Blog

CALL US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION

Call Us831-426-5800

Call Us831-566-4357

303 Potrero Street, Suite 30
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Refusal of an alcohol test comes with a string of penalties attached. In fact, this is one of the reasons why attorneys typically do not advise refusing an alcohol test. The law in California specifically requires all motorists to submit to an alcohol test, if they are asked to submit to a chemical test by an officer.

If you refuse to take the chemical test, then you may have a number of penalties that apply to you. One of those penalties is related to the suspension of your driving license. There are a number of different types of penalties involving suspension of the license. For example, if you were above the age of 21 at the time of the arrest, then your refusal could possibly result in a suspension of the license for a year if it was a first offense. If it was a second offense within 10 years after the first offense, then you could lose your license for two years. A third or subsequent offense will result in a revocation of the license for a period of 3 years.

If you were below the age of 21 at the time of the refusal, then you will lose your license for a period of one year for the first offense, and two years for a second offense. A third offense within a period of 10 years will mean that you lose your license for three years.

...

A Florida mother is in deep trouble after a DUI incident in which her children reported her behavior.

The woman was driving with her children and at least three other 11-year-old kids, when the children stopped the car, and ran out into a nearby restaurant. They told people in the restaurant that one of the children's mother was driving them under the influence of alcohol. Her driving scared them so much that they felt that they had to get help.

According to the children, the woman was very drunk and was swerving all over the road. She struck a pole, and that incident resulted in damage to the car. However, when they came to a stop outside the restaurant, the children jumped out of the car and ran in for help.

...

Can you get drunk after eating a plate of beer-battered fish? That is the question that many Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers are asking, after a man in Wisconsin presented that as a defense for his DUI.

The man was pulled over by police officers, who then administered a breathalyzer test. The man registered below the .08 maximum permissible level, but since this wasn't his first DUI, he was charged just the same. The man apparently told police officers that he had eaten beer-battered fish just before he began driving, and that this accounted for the alcohol content in his blood. He denied having consumed any alcohol beverages.

To cook up a plate of beer-battered fish, the seafood is dipped in batter that includes beer, and deep-fried. Cooking removes the alcohol from the food. The alcohol evaporates in the cooking process, and although it leaves behind the flavor of alcohol, it does not leave behind alcohol content that would be sufficient to actually intoxicate a person.

...

An analysis of data from the California Department Of Motor Vehicles from 2012 found that employees at the DMV either suspended or revoked the licenses in at least 135 DUI cases. In all these cases, the persons arrested had never been charged with any DUI-related crime, nor had their criminal cases dismissed because of lack of evidence.

Los Angeles DUI lawyers have found that DMV employees are often allowed to act as a prosecutor and judge, when they decide whether to revoke or suspend licenses. Attorneys have always believed that allowing a single employee to decide on a matter like this amounts to a violation of an individual's constitutional rights. Now, a lawsuit that has been filed by a group of attorneys against the California Department Of Motor Vehicles, targets these arbitrary powers that are granted to employees at the agency.

The lawsuit claims that allowing employees to act as both the prosecutor and judge about which person’s licenses will be suspended or revoked, is a violation of their rights. At the California Department Of Motor Vehicles, a single employee is given the task of advocating for the DMV's interests, and making the decision in administrative proceedings. That makes it a clear conflict of interest, and means the system is tilted against drivers in the state of California who have been arrested for DUI.

...

Under the proposal by New York Democrat Congresswoman Nita M. Lowey, states that fail to enact the law by the deadline of October 1, mandating all DUI offenders to have these devices installed in their vehicles, would suffer a cut in their highway transportation funding.

Motorists in four California counties-Los Angeles, Sacramento, Almeida and Tulare - are already familiar with a program like this. Under the pilot program, which was kicked off in 2010, even an offender who is convicted of a first-time DUI, is required to install certified ignition interlock devices in each vehicle that he owns or operates.

An ignition interlock device is a device that is connected to the ignition of the car. The device takes a breath sample from a person before he begins driving. It detects the alcohol content in the breath, and if it detects alcohol content above a predetermined limit, it will shut down the ignition, and the engine will not start. As the person drives, the device will continue to ask for samples to reduce the risk that the driver will consume alcohol as he is driving.

...
Back to Top