Los Angeles DUI Lawyer Blog

California law requires any person, as a condition of obtaining a California drivers license, to submit to their choice of a chemical test, either breath or blood it stopped by the police on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.

When this law when it was enacted many years ago was talking about a breath test subsequent to a driver's arrest on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs or the combined influence.at that time, for instance, there was only a breath test administered at the police department. Now, drivers are frequently asked at the scene of their stop, too blow into a preliminary alcohol screening device, commonly known as a PAS TEST. This screening device, currently being used by the majority of police departments in Los Angeles has been determined by Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers to lack the accuracy it purports to have.

This test is not required by law, and is used by law enforcement to screen once blood-alcohol level prior to the test at the station, or a blood test typically drawn at a local hospital. Officers rarely, accurately advise drivers stops for DUIs that this test is optional, and not required by law.

Failure to submit this to a preliminary alcohol screening test, has no negative legal consequences, compared to failing to submit to a breath or blood test which includes mandatory jail time and substantially increased license suspension potential.

Another example of commonly misunderstood legal requirements are the field sobriety tests for coordination which are administered two suspected drunk drivers to determine their level of impairment by their performance on a series of coordination and mental acuity. All police officers are trained at the Academy to instruct and evaluate suspected DUI drivers. It's interesting to note since our firm has specialized in DUI defense for over 30 years, that after reading thousands of arrest reports, that they were here to be similar line which like red watery eyes, slurred speech, present in nearly all of these reports.

Drivers are commonly told, that if they pass these fields writing tests they will be free to go. The majority of suspected DUI drivers thinking they are not there submit to these tests, and ultimately build evidence against themselves, since rarely have I seen a driver pass.

It may surprise you, that these field sobriety tests are not mandatory, but are completely optional. There are no negative legal consequences for refusing these tests.

Plea bargaining is simply a negotiation between your attorney and the prosecutor to dismiss or reduce the charges that may be pending against you. These type of negotiations can also be very effective at obtaining dismissals, reductions in penalties like eliminating jail time, in exchange for community service. For example, in a recent DUI case although the prosecutor was demanding jail time, we were able to persuade the Judge to allow our client to be placed on electronic monitoring in lieu of serving time in a jail cell.

In addition, when there are aggravating circumstances presence, the terms that the prosecutor, Judge or legislature dictates, can still be modified by the negotiation and skill of an experienced DUI lawyer to trade-off harsh consequences.

Many new clients, and those potential clients seeking advice on how our firm can assist them view DUI penalties as if they were a specific, set in stone formula, with no room for alteration or modification. People not familiar with this area of the law are very surprised to find out that every legal offense from a DUI case to a manslaughter offense are quoted in ranges, rather than specific finite penalties.

For example, clients are greatly surprised that I may first offense driving under the influence of alcohol, that this misdemeanor carries with it between no time in jail, and six months in jail. It should be obvious by this example that inexperienced Los Angeles DUI attorney has substantial room to negotiate on his client's behalf. Clearly, it is every attorneys priority to maintain his client's freedom and good record at all costs.

Many clients oversimplify the law that they frequently don't fully understand,by making assumptions about the consequences of their case. For example, clients frequently assume that one's blood-alcohol level does not impact the length of a state-mandated alcohol program for anyone convicted of a driving under the influence offense in California. Nothing could be further from the truth.. Programs on first offense is range from three months to nine months. Typically, a three-month alcohol program is ordered for those people with blood-alcohol levels of .14 or under. A nine-month program is frequently requested by the prosecutor if one's blood-alcohol is .15 or more.

Frequently, by strategically having our clients attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and obtaining a written sign in sheet prior to negotiating a plea bargain, prosecutors frequently are willing to trade off these meetings and allow our clients to do the short alcohol program which saves our clients hundreds of hours of time, not to mention a lot of money.

Reducing a DUI charge in Los Angeles to a lesser offense through effective plea-bargaining can also avoid the expense and embarrassment of the dreaded ignition interlock device which was ordered on all people convicted of a DUI, and who own the vehicle after July 1, 2010.

Our attorneys frequently hear clients say, is there any difference between being represented by an experienced DUI defense lawyer, a public defender, or just going in on your own in pleading guilty. The answer is clear. Clients always benefit, from the experience and courtroom skill by recognizing the weakness in evidence, the value of strategic building of rehabilitative efforts voluntarily commenced,and the power of effective plea-bargaining with prosecutors who now see our clients not just his case numbers but as real people with much more positive aspects that appears on the pages of an arrest report.

If a person is charged with a DUI, and they refused to take a breath or blood test at the time of the arrest, they may face additional consequences if convicted. When a driver is issued a California license, they give implied consent to submit for a blood alcohol test if asked to do so by officers. When a person refuses to do so, they are violating this previously given consent, and the penalties are taken seriously by the DMV and the government.

Many of our clients do not explicitly refuse to take a blood or breath test, but are unable to do so for various reasons. For example, many people who are overwhelmed and stressed out find it difficult to calmly breathe into a breathalyzer to get an accurate result. Some have asthma and are unable to properly breathe into the machine. Those that are unable to take the breath test and provide usable results, must take the blood test as an alternative. But many times, the officials administering the blood test are unable to find a vein or collect a sample large enough. The driver may also have a fear of needles and cannot submit to the blood these. As a result, the person is unable to take the blood test or the breath test, but have cooperated and provided legitimate attempts to do so.

For example, say Sally is stopped for a DUI and is asked to take a BAC test. She has asthma and does not have her inhaler with her. She, nevertheless, tries to breathe into the machine in order to provide a sample but officers tell her that none of the attempts were valid. She is then asked to take a blood test since the breath test was not valid. They try to take her blood but cannot find a vein and after several attempts, fail at gathering a sample. Sally followed directions and tried to aid the officers in gathering a sample to the best of her ability, but because of uncontrollable factors she was unable to do so.

Unfortunately, the law does not make an exception for such a situation. It will still be charged as a refusal, and will lead additional consequences if convicted. When there is no reading of blood alcohol, whether it is a blood or breath reading, the law views it as a refusal. The reason as to why there was a refusal is irrelevant.

However, an experienced Los Angeles DUI Lawyer is able to use any cooperation on behalf of the client as a good faith support. A knowledgeable attorney will play up a strong argument that the driver attempted with good faith to take the test but was unable to do so due to factors out of their control. With the right powerful defense a DMV hearing officer, or a Criminal Judge may be sympathetic and appreciate the cooperation, reducing the additional penalties on account of the refusal.

The proceedings at a Los Angeles DMV hearing are very different from those in Criminal Court. The DMV hearing may take in person, or at the request of a Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyer, over the telephone. Telephonic hearings are often requested by the attorney so that they can help coach you with the testimony. The DMV hearing officer will call you the law office and the attorney and client will be present and listening over speaker phone. All dialogue is on the record and will be conducted with the professionalism and legal guidelines as any proceeding, but is just a lot more convenient for all parties involved.

The officer will call at a scheduled time and will confirm the name of the attorney and the client. The client is identified by providing full name, birth date and address. The attorney will be identified by providing a name, and address. The officer will introduce the different exhibits as evidence, one of which will be the arrest report including the officer's statements. The issues will be stated and the officer will ask which the attorney stipulates to, and which he or she is contesting.

Once all issues have been stated and it has been entered on the record what is being contested the DMV hearing officer will swear in the client and any other witnesses that are going to testify on the record. The attorney will then ask the client questions, followed by any questions the officer may have.

Some of the questions the attorney will ask are general to most DMV hearings, however some will be specifically tailored to the specific case before the hearing officer. The attorney, through questioning will try to establish that the client was not intoxicated while driving. Oftentimes this is done by discrediting the officer whose statements serve as the sole evidence, or by establish additional witnesses who can account for the driver's actions.

The experienced Los Angeles DUI specialist will ask general questions asking for the client's story of the night they were arrested, asking questions to elaborate on parts that he or she feels are worth putting on the record. The hearing officer will likely counter asking what the client remembers from the night and trying to protect the credibility of the arresting officer's statements and weakening the credibility of the driver. Because the driver is presumed to be intoxicated, their account of the events is taken with little regard. The officer and most often the court will assume that the driver was under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs and does not have an accurate memory of the night.
At the conclusion of the hearing the officer will make a decision regarding the status of the driver's license. Sometimes if there is room for argument and the attorney has presented powerful testimony, the hearing officer will not be able to make a decision based on the facts presented and will have to hear testimony from the arresting officer regarding the facts from the night of the arrest. In this case, a second DMV hearing will be scheduled.

The DMV hearing is an important part of the DUI process and one that holds the final decision regarding your driving privileges. A knowledgeable DUI attorney provides the guidance you need to make sure your credibility is strengthened and your side of the case is heard on the record before any decision is entered. Without an attorney, it is difficult to be sure of the right questions to ask and what to say in response to the DMV hearing officer. For the best possible results and to assure that your driving privileges are only suspended for a minimal amount of time, and a restricted license is granted, seek the help of an expert that has been conducting DMV hearings for over 30 years!

During a DMV Hearing the officer will ask questions and review the arrest report to determine several issues and make a decision regarding the restriction or suspension of your driver's license based on their findings. All questions asked and evidence gathered will be directed towards determining answers and argument centered around the issues that must be determined.

At the hearing the DMV officer must first determine whether the arresting officer had valid probable cause to stop the driver. The officer may not stop any driver without a valid reason to do so. Majority of times the driver is stopped for a violation of the California Vehicle Code. This could be running a red light, speeding, an illegal u-turn, or similar offenses. If a person violates the vehicle code, the officer has a duty to stop the driver and cite them for the violation. If during the stop the officer believes the person may be intoxicated, they have the right to conduct a sobriety test to determine if they could possibly be guilty of a DUI.

An officer also has probable cause when they check up on a person who had gotten into an accident or is pulled over at the side of the road. When a person is pulled over or has just gotten into an accident, the officer must conduct a welfare check to determine whether the person is ok or if they need assistance. At the time of the check the officer may determine the person is under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol and give the person a sobriety test.

The DMV officer must also determine if there was reasonable cause for the arresting officer to arrest the driver. They must look into observations made by the officer regarding intoxication to determine if the arrest was proper and with reason. If there was no reason to arrest the driver, there may be no case for DUI.

The hearing officer will also asses the facts of the case to determine whether a sobriety test was taken and if so which one. The driver has a right to refuse the preliminary alcohol screening test administered at the site of the arrest, but refusing the test at the station may lead to more severe consequences if the person if found to be driving under the influence. The driver also has a choice between the blood test, and the breath test, but by implied consent one must be taken at the station. Implied consent is consent given when a person is issued their driver's license. It implies that the person agrees to submit to an alcohol screening test when asked to do so by an officer.

If all other issues have been demonstrated, the final point the officer must determine is if the Blood Alcohol Content reading is a .08 or over. This will be completed by confirming the BAC reading from the blood or breath test and determining that there was no error in the use of the machine or its maintenance.

The job of the Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyer is to prove to the DMV hearing officer that the elements required to be found guilty of a DUI are not met. This is completed through testimony and casting doubt upon the officer's report and observations from the night of the arrest. If the different issues are not proven sufficiently, the driver may not be found guilty of a DUI, and their license will not be suspended or revoked.

When a person has been charged and arrested for a Southern California Driving under the Influence charge they must appear before a criminal court Judge as well as a DMV hearing officer. The criminal court will determine if they are guilty of a DUI and will dismiss or sentence accordingly. The DMV hearing officer will hear the facts of the case and if found guilty will take actions against the person's driver's license.

Each person has the right to a criminal defense lawyer to represent them in both the criminal court proceedings and the DMV hearing. Hiring an attorney to represent the driver during the DMV hearing not only ensures that the person is properly prepared during the testimony, but also that their rights are protected. A powerful argument made during the DMV hearing can help prevent the California driver's license suspension for an extensive amount of time, and in certain situations may allow them to retain the use of their license on a restricted basis.

During a DMV hearing the officer will present the arresting officer's report and will give the person charged an opportunity to present their side of the case on the record. The driver has the burden of proving that they were not intoxicated while driving. They must prove their case through strategic testimony.

The careful preparation and practice testimony prepared by an experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense lawyer will assure that the DMV hearing officer is aware of all issues pertaining to the case and that all facts are put on the record. These facts are brought out through testimony and the criminal defense attorney will help their client go through questions and issues prior to the hearing, as well as be present during the hearing to guide the questioning.

Oftentimes, the hearing officer must learn all sides of the case, and if a person does not have an attorney to represent them during the hearing, they will not know what to say and may make statements that could damage their case.

Recently we had a client who had a very difficult case. She believed that she had been drugged, was very scared and terrified about the whole ordeal. A DMV hearing was the last thing she needed to stress her out and remind her of the night she was traumatized by. With the guidance and help of our knowledgeable attorney, Ronald Hoffman, she was able to get through the DMV hearing. The DMV officer is trained to remain unsympathetic to emotional stories regardless of how difficult the situation is for the driver. Despite the sadness and tears our client had while answering the questions, she was able to persevere through the testimony with the attorney asking her questions and guiding her responses while sitting right there next to her.

When a person is already stressed out by appearing before a criminal court Judge, the added hassle of a DMV hearing may be more than they are able to deal with. There is a great benefit in having an experienced Los Angeles DUI attorney to help guide you through the testimony and ask questions that would normally be left up to the DMV hearing officer. Additionally, the lawyer can spend time with you beforehand preparing you for the questions that will be asked and the best way to phrase responses so that the DMV officer understand that you are not just another case number, but a person with a name and a side of the story that would not normally be heard.

The burden of proof in a criminal case refers to whether the government (Department of Motor Vehicles or the Prosecutor) or the driver has to prove the person being charged meets the standard required to be found guilty of the offense.

During a DUI case in front of the Criminal Judge, the Prosecution has the burden to prove that the driver is guilty of driving while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs beyond a reasonable doubt. What this means is that the government attorney must demonstrate to the court that there is enough evidence that demonstrates the person was guilty of a DUI beyond the doubt of a reasonable person. If there is any kind of doubt upon any part of the evidence, or the evidence as a whole, the burden has not been met. The person being charged has no obligation to prove that they were not intoxicated and driving. They have the right to defend themselves against accusations made or presented by the government, but do not have the burden of disproving intoxication while driving. If the government cannot present enough evidence as to alleviate any reasonable doubt, then they have not met their burden and the driver is not guilty of a DUI.

Assuming as an example, a person is being charged with a DUI in front of a criminal Judge. Prosecution presents a Blood Alcohol Reading and the officer's statements as evidence. However, the officer has been cited several times previously for fabricating reports and there is a conflict between his story and the driver's. There was a second car on scene that witnessed the whole event and corroborates the driver's story causing further doubt on the officer's report. Additionally, the blood alcohol machine records show that the machine has not been calibrated or sent for proper maintenance in a few years resulting in a margin of error on readings. Due to the discrepancies in the officer's report and the possible erroneous reading on the breathalyzer the prosecutor has not proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused driver has no obligation to show through evidence that he was not intoxicated, the case will be dismissed.

During a DMV hearing the burden is on the driver to demonstrate that they were not intoxicated while operating a motor vehicle. The DMV hearing officer does not have the obligation to show that the driver was intoxicated like the government does in a criminal case before the Judge. The officer must listen to the testimony of the driver and that will be entered as evidence against the claim of driving while intoxicated.

For example, during a Southern California DMV hearing, and officer enters the arrest report prepared by the arresting policeman that the driver showed signs of being under the influence of alcohol and was weaving in and out of lanes. Additionally, the driver made statements admitting that she had had several drinks of hard alcohol and decided to drive. Although the driver will have the chance to testify with the help of her attorney before the DMV hearing officer, she will likely not be able to disprove the assumption that she was drinking and driving. In this cases, the burden that she was not intoxicated will not be met, and the DMV will suspend her license according to their laws.

The burden of proof will determine how the case should be argued, defended and presented. The proper evidence and testimony must be prepared according to whether the case is being heard by a criminal Judge or a DMV hearing officer. An experienced Los Angeles DUI lawyer has handled these cases thousands of times and knows what the best argument will be based on the circumstances and who the case is being presented to.

California state law prohibits anyone from driving a motor vehicle when your driving ability is impaired under section 23152 (a) of the vehicle code. Drivers are also prohibited under section 23152 (b) of the vehicle code to drive a motor vehicle when their blood alcohol level is a .08% or more.

Whether you take a breath test or blood test after being stopped and arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, the seriousness of your case relies in great part on the readings obtained at the time that you were stopped and tested.

A criminal prosecution for this charge carries serious consequences including probation, fines in excess of $1500, required attendance at a lenghly alcohol program, and a range of other consequences.

The strength of the prosecution's case involving driving under the influence, is based on the probable cause for the stop, the driver's performance on a series of field sobriety tests, their blood-alcohol level, both at the scene, and at the station or hospital. The drivers record can also substantially affect the willingness of the prosecutor to reduce or dismiss any case.

The legal level of blood-alcohol as stated above is important as a benchmark for the prosecutor and the defense lawyer to negotiate. The closer the driver's blood-alcohol rate is to the legal limit, the weaker the prosecution's case. The higher the driver's blood-alcohol over legal limit can significantly build a stronger case for the prosecution who will seek greater penalties typically, then those cases involving lower readings.

There seems to be a growing trend in certain judicial districts, to file drunk driving charges even in cases where one of blood-alcohol is less than an 08%. Arthur recently was retained to represent a driver who although had a blood-alcohol rate of 07%/07% was charged with a 23152 (a) V C. In this case, our firm was able to persuade the prosecutor based upon our clients good record to dismiss the charges of DUI, and allow the driver to settle the case, but to a substantially lower charge.

Thanks to the California Legislature, our state enacted some years ago a law commonly known as a stop and snatch law. Essentially anyone stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol whose Bac level is a .08% or more as their license taken by the police officer and forwarded to the DMV. In its place, the officer gives the driver a pink piece of paper known affectionately as an administrative per se drivers license.

Although this important piece of paper will serve as your drivers license, it hales on its face important information regarding your rights and obligations under California law. Most importantly it informs the driver that the DMV has commenced an action to suspend your license.

These suspected DUI driver with a .08 or over is put on notice that they are required to contact DMV within 10 days of their arrest, including weekends, to request a hearing to determine whether or not a suspension is appropriate based upon sufficient probable cause to stop and arrest the driver on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol. The second critical issue is whether these suspected driver was operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .08% or more.

Failure to request such a hearing and delay, or in legal terms a stay, results in a drivers license being suspended commencing on the 31st day after their arrest.

Smart and responsible drivers contacting the DMV in a timely manner within the 10 days are often caught offguard in their attempt to exercise their rights to extend their driving privileges as well as request an administrative hearing to contest the pending suspension. Our firm frequently is told by clients that representatives of the Department of Motor Vehicles have overtly told drivers not to waste their time, or it will do no good. Drivers often are dissuaded, and advised that it's better to start your suspension after the 30 days, instead of waste their time exercising their rights to such a hearing.

Seeking the advice of an attorney, who frequently deals with the DMV, and understands the value of the client and his attorney carefully reviewing all police reports for accuracy, prior to deciding how to proceed in defending their vital driving privileges against a suspension. Exercise your rights in a timely manner, to avoid the awful consequence of losing your driving privilege. Frequently, through effective defense strategies, we are able to protect our clients valuable driving privileges, regardless of the specific facts of our clients cases. None of this is possible, unless the client contacts us within the allotted time to request a DMV hearing.

Many of our DUI clients do not know that it is up to them to schedule a DMV hearing within ten days of their arrest, including weekends. If a DMV hearing is not scheduled, it can lead to automatic license suspension, without a chance to be heard.

The DMV hearing is a completely different proceeding from the Criminal court proceedings. The evidence is different, and heard by two different decision makers, and the issue that is being decided is also different.

During a criminal proceeding, the case is brought by the government, represented by a Prosecutor. The Judge is to determine whether there is enough evidence to find the driver to be driving while intoxicated. Both sides will present arguments, and evidence (usually the officer's report and the alcohol screening test reading) before the judge determines a sentence if the driver is convicted of a DUI.

A DMV hearing does not have a Judge or a Prosecutor and is an administrative hearing. The DMV hearing is with the driver and a DMV officer and can be done over the phone. The officer will review the officer's report and the Alcohol Screening test reading to determine an appropriate suspension or revocation of a person's license. The driver, or an attorney on their behalf, also has the time to present an argument and a defendant to reduce or dismiss suspension or revocation.

A Los Angeles criminal defense attorney is able to represent you in both types of hearing. An experienced Los Angeles DUI attorney has represented thousands of clients in DMV hearings as well as Criminal court proceedings. They can fight for your rights and protect your driving privileges and help keep your criminal record clean.

Many different factors come together to affect the rate of alcohol absorption, how quickly it is distributed into your blood stream and how quickly it is eliminated from your body.

Alcohol absorption is affected by the food you have ingested and the type of drink. When food is eaten along with alcohol, the alcohol absorption is a lot slower and the blood alcohol concentration peak (the point of greatest intoxication) is generally achieved anywhere between an hour to six. For people who haven't had as much to eat, and are not eating along with their alcohol, the blood alcohol concentration peak is reached faster, generally in half an hour to two. The type of food ingested; fat, proteins or carbohydrates may have an effect on the quickness of absorption, but there is no concrete evidence. There is proof however, that the bigger the meal, and the closer in time to drinking that it is eaten, there is a slowing effect on alcohol absorption.

The stronger a drink is, the faster it will be absorbed by the body. Drinks that are generally between 10% and 30% of alcohol concentration will be most rapidly absorbed. Drinks that are less than 10% will take longer to be absorbed by the body.

The rate at which the alcohol is distributed into a person's blood stream depends on their body fat, type and weight. Persons with lower body fat percentages will have a lower blood alcohol content. For people who are the same weight, the person with the higher fat will have the higher BAC. Similarly, the less a person weighs, the more they will be affected by alcohol.

The liver is the organ responsible for eliminating alcohol from the body. Studies show that women eliminate alcohol from their systems 10% on average faster than men. Additionally, if a person is consuming alcohol at a higher rate than elimination, the BAC will be higher.

These are all things to take into account when a person is charged with a DUI. Consult a Los Angeles DUI Attorney to discuss the contents of an arrest report and the reading of the sobriety test. Oftentimes, there may be errors and the BAC may not be as high as it is documented. A knowledgeable attorney can expose the errors to the court, leading to a potential reduction or dismissal of the charge!

Client always asked me at our first consultation, whether or not it is possible to get the their recent DUI case dismissed. I provide each client with an honest answer, that is, it depends. The law requires that for a driver to be convicted of a driving under the influence charge, certain legal requirements must be properly proven.

Regardless of a drivers blood alcohol level at the time that they were stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence, the police must legally justify a traffic stop by specifically identifying the vehicle code violation committed by the driver which gives rise to a lawful stop. This critical foundation is known as the principle of probable cause. Essentially, every DUI stop is required to have sufficient probable cause, or legal reason.

The absence of probable cause requires dismissals are granted, when it is determined by a prosecutor, judge, or jury that the officer lacked probable cause to justify a stop. Our firm recently represented a client who was stopped by the police for driving without his rear license plate illuminated. The driver was arrested for DUI because he had a blood alcohol reading of .18, over two times the legal limit. This case was ultimately dismissed on a defense motion when the driver and two passengers contested the police allegation regarding the light. The judge determined that the officer lacked probable cause to stop the driver because he believed that there was in fact a working license plate light as testified by the driver and his witness/passengers.

Another powerful argument for dismissal can be based upon the fact that although the breathalyzer machine that the driver was tested on appeared to be working, the maintenance and accuracy records obtained through subpoena showed a different story. A careful review showed a flawed and questionable accuracy of the machine that tested our clients breath for alcohol content. These independent maintenance and accuracy records showed an unacceptable percent of error uncovered by an independent agency trained to determine the accuracy of all tests performed by the police department.

A drivers blood alcohol level is the cornerstone of the prosecutor's case. When this essential building block, it determined to be unreliable, it creates an irreparable flaw in the states case which ultimately leads to a dismissal by the prosecutor.

The above reasons, are but a few of the challenges that are put to the prosecutors, making them prove their case by justifying that the police be held to the highest constitutional standards of law.

A driving under the influence conviction not only affects a person's criminal record, but also their driving record and auto insurance. Exactly how it affects each person's auto insurance policy will differ from person to person, and from company to company.

When a person is convicted of a DUI, the DMV is automatically notified. Along with scheduled court dates to determine the outcome of the criminal case, the DMV will hold a hearing to determine the status of the person's driving privileges. Once the sentence is determined, a person's auto insurance company is allowed to access any information they need regarding the conviction. Upon their research, the auto insurance company will make a determination regarding the status of the person's insurance policy.

Insurance policies are affected in different ways. For some people the premium will increase significantly, whereas other policies will be cancelled until further notice. The approach taken by an insurance company depends on several factors; the past driving record of the individual, the criminal record of the driver, as well as the age. After taking into consideration all factors as a whole, the company will make a determination.

Once driving privileges have been revoked, a person is required to file an SR-22 before privileges can be reinstated. An SR-22 is a form that shows proof of insurance. An insurance company issues a SR-22 to a driver so they can present it to the DMV when requested. Before insurance can be reinstated after it has been revoked or suspended, an SR-22 must be filed with the DMV to demonstrate that the driver is insured. A major insurance company does not issue SR-22s to listed drivers, only those that are the named driver on the policy. So for example, if the insurance policy has the father as the main driver, and the son is listed as a driver under the father's policy, the insurance company will not issue a SR-22 to the son. The son will have to get a separate policy where they are the named driver.

An experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney can represent a person in criminal court as well as DMV hearings. Years of practice has given them the knowledge to prepare a powerful defense on a driver's behalf. They fight hard to keep a driver's privileges intact and their auto insurance premiums low, and their policy with full coverage.

Many of our clients proclaim that the officer had no reason to stop them while driving and administer a field sobriety test. The reason may be any number of things, but our clients hold that those are false allegations. If there is no actual probable cause for an officer to pull someone over, then they cannot charge you with a DUI. Some common causes that officers cite for pulling a person over include: weaving in and out of lanes, broken taillight, not indicating before turning, and not staying within the lanes. If a person is stopped for doing any of the aforementioned violations, plus any others, an officer has a right to stop the person and ask the person to complete some field sobriety tests if they feel it may be necessary.

In the absence of any valid reason to stop a person, the officer has no right to do so. The police report will list the reason the person was initially stopped. When a person claims that there was never a reason to stop them, it is the officer's word against our client's, which brings up the issue of credibility. Generally the officer is taken to be accurate in his report, and his or her word is to be taken as truth. The person charged however, does not have as much credibility for many reasons, including the assumption that they were intoxicated at the time of the report.

When a person claims that there is no probable cause, it can often be difficult to prove. For example, say a person is stopped by an officer because they were weaving in and out of lanes. The officer stops the person, and notices symptoms of intoxication and administers a field sobriety test. The person is found to have a relatively high BAC and is taken into the station and charged with a DUI. Later on the person hires a Los Angeles DUI attorney and claims they were not weaving in and out of lanes, and therefore the officer had no right to stop them.

This would be difficult to prove when it is the officer's word against that of the person charged, unless there are witnesses to corroborate the story. There may be other passengers in the car, or there may be friends who are following them and watch as the officer stops the driver. In these situations, they may be able to make an argument, but there will always be an element and doubt for bias.

Oftentimes it is difficult to disprove what is written in the police report, but there is certainly room to try. An experienced and knowledgeable DUI attorney can explain all possible defenses and its probability for success in an obligation free consultation.