunk driving. As evidence mounts concerning the dangers of distracted driving, using onboard devices to facilitate emergency runs and driving safely may be deemed incompatible.

Current rules in some jurisdictions preclude emergency drivers from using tech devices in traffic, but in practice those rules are likely to be ignored in times of crisis. Sometimes ambulance drivers’ partners are attending to patients and unavailable to key in data in lieu of the driver.

Even more troublesome, though, if the fact that not all gadgets in emergency vehicles are used for life-saving purposes. Police officers routinely type in license plate numbers in non-emergency situations, for example. As spokesman Shawn Chase for the California Highway Patrol told Firehouse.com, “There’s no way you could do this without eventually running into something.”

Originally published here.

On the heels of a month marked by extensive media coverage of the Orange County trial of Andrew Gallo–the San Gabriel man, who, despite having his license suspended for a prior DUI conviction, took the wheel after a night of binge drinking and killed Angeles’ rookie pitcher, Nick Adenhart, and two friends in an early morning collision–news has broken of a new law that will impact DUI repeat offenders. Starting January 1, 2012, judges will have the option of revoking an individual’s license for up to 10 years if that person has three or more convictions for driving under the influence within the past decade. The law is just one of many efforts by state legislators and officials to combat drunk driving in California.

Annually 1.5 million people are arrested for driving under the influence in this state, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). DUI repeat offenders account for one-third of those arrested. A recent study of the percentage of drivers with alcohol-related convictions in the nation’s 20 largest cities by insurance.com found that the greatest number of violators resided in San Diego, followed by San Jose in second place, Los Angeles in seventh, and San Francisco in eighth. The high incidence of convicted drivers in these cities was attributed to three factors: a higher rate of alcohol consumption among the population, “more partiers,” in general; a lack of public transportation; and effective enforcement of drinking-and-driving laws.

Over the last 30 years, numerous laws have been passed to prevent drinking and driving in the United States:

In 1984, the Federal Uniform Drinking Age Act was signed into law. Under the law, states that fail to prohibit the purchase or public consumption of alcohol by an individual under the age of 21 will have 10% of Federal highway funding withheld from them. In effect, this law raised the national minimum drinking age to 21.

In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sobriety checkpoints were legal under the constitution.

In 1995, the Federal Zero Tolerance Law was passed, making it illegal for individuals under 21 years old to drive with any measurable amount of blood alcohol content (BAC) in their blood. Highway safety funds would be withheld from any state failing to comply with the law by October 1, 1998.

In 2000, .08 BAC became the national illegal limit for impaired driving. Under the law, a percentage of federal highway construction funds would be withheld from any state failing to comply.

To date, 14 states have enacted laws mandating DUI first-time and repeat offenders to install ignition interlock devices in their vehicles: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. California, however, has only implemented a pilot program in four counties: Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Tulare. Drivers with the device are forced to breathe into a tube connected to a machine that measures alcohol levels; if alcohol is detected, the machine will prevent the ignition from starting. The device not only prevents those with DUI convictions from drinking and driving, it also serves as a deterrent to all drivers, as it considerably increases the cost of receiving a DUI. Legislators will consider expanding the program statewide after a 5-year evaluation.

In California-and nationwide-efforts to combat drunk driving have had an impact on the number of fatal alcohol-related accidents. Throughout the country, such accidents decreased by almost 10 percent from 13,041 in 2007 to 11, 773 in 2008. In California, there were 108 fewer fatal accidents in 2008 than in 2007, from 1,347 to 1,239. Hopefully, the fatality rate will continue to decline with the state’s increasingly aggressive DUI enforcement and harsher penalties.

Originally published here.