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.

California Vehicle Code §23152(a) regulates Driving under the Influence of drugs (DUID). This same section also makes it unlawful to be driving under the influence of alcohol. Despite being charged under the same section, both types of cases invoke different arguments and defenses.

Someone is considered to be intoxicated for purposes of a DUI if their Blood Alcohol Level is .08% of higher. This is a objective test and a reading is obtained through the use of simple blood, breath and urine tests. In contrast, there is no objective test for a DUID.

When stopped under the suspicion of a DUID an officer will check for several different subjective signs to include in their report and support their allegation that a person was under the influence of drugs. They will observe your general behavior, and check your pulse and heart rate.

Additionally, they may ask you to complete a horizontal or vertical gaze nystagmus test. A gaze nystagmus test asks a person to follow an object with their eyes only, and not moving their head. It checks for involuntary jerking movements of the eye, which can be indicative of certain drug use. An officer will also ask the person to complete a series of Field Sobriety Tests like walking in a straight line, Finger to Nose, or a balance test. A urine test is also generally asked to be completed.

The results of any tests administered, or questions asked during an arrest will then be stated on the officer's arrest report. Prosecution will use the specific facts of the case to prepare their argument and to prove in court that the driver was under the influence of drugs.

An experienced Los Angeles Criminal Defense attorney has handled thousands of DUID cases. They are aware of the type of arguments Prosecution will make, and have powerful defenses ready to use in their client's favor. Due to the fact that a DUID case must be proven through the use of facts, there is much room for negotiation. A knowledgeable Criminal Defense attorney will present the facts in a light most favorable to their client, casting doubt on any claims made my Prosecution and weakening their case.

Police officers are always right... wrong! At Hoffman and Associates, our law firm has successfully defended thousands of driving under the influence cases. One of our effective strategies is to attack and challenge the credibility of the officers observations, statements and conclusions being used against our clients.

You may be unlucky enough to have been stopped by the police for allegedly committing a vehicle code violation, but it is not necessarily true. The main thrust of an officer's education at the Academy is how to build a case against suspected violators. Officers are taught from the beginning that they must always justify and build a case.

One of the major areas of challenging the officers observations is to point out to the prosecutor, judge or jury, that although the officer will testify from the witness stand, or by the statements in police reports, that his credibility must be established like any other witness, despite the fact that he is a police officer.

Prosecutors, like police officers, like to act like these observations are completely objective, and accurate without question. Nothing is further from the truth. An officers observations and conclusions are really nothing more than subjective. The difference is very significant. Clearly subjective opinions by all people, including police officers, must be considered by looking at their personal influence that could motivate anyone to color their opinion. These types of statements he are much more susceptible to error.

An example of these concepts is the fact that in defending thousands of drivers stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence, I have rarely ever seen an arrest report where the driver successfully passed all of these coordination or field sobriety tests. Since the officer has probably never met the suspected driver before the night of the arrest, she has no idea of that persons coordination or ability without any alcohol to compare his coordination at the time of his stop.

Considering the diversity in alleged DUI drivers performance on different field sobriety tests, why is there a common and universal type language, used in almost all police reports. Slurred speech, red watery bloodshot eyes is always present.

Showing the similarity of the officer's statements in a majority of his arrest attack the accuracy of his observations and erodes the credibility of the officers testimony. It is essential that you or your legal counsel carefully scrutinize the accuracy of this critical evidence being presented against you.

The credibility or believability of an officer saw summations and statements should never be considered totally accurate or correct. It is essential that all statements declare fully scrutinized and challenge by her attorney in a DUI or other criminal case.

Very often when our attorneys are reviewing police reports with our clients, major and minor factual discrepancies appear with no rational explanation. Although it's easy to assume that the clients, or person being charged with the offense is lying or fabricating to make themselves look better. There is often another reasonable explanation.

Although police officers are employed to protect and serve the community, and hold themselves out as neutral and unbiased people, that is not always the case. Police officers also have an agenda... that is to build a criminal case against a suspect who he has determined to be guilty.

Unfortunately, that is often not true. Officers frequently make errors in judgment, make flawed observations, as well as mistakes in identification. Officers are subject like anyone else to make the same kind of errors, and their conduct should always be carefully scrutinize by the same standard any other witnes

For example, in a DUI case, once a police officer suspects someone as a DUI driver, he rarely considers any other alternative explanation for their impairment. Sickness or other physical disabilities are rarely considered as an explanation for their conduct or unsatisfactory performance.

Police officers are goal oriented, and strive to build a case against a suspected drunk driver, often making errors in observations, as well as interpretations of what they see. In truth, they are not unbiased, or neutral observers. This is critical when your face with a serious ramifications of arrests. We feel that a drivers recollection of the events are just as valuable, as that of any officer. It is critical that you consult an experienced Los Angeles DUI lawyer who can challenge the truth of any observations or conclusions, and fight for truth to prevail.

The officer's observations in the police reports that he completes after an arrest, are the basis for determining the relative strength or weakness of the state of California's case against you.

In a driving under the influence arrest, the first critical element to evaluate is whether the officers had probable cause to stop you. In a DUI case, the more vehicle code violations the officers cite in their report create a stronger case for the prosecution. Vehicle code violations such as technical violations, like no license plates, or a tail light out although valid probable cause, create a weaker case for the prosecution.

Vehicle code violations like weaving, lane Straddling, or driving on the wrong side of the street, create a stronger case for the prosecution since they add a link for the prosecutor to build a case of a impaired driving.

Although citations for alleged violations are generally not issued for each separate violation, the officer is always seeking to list as many possible violations to build a stronger case against you. Eventhough a ticket typically is not issued at the time of arrest for any DUI, don't be surprised that the officer had listed each and every violation he claims he saw in your police report. Carefully reviewing this report can make you and your attorney aware of the numerous discrepancies contained in the report.

The field sobriety tests, or coordination tests are given by the police officer as a building block to show your lack of coordination and impairment related performance. Although it is always good to be cooperative, it is also important to know what is legally required, and that which is not. These field sobriety tests are not required by law, and since 90% of all drivers completing these do not pass in the officer's eyes, there seems little advantage to agreeing to perform these tests, which are challenging without consuming alcohol.

Your blood-alcohol testing or BAC level, is the contents of your alcohol level determined by a breath or blood test. You have a choice of completing either of these tests, and although the choice is yours, the law requires that you complete at least one of these tests when requested by a police officer who suspects that you have been driving under the influence.

The higher your blood-alcohol level above the legal limit of .08% creates a stronger case against you. Your statements about what alcohol you have consumed, or your admissions to feeling buzzed or impaired, rarely are favorable to making you look better. It is always good to refrain from making additional statements which further corroborate the officers observation about your level of impairment. Don't help the prosecutor build a stronger case against you.

Clients always asked me as part of our initial consultation subsequent to their DUI arrest, whether they did the right things. Immediately after a driver has been pulled over for a DUI the officer requests the driver to submit to and complete a series of coordination and balance tests, commonly called Field Sobriety Tests. They get their name from the common location these tests are administered which is usually not in a police station, but on the side of the road.

These tests are designed to provide police officers with screening information to determine the drivers level of impairmment. Common examples of these tests are walk the line... these tests, like other coordination tests given in DUI cases is first demonstrated and instructed by the officer prior to asking the driver to perform. This popular tests requires the driver to take a designated number of steps on a line or crack in the sidewalk and then duplicate that in the opposite direction. The officer looks for lack of the subject following specific instructions as well as lack of balance.

Another popular field sobriety tests is the nose touch test. This requires the driver to close his eyes tip his head back and touch alternating right and left index fingers to the tip of his nose. Reciting the alphabet, or countig 1-20 and then backwards are also popular.

It is a very popular misconception that these field sobriety tests which are typically part of every DUI investigation are required by law. That is not the case. Since state law does not require a driver to submit to any field sobriety tests when stopped on suspicion of DUI, it is permissible and advisable to pass on the officer's request to complete these. Although many of my clients tell me they feel that they performed these tests with excellent results, rarely is this reflected in the police officers viewpoint and police report. When asked by the officer to submit to a series of field sobriety tests, simply say you'd rather not.

Don't help the police officer build a stronger case against you by giving him an opportunity to demonstrate your lack of coordination, or failure to follow the officer's instructions. These observations are an integral part of his investigation and a building block for a case against you. Don't help !!!