TYPICAL DUI INVESTIGATION AND ARREST |
I was charged with my fIfth DUI as a FELONY and a Refusal. I went to court without an attorney and the public defender told me I would have to take 3 years state prison. I came to Mr. Zavala, who was honest with me and told me that although he could not guarantee me the outcome of my case, that he promised to do everything in his power to keep me out of prison. He never gave up on me and it paid off. Over the prosecutor's objection, the Judge agreed to give me NO JAIL ! Thank you Mr. Zavala. Alex Guirola * |
ATTORNEY FRANCISCO M. ZAVALA
HAS BEEN FEATURED ON VARIOUS
MEDIA OUTLETS SUCH AS::
HAS BEEN FEATURED ON VARIOUS
MEDIA OUTLETS SUCH AS::
The Law OFFICES OF
FRANCISCO M. ZAVALA
A TOP RATED criminal DEFENSE FIRM
FRANCISCO M. ZAVALA
A TOP RATED criminal DEFENSE FIRM
So you go out with some friends have a few drinks and decide you
are sober and not under the influence of alcohol. So you make the
decision to drive home. Chances are, you are correct. The fact is
that most people arrested for drunk driving are actually not
impaired by alcohol.
Often, a dishonest police officer will pull over someone simply
because they just came out of a bar. The dishonest cop will
falsely write in his report that the he saw the driver swerving in
his lane, making unsafe lane changes or speeding.
You know you are sober and you know you have done nothing
wrong. But the cop has pulled you over for no reason and has
asks if you "had anything to drink". Regardless of your answer,
he orders you to step out of the vehicle.
Now you know that this cop has made up his mind you are guilty
of drunk driving. He gives you a series of field sobriety tests and
you pass them with flying colors. Regardless, he tells you to
blow into a machine and when you ask him what the results
where, he tells you to turn around and then places you under
arrest.
MOST COMMON BREATH TESTING INSTRUMENTS
I. Vehicle Code Sections 23152(a) and
are sober and not under the influence of alcohol. So you make the
decision to drive home. Chances are, you are correct. The fact is
that most people arrested for drunk driving are actually not
impaired by alcohol.
Often, a dishonest police officer will pull over someone simply
because they just came out of a bar. The dishonest cop will
falsely write in his report that the he saw the driver swerving in
his lane, making unsafe lane changes or speeding.
You know you are sober and you know you have done nothing
wrong. But the cop has pulled you over for no reason and has
asks if you "had anything to drink". Regardless of your answer,
he orders you to step out of the vehicle.
Now you know that this cop has made up his mind you are guilty
of drunk driving. He gives you a series of field sobriety tests and
you pass them with flying colors. Regardless, he tells you to
blow into a machine and when you ask him what the results
where, he tells you to turn around and then places you under
arrest.
MOST COMMON BREATH TESTING INSTRUMENTS
BASIC DRUNK DRIVING OFFENSES
I. Vehicle Code Sections 23152(a) and
- 23152 (b): D.U.I. Alcohol; 0.08% Per Se
Veh. C. §23152 is the non-injury drunk driving statute.
Non-injury drunk driving is usually referred to as
misdemeanor drunk driving.
Subdivision (a) of §23152 makes it illegal to drive, a
vehicle, while under the influence of alcohol.
Subdivision (b), the so called “per se” statute, makes it
illegal to drive, a vehicle, with a blood or breath alcohol
concentration (B.A.C.) of 0.08% or more.
Subdivision (b) was first added to the Vehicle Code in
1982.
i) A Comparison of Subdivisions (a) and (b)
The difference between subdivisions (a) and (b) of
§23152 is that evidence of alcohol is necessary for a
conviction of violating subdivision (a), whereas under
subdivision (b), only blood or breath alcohol
concentration need be proved.
In cases where there is no chemical test result, only (a) is
charged because alcohol level is difficult to determine on
the basis of impairment evidence alone. Since some
people are under the influence at alcohol levels as low as
0.05%, chemical test evidence indicating a blood or
breath alcohol level of 0.08% or more would probably be
necessary for there to be legally sufficient evidence of
violation of subdivision (b) (cf., Wheeler v. D.M.V.
(1997) 34 CA4th 228, 28 CR2d 597 [fn 6 and related
text]).
In most cases with chemical test results both (a) and (b)
will be charged, but judgment of conviction can only be
entered on one of them (People v. Duarte (1984) 161
CA3d 438, 207 CR 615).
“Drive”
Both of the drunk driving offense statutes (Veh. C. §§
23152 and 23153) require that the defendant “drive” a
motor vehicle.
But what acts constitute driving? Where the defendant
was seen operating a moving automobile on a highway
there is almost never any controversy about whether or
not he was driving the vehicle. But occasionally the
arresting officer hasn’t seen any such acts which are
indisputably driving. Instead he has perhaps found the
defendant asleep on the front seat of a vehicle which is
legally parked, with the transmission in neutral, the
headlights and wipers on, and the engine running.
In Mercer v. D.M.V. (1991) 53 C3d 753, 280 CR 745,
49 CrL (BNA) 1191, the California Supreme Court held
that mere actual physical control is not enough to
constitute driving. Thus, “drive”, for the purpose of the
drunk driving statutes, requires volitional movement of
the vehicle.
| CALL US 24 HRS. (818) 988-3234 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |