#DUIdata (Blog)

Do your own work. People v. Hunter, 9/11/17

Posted by on October 11, 2017 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

Do your own work. People v. Hunter, 9/11/17

In criminal law in California, Defendant’s can request discovery from the prosecution under California Penal Code 1054. However, what if there are co-defendants…and one D wants discovery from the co’D? Does 1054 require this disclosure? The quick answer: probably not. So you need to do your own work to investigate (legally speaking). This 9/11/17 decision People v. Hunter from the Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Third Division. Hunter deals with Defendant wanting a Victim interview that Co-D’s attorney...

read more

Can police search my car after a DUI arrest? People v. Wallace

Posted by on September 28, 2017 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Can police search my car after a DUI arrest? People v. Wallace

I get this question a good deal, whether Police can search your car after a DUI arrest. This 9/7/17 case People v. Wallace gives some thoughts. It’s from the California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 2nd Div. There are laws as to whether police can search certain areas or containers in your car, and this case case doesn’t deal with that issue. Here, the officer sees the handle of a baton sticking out from a seat. At any rate, the issue is whether a car search not within police policy violates 4th Amendment. Spoiler: it...

read more

More prosecutor misconduct in closing arguments: People v. Cowan

Posted by on June 12, 2017 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

More prosecutor misconduct in closing arguments: People v. Cowan

Ah, Prosecutor misconduct: This February 23, 2017 decision People v. Cowan (8 Cal. App. 5th 1152; Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Six) deals with what Prosecutors can and cannot say in closing arguments.  It’s also a furtherance of the Cal Supreme decision People v. Centeno (2014) 60 Cal.4th 659 (Cowan was sent back to this Court to make its decision in accordance with Centeno). So first, in Centeno there were two main issues: 1) It was error “for the prosecutor to suggest that a reasonable account of the evidence...

read more

Again: implied consent is NOT actual consent. People v. Mason

Posted by on April 9, 2017 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

Again: implied consent is NOT actual consent. People v. Mason

Over the past years, we’ve seen drastic changes on whether a warrantless blood draw on a DUI arrest is lawful.  This issue has swept through both the US Supreme Courts (with McNeely (2013) 133 S.Ct. 1552 and Birchfield (2016) 136 S.Ct. 2160), as well as the California Courts. The most recent California case is People v. Arredondo (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 186, which the Cal Supremes took up in June 2016.  We’re still waiting on their decision, and you can read my blog about Arredondo here. With these cases, there are some deep legal...

read more

DUI, and someone else was driving? Can an investigator testify to the real driver’s statements?

Posted by on April 5, 2017 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

DUI, and someone else was driving? Can an investigator testify to the real driver’s statements?

What happens when you’re arrested for DUI, and someone else was driving?  Or…let me take it a level deeper: what happens when you’re arrested for DUI, and the Police say you admitted to driving, that others said you were driving, but then later recanted and are trying to say you did NOT drive–that someone else drove?  When and how can that come into play? This March 30, 2017 California Court of Appeals decision People v. Smith (cited as 2017 WL 1174411) addresses this issue…although there’s a little more to...

read more

Can Prosecutors Judge/Forum-Shop after losing a Motion to Suppress?

Posted by on December 9, 2016 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Can Prosecutors Judge/Forum-Shop after losing a Motion to Suppress?

Can Prosecutors Judge/Forum-Shop after losing a Motion to Suppress? So, in the criminal law arena (which San Diego DUI arrests fall into obviously), you have the ability to run a motion to try and suppress evidence.  If you win that motion, then the Prosecution may not be able to move forward with their case…since they may no longer have the evidence to try and prove what they’re trying to prove. With this, the Prosecution can dismiss the case…but then they may be able to refile the same charges (I know, silly).  There are...

read more

Can a Judge interact with jury deliberations?

Posted by on November 1, 2016 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

Can a Judge interact with jury deliberations?

How much can a Judge interact with Jurors while they deliberate?  If the Jurors have questions or cannot reach a verdict, can the Judge answer questions?  If so, to what extent?  This August 15, 2016 Cal Supreme Court decision People v. Nelson gives some guidance (and why I used the picture of Conte intercepting a pass). The facts of Nelson: While this can happen in any San Diego DUI or criminal trial, Nelson  is a murder case where the Jurors appeared deadlocked and hung (they could not make a decision for either a verdict of guilty or not...

read more

Further explanation re Hearsay with the Sanchez ruling

Posted by on October 21, 2016 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

Further explanation re Hearsay with the Sanchez ruling

Back on June 30, 2016, the California Supreme Court decided People v. Sanchez (63 Cal.4th 665), and it made many lawyers stop and think about how to bring evidence into a trial or at a hearing. My article in the North County Bar Association monthly magazine explained this, in case you caught it when it was hot off the shelves. The rule from Sanchez regards hearsay. Let’s discuss: First, we know generally that experts can rely on hearsay for their opinions. The law allows for that. But what the witness canNOT use is hearsay solely (and...

read more

Does the military diversion program apply to DUIs?

Posted by on October 3, 2016 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Does the military diversion program apply to DUIs?

A law from 2014, California Penal Code 1001.80, provides that certain military personal may qualify for a diversion program.  So instead of taking a criminal conviction, the qualifying military person can complete a diversion program, and then have his/her criminal Court case completely dismissed without a conviction. As it relates to DUIs, in general to qualify, the Defendant must show: He/she is a current or former member of the US Military; He/she suffered substance abuse as a result of his/her military service; The crime resulted from the...

read more

DUI science: it’s either right or wrong. Which is San Diego?

Posted by on September 22, 2016 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

DUI science: it’s either right or wrong. Which is San Diego?

DUI science is very objective and very black and white.  If it’s not right, it’s wrong.  And if it’s not valid, it’s invalid.  And you simply cannot convict someone or take away their license with invalid science. We have seen a very honest trend with the California Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District with two cases.  The first is Najera v. Shiomoto*, from 2015, and the second is Freitas v. Shiomoto, from September 14, 2016. Both cases deal with how blood is tested (usually) for DUI cases–the method of gas...

read more