Overview
The Law Office of Michael Rehm provides representation on all driving under the influence matters. Once a DUI arrest occurs, a hearing must be set with the California DMV within 10 days of the arrest. Therefore, even with the normal sense of urgency in a criminal case, there is a strict deadline right away. This hearing allows the defense an opportunity to contest any potential license suspension, as well as obtain valuable evidence from the DMV, that might not be available in court.
There are many potential charges in drunk driving litigation. Vehicle Code 23152(a) and (b) are the most common charges associated with a DUI case. There are also felony DUI charges, wet reckless, DUI Boating and several enhancements that can be added to these types of cases. These cases can have far-reaching consequences. Obviously, the more severe the charge, the greater the need for a qualified attorney and a sound defense.
Although every case is unique, and the consequences will be unique to each individual, there are certain factors that are looked at in every DUI case. The two main factors are impairment and driving. If it is DUI case with alcohol, as opposed to drugs, what was the blood alcohol level? That is where you start, but it is certainly not where you end up. The blood alcohol level usually referred to in these cases is the result of either the blood or breath test administered by law enforcement either before or after an arrest. This is the government’s version of events. This is the government’s determination of what your blood alcohol level was. Is the number they are providing an accurate reflection of what your blood alcohol level was at the actual time of driving? Probably not. This is important to remember when dealing with DUI defense. The “facts” can be entirely speculative and in reality are not facts at all.
It only takes a casual conversation with a forensic toxicologist in regards to how alcohol absorbs into the bloodstream, and how a breathalyzer or a blood test is not an accurate reflection of what an individual’s true blood alcohol level is, or for that matter their true level of impairment, that it becomes obvious that a lot of the government’s case in these matters is based on flawed evidence. What the blood alcohol level was at the actual time of driving can many times be the crux of the case, and the only real fact is that there is no answer to that question, just speculative opinions. Speculation should not equate to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The actual driving of the vehicle is relevant for multiple reasons. First, there has to be proof there was driving in general. Second, if driver of the vehicle is stopped while driving a vehicle, what was the reason? Is the reason sufficient to detain the driver? If it is not, or it is questionable, a Motion to Suppress Evidence, pursuant to Penal Code 1538.5, is the proper course of action to challenge the bogus stop, and ultimately to suppress the evidence gathered after the stop occurred, which is generally all of the evidence in the case. In other words, the evidence gathered after the illegal stop will be thrown out of court. Third, if law enforcement did have a legal justification for detaining the vehicle, how was the driving in general? In cases where the blood alcohol level is low, one of the main pieces of evidence the prosecutor will use to show impairment is the driving, but obviously only if it was poor. Therefore, if the driving was not poor, or the driver was detained for a reason that had nothing to do with driving, like a sobriety checkpoint, expired tags, etc, this can be important evidence to show proof of actual sobriety at the time of driving. If impairment is an issue in general, and the driving is also not bad, the prosecution’s case just became that much tougher.
This cursory overview is explained in much greater detail throughout the website, specifically in the DUI defense section, but for now, it is important to remember that these cases have multiple issues, and the services of an attorney that regularly practices DUI defense is highly advised. Even in the most “ordinary” case, where the client has no desire to go to trial, there are always potential plea bargain resolutions, including reducing the length of the DUI school, reducing or eliminating any potential jail or alternative sentencing, or reducing the charges in general, to a wet reckless, dry reckless, etc. depending on the circumstances of the case.