Arizona's medical marijuana laws which allow persons to access marijuana for medicinal purposes, does not give these cardholders immunity from prosecution for DUI charges. An Arizona court recently delivered a ruling in a case involving a man who was arrested for DUI after driving a car the car under the influence of pot. The man was a medicinal marijuana cardholder, and although he was found not guilty of driving while impaired, the court did find that he was guilty of driving with pot in his system.

According to the ruling, persons who are using marijuana and have traces of the drug in their system, can be charged with and convicted of DUI. It's an interesting ruling, and one that is bound to be watched in states like California that also have medical marijuana laws in place.

The ruling is also interesting to Los Angeles DUI lawyers because it comes at a time when a number of states are moving to ease restrictions on access to marijuana. Colorado and Washington recently became the first states to allow the sale of marijuana for recreational purposes. As restrictions on marijuana continue to ease, courts continue to deliver conflicting messages, ruling that while access to marijuana is easier, people who have traces of the drug in their system can actually be prosecuted for DUI.

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.

Teens, who are exposed to brand-specific alcohol advertising on television, are much more likely to drink. Those who already drink illegally are likely to drink even more, when they view such commercials. Those are the results of a new study that was released by researchers at the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health recently.

The researchers were specifically looking at whether brand-specific alcohol ads that air during television shows specifically increase consumption of these brands. They found that there was definitely an association between exposure to specific ads during television shows an increased consumption. Ad exposure over 20 television shows was monitored, and the researchers looked at whether the ads had an impact on teen drinking rates. They found from their study of more than 1000 people, that there was a significant connection between exposure to a brand in advertisements on television, and actual consumption of the beverage.

Teenagers are specifically targeted by the alcohol industry, even though people below the age of 21 are not allowed to possess or drink alcohol. The legally permissible drinking age in California is 21 as in the rest of the country.

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.

That seems to be confirmed by statistics in Los Angeles and other cities, where there has been a drop in the number of DUI offenses recorded since Uber arrived on the scene. According to data involving DUI citations from the California Highway Patrol, the number of DUI arrests actually peaked just before the release of the Uber app in April 2012. After the app was introduced, the number of DUI arrests began to drop even as other rideshare apps like Lyft arrived on the scene. However, police are not as quick to credit Uber for that drop in DUI arrests.

The Los Angeles Police Department however does admit that there has been a slight decrease in the number of DUI accidents between 2013 and 2014. The department also admits that there is no way to confirm that a decrease in the number of DUI accidents is in any way linked to the increasing use of Uber. The Los Angeles Police Department would like to believe that there have been other factors that have contributed to a drop in DUI arrests, and DUI crashes like increased awareness and education campaigns targeting drunk driving.

Uber hasn't been around that long to really tell whether the app has contributed to a decrease in the number of DUI arrests. However, California DUI lawyers would highly recommend that if you are concerned about driving home after having had a few alcoholic beverages, call a cab.

The Supreme Court of the United States Of America recently decided not to take up the appeal of a DUI decision, that had been handed by a California court.

The decision was handed down in Vangelder versus California, and the crux of the defense was the breath test performed just before the arrest. Vangelder had been arrested for DUI after a breath test. At the trial, attorneys for the defendant brought in an expert, who said that testing machines were unreliable because they tended to measure the alcohol content in the wrong part of the breath. They didn't measure the alcohol content in the deeper part of the air, which is closer to the bloodstream, and therefore, readings from the testing machines were unreliable.

The defense however didn't work, and the man was convicted. The man appealed, and the California State Court ruled against him again. When the matter went to the Supreme Court of the United States Of America, the Court decided to not take up the appeal at all.

A Riverside woman, who seems to have run over her father in a tragic accident while she was under the influence of alcohol, has been arrested.

According to police, the woman has been arrested on suspicion of DUI after the accident in which she struck her father with her car, while under the influence of alcohol. The father was trying to convince her not to drive while drunk. The woman has been drinking at home, and arguing with family members. She seems to have rushed outside her home, and tried to drive off in her car. Her father tried to persuade her not to drive since she had been drinking. However, she refused to listen to him, and when he tried to prevent her from driving off by standing in the driveway, she struck him as she was backing out of the garage.

The father was rushed to the hospital where he later died. The woman was arrested on suspicion of DUI, and after investigation, could actually face more charges.

The market is flooded with personal mobile breathalyzer devices that can be used to determine whether you are too intoxicated to drive. These devices have become popular, not just because they are accessible and quite affordable, but also because some of them do have high levels of accuracy.

If being arrested for DUI is a concern for you – as it should be - then it might help to invest in a personal breathalyzer. It is handy to carry around, and you can instantly use it to check whether your blood alcohol levels are too high for you to drive safely.

While there are a number of breathalyzer models available, you don't want to skimp on price. Don't choose the cheapest breathalyzer you can find.

This is a decision that is likely to have many far-reaching effects. The United States Supreme Court decision came in the case Navarette vs California. The case is related to the California Highway Patrol’s decision to pull over a pickup truck based on an anonymous tip.

The California Highway Patrol was alerted to the silver Ford F-150 Pickup via an anonymous tip which informed officers that a truck had just run another car off the road. The officers found the F-150 pickup exactly where the anonymous tip had informed the officers it would be. They followed the truck for some time, but did not notice any illegal or suspicious activity. However, they still pulled the truck over, and searched it. They found a stash of marijuana in the truck, and he was arrested.

The cops say that they smelled marijuana near the truck, and then decided to search the truck. What is disturbing is that this entire search of the truck was based on an anonymous tip. There was nothing that the truck driver did to arouse suspicion in the officers. He was driving at a reasonable speed, and was not driving recklessly or dangerously. He was not veering lanes, and there was no reason to suspect that he was driving in an impaired condition. The officers had pulled him over based on an anonymous tip, claiming that he had run another car off the road.

The families of the victims of a fatal DUI car accident are protesting a fundraising initiative by the family of the driver of the car involved in the accident to pay for his legal fees.

The accident occurred when the driver drove his car off Interstate 8. Two of his friends in the car were killed in the accident. According to prosecutors, the intoxicated motorist had a blood alcohol level of .30 at the time of the accident. They have filed murder charges against him. He has a prior DUI conviction on his record.

His family and friends have gone on a fundraising effort to raise money through donations for his legal defense. However, they are being criticized by the families of the victims who were killed in the accident, for those fundraising efforts.

Could the secret of avoiding drunk driving be as simple as eating yeast before you begin drinking your beer? According to one beer connoisseur, it definitely is. Jim Koch, who happens to be the chairman and cofounder of the Boston Beer Company, recently admitted his long-held secret to avoiding the effect of drinking, even after several beers.

According to him, he consumes standard regular yeast mixed in yogurt just before he begins drinking. The standard prescription is one teaspoon for every beer. According to his experience, the yeast breaks down the alcohol in the stomach, and thereby prevents the alcohol from being observed in the bloodstream. Therefore, according to him, there are very few of the intoxicating effects that are normal after having a few beers.

The theory is that the yeast breaks down the alcohol molecules into components of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon, right in the stomach before the alcohol moves to the liver. Therefore, there are few of the intoxicating effects of alcohol that are very often seen when a person has had 5 to 6 beverages.

Tough laws, stringent enforcement and education initiatives - colleges around the country have experimented with many strategies to reduce the risk of underage drinking on their campuses, and have failed. Many colleges have now begun experimenting with less conventional methods, in an effort to reduce binge drinking on campus.

Binge drinking is the consumption of five or more alcoholic beverages in a single session, and it is one of the most dangerous behaviors that a college student can engage in. Binge drinking is strongly linked to DUI.

In a new study, researchers at the University at Buffalo, State University Of New York found that talking about the risk between drinking alcohol and dying in a fatal accident is not an effective way to reach out to college students. However, students pay more attention to the dangers of drunk driving when they are told about the possible association between drinking alcohol and cancer. The researchers found later that those students who believed that there was a strong association between alcohol and cancer were actually much less likely to binge drink.

If you're the parent of a teenage driver, you might want to keep tabs on the kind of friends that your child is hanging around with, if you aren't already. Pay special attention to the alcohol and drug practices of your child's friends. If his friends are comfortable with using alcohol or drugs, and driving under the influence of these intoxicants, then it is very likely that your child will also indulge in the same practices.

According to the results of a new study, teenagers very often tend to copy the practices of their friends, when it comes to driving under the influence. The study very clearly found that older high school students were much more likely to drive while intoxicated, when they had friends who frequently drove intoxicated.

It shouldn't be hard to understand the reasons for this. When an impressionable young teenager is frequently exposed to friends who find nothing wrong in driving while intoxicated, the teenager is much more likely to believe that such practices are perfectly normal. Parents play a huge role in helping reduce the risk of underage DUI, and this is one of the things that you can do as a parent to reduce the risk of an underage DUI arrest, involving your teenage child. Step in to end such undesirable friendships in high school, even if such actions prove to be unpopular with your child.

Last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conducted a survey on drug and alcohol use among Americans in 60 cities, testing random motorists. Many of those Americans are furious over the methods that were used for the testing. Many motorists will be outraged to find that they were screened for DUI before they even consented to the test.

Broadly, the methods that are used in the survey, the National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by Drivers, involve police stopping motorists at roadblocks. Motorists are ordered into the roadblock area without informing them about the purpose of this, and federal contractors working for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ask them to participate in a drug and alcohol use survey. Motorists may be asked for their breath, saliva or blood samples, and maybe offered cash gifts of between $10 and $50 for body fluid samples.

The federal administration goes to great pains to insist that participation in the survey is entirely voluntary, and that drivers have the right to refuse to give samples if they don't want to participate. While drivers are not charged with DUI if those tests are found to be positive, many of them do find that these tests are intrusive, very invasive, and very often leave them feeling trapped in a roadblock.

A former San Francisco prosecutor, who admits to having shown off his badge to get special treatment by arresting officers during a DUI arrest, could lose his law license for his behavior. A California judge ruled recently that former San Francisco Deputy District Attorney Marc Guillory could lose his law license for a period of two years.

Guillory has three prior convictions for DUI. During those three arrests he was serving as San Francisco Deputy District Attorney. During his tenure as prosecutor in San Francisco, he was arrested in 2008, 2010, and then again in 2012 for driving under the influence of alcohol.

According to arresting officers, during each of those incidents, he “badged” them.  This means he showed the arresting officer his Deputy District Attorney badge in order to seek special treatment. The officers say that they interpreted his actions to mean that he specifically sought special treatment from them. Those three DUI arrests are not the only ones that Guillory has on his record. In 1999 he was also arrested and convicted for misdemeanor reckless driving for being involved in a drunk driving accident that resulted in a fatality.

Teen singing sensation Justin Bieber was arrested recently in Florida for DUI and drag racing. He is now out on bail. He was arrested after a police officer saw him heading down a street in Miami Beach, driving a yellow Lamborghini at excessive speeds.

According to officers, they were alerted because the star was driving at least twice the speed limit at the time. When he was pulled over, the officers noticed several signs of intoxication. He seemed drunk, and smelt of alcohol. According to officers, he had a look of stupor on his face, and when he was ordered to get out of the car, he made very slow and deliberate movements.

When the officer asked him to put his hand on his vehicle so that he could be patted down for weapons, Bieber refused to do so. He became uncooperative and argumentative. He failed a DUI sobriety test, and was then taken to the station for a breathalyzer test. Officers also found that he was driving with an invalid license.

Things are likely to get more complicated and more serious for former teen idol David Cassidy of The Partridge Family show. He was recently arrested for the third time for DUI.

The 63-year-old actor registered at .19% on an alcohol test after he was stopped by the California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles. That is more than twice the legally permissible blood alcohol concentration limit in California. According to officers, they pulled over the actor after they observed him making a right turn on a red light in clear violation of a sign which clearly indicated that no right turns were allowed at the red light. When the officers approached the door, they noticed the smell of alcohol from the car, and arrested him.

Last year, Cassidy was arrested for DUI in New York, after he registered at .10 on a breathalyzer test. The maximum legally permissible blood alcohol concentration level in New York is also .08.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently unveiled a massive $7.5 million ad campaign, aimed at reducing the incidence of drunk driving over the holiday season. The latest series of ads run by the federal agency feature none other than RoboCop, which the federal agency says it has “enlisted” to crack down on drunk driving this season.

In the ad, the agency teams up with science fiction thriller RoboCop, which is set to be released within the next few weeks to launch a new trailer/public service DUI announcement, that warns drivers that they must drive sober or will be pulled over. As RoboCop appears on the screen, a voice-over states that cops are stepping up in their mission to protect the streets from drunk driving. The same actor who plays the lead RoboCop in the movie, is shown catching a potential intoxicated motorist holding up his car keys, and telling him “I’d put those down if I were you”.

Obviously, this is a gimmicky campaign that is meant to capture eyeballs, and it is likely that it will accomplish its purpose. After all, during the busy holiday season, with a much higher incidence of driving under the influence of alcohol, the federal agency's does find itself strapped for ideas and stressed for resources to help get the anti-drunk driving message out and effectively. This is a unique campaign and is likely to get many people talking, and therefore, raise more awareness about driving under the influence of alcohol.

A DUI verdict that was delivered in a small juvenile court has reverberated across the country. A judge in a Fort Worth Juvenile Court recently sentenced a 16-year-old boy to 10 years of probation after he confessed to charges arising out of a fatal drunk driving accident that occurred on a rural road. Four people were killed in the accident, and at the time of the crash, the teenager tested positive for a blood alcohol concentration level that was at least three times the legal limit of .08.

His defense lawyers brought to the stand a psychologist who testified in his defense that he suffered from a condition called affluenza. According to the psychologist, this was a syndrome that prevented children like this teenage boy, from learning that bad behavior can have serious consequences. As a result of the syndrome, the boy failed to realize that bad behavior and breaking the rules can have serious consequences, and hence, his poor judgment in driving under the influence of alcohol. The psychologist also brought attention to the fact that the boys parents had failed to punish him for equally poor behavior in the past.

Prosecutors understandably are livid at the judgment, especially since they had sought the maximum sentence in this case, which would have amounted to 20 years in prison. However, the lawyers were very successful in convincing the judge that what the boy needed was not time in prison, but rehabilitation.

Earlier this year, officials found mistakes in testing at the Orange County Crime Lab that put the results of hundreds of DUI alcohol tests in jeopardy. Now comes news that even more errors have been discovered at the same lab.

The announcement of the earlier errors was made after officials found mistakes in testing that likely produced incorrect lab test results. Those incorrect results are believed to have occurred over at least 5 months. Several persons, who submitted samples for alcohol testing, and whose test results were affected by the error, have already been contacted by the district attorney's office. Prosecutors have also contacted people who were convicted for driving under the influence or pleaded guilty to DUI, as a result of those botched DUI tests. Not surprisingly, these people are extremely upset about the fact that errors in testing, resulted in convictions for them.

The new error is believed to have been discovered during an audit of the lab's operations after the earlier errors were discovered. Under crime lab procedure, a blood test sample is tested twice using two different machines. The average reading is then taken. However, this error is believed to have occurred when the lab calibrated one of the machines, and failed to input the appropriate data in the software. That meant that the results were skewed by as much as .003 percentage points.