Blog

Must a Court take an acquittal if Jurors decide against a greater included crime but are hung on a lesser?

Posted by on June 17, 2019 in #DUIdata, Blog | 0 comments

Must a Court take an acquittal if Jurors decide against a greater included crime but are hung on a lesser?

If Jurors hang on a lesser included offense, must the Court require a verdict of acquittal on the greater charged crime(s)? The quick answer from this California Supreme Court People v. Aranda (filed April 4, 2019) decision is the Court must take the acquittal on the greater crime and then the Court may declare a mistrial to the lesser offenses. There’s a few rules and understandings that come out of Aranda. First, the Court confirms Stone v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 503, which “concluded that a court must accept a partial verdict of...

read more

Must Miranda consent be written?

Posted by on April 1, 2019 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Must Miranda consent be written?

[An update on this case: on 3/29/19 the Courts ordered it depublished, see 2019 Cal App Unpub LEXIS 2252. But it’s still an interesting read with some history of this case law] Does Defendant need to sign anything to formally (and legally) waive Miranda? Must an officer take separate Miranda waivers after each advisal within Miranda? What if Defendant is a minor…how does that affect things? In re L.R. from 2/20/19 (Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Five) discusses this. First, the law at large: “The...

read more

Are there blanket preclusions for DUIs in military diversion?

Posted by on April 1, 2019 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Are there blanket preclusions for DUIs in military diversion?

In this 3/29/19 decision Wade v. Superior Court , Defendant was active duty military and was charged for DUI with the enhanced allegation of driving with a BAC at or above a 0.15. Defendant held no criminal record otherwise, and there was issues here also about the People claiming there was an accident with a hit and run when the record stated the opposite. Here, the People opposed Defendant being accepted into diversion, and the Trial Court rejected Defendant from the diversion because of the case facts. Boiled down, the main issue is...

read more

Revisiting Defense’s duty of disclosure: People v. Adrian Landers

Posted by on March 8, 2019 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Revisiting Defense’s duty of disclosure: People v. Adrian Landers

What is the line between a Criminal Defense Counsel’s duty to disclose evidence to Prosecution and the same duty to represent the Client? In People v. Adrian Landers decided 1/16/19, the Trial Court hit a Public Defender with a sanction “for violating a reciprocal discovery order.” It was a two-defendant joint criminal trial and the Court found the PD failed to disclose to the People the name and statements taken from a witness called by the co-defendant. The PD didn’t put on any witnesses or evidence and instead just argued the People didn’t...

read more

Fake Friending by Police does not violate the 4th Amendment. People v. Pride.

Posted by on February 15, 2019 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Fake Friending by Police does not violate the 4th Amendment. People v. Pride.

In this January 10, 2019 decision People v. Pride*,  an undercover officer posed as someone, sent Defendant a friend request…and then after a crime, Defendant posted something incriminating on his social media. The officer saw that post without using a warrant, as he was a “friend.” His account was private–open to only the people whose friend request Defendant accepted. And the posts disappeared after a period of time. Well, here comes trial and the People used that post to convict Defendant. Defendant claims this...

read more

Is Counsel’s concession of guilty during Opening a guilty plea?

Posted by on February 6, 2019 in #DUIdata | 0 comments

Is Counsel’s concession of guilty during Opening a guilty plea?

The People charged Defendant with DUI Murder, Hit and Run, among other allegations. In Defense Counsel’s Opening, he stated Defendant caused the accident, and hit and ran. Specifically Counsel said Defendant “’caused the accident. No dispute. And then he drove away.’ A few moments later, he conceded, ‘As to the hit and run, he’s guilty of it; I’ll say that again at the end. There are no games being played here…. But he’s not guilty of murder.’” Hm, so is this the same as a guilty plea to that crime? To start,...

read more

New DUI IID laws for 2019

Posted by on January 4, 2019 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

New DUI IID laws for 2019

Starting January 1, 2019, new laws as they relate to ignition interlock devices (in-car breathalyzers) came into effect in California. This comes from Senate Bill 1046. SB 1046 is effect January 1, 2019 until January 1, 2026 when some parts will sunset and other laws will come into effect. There are many, many updates to the Vehicle Code for all of this. So I’ll just hit the main points as they relate to what happens after a conviction of different levels of DUIs (ie 1st or 2nd offense, wet reckless, felony DUI, etc.). The vehicle code...

read more

Update in whether a DUI blood draw requires a warrant. People v. Gutierrez

Posted by on October 16, 2018 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

Update in whether a DUI blood draw requires a warrant. People v. Gutierrez

This 10/2/18 People v. Gutierrez* case comes down within a legal window left open from the 2016 US Supreme Court decision of Birchfield**. Birchfield held a breath test after a DUI arrest does not require a warrant but a blood test does…unless there is an exception to the warrant requirement (exigent circumstances, consent, or search incident to arrest). But what “Birchfield does not address is how the search-incident-to-arrest exception applies when a suspect is compelled to undergo BAC testing but given a choice as to what form...

read more

What role can a Judge play when Jurors ask a question during deliberations? People v. Fleming

Posted by on October 12, 2018 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

What role can a Judge play when Jurors ask a question during deliberations? People v. Fleming

This is not uncommon at all in criminal trials: the Jurors begin deliberation and they get stuck and need clarification. Now, they can’t (well, are not supposed to..) just phone-a-friend or ask the Court Bailiff… But there are formal rules where they can write questions to the Judge, have the Judge talk with the attorneys, and get written responses back from the Judge. This September 27, 2018 case People v. Fleming* is a solid recap on how those laws work. And it also discusses what type of response is inappropriate for a Judge to...

read more

A spoken verdict trumps a written one. People v. Bailey

Posted by on October 10, 2018 in #DUIdata, Uncategorized | 0 comments

A spoken verdict trumps a written one. People v. Bailey

Criminal cases must reach a unanimous decision. Yep, we know that. But HOW the verdict is given: that’s what this September 20, 2018 case People v. Bailey* discusses. Or more directly: the verdict is first written on a verdict form…but what if any Juror gives a different verdict verbally in Court? Which is the true verdict? Bailey rules the spoken verdict is the true one. Let’s dive in: Facts in Bailey: Criminal case with 2 counts of DUI. Jurors say they have a verdict. The Clerk reads the verdict as written: guilties....

read more