California Criminal Lawyer Blog

The "per se" legal limit to drive in California is below .08 blood alcohol level. CNN reports that the National Safety Transportation Board is suggesting that states lower the legal limit to .05. Well, that means more business for California DUI lawyers. But does it really mean more safety for the public. Read below and make your own decisions.

Click HERE for the link, or just keep reading for the CNN story.

States should reduce the blood-alcohol level that qualifies as drunken driving to 0.05% to reduce fatal crashes, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended Tuesday.

The risk of a crash at 0.05% is about half as much as at 0.08%, the limit in all states, according to a safety board report released Tuesday.

"This is critical because impaired driving remains one of the biggest killers in the United States," said Deborah Hersman, the NTSB chairman. "To make a bold difference will require bold action. But it can be done."

But the board makes only recommendations to states and the federal government, and can't make laws or regulations.

The Governors Highway Safety Association supports the current alcohol threshold, while commending the board for a comprehensive strategy to address drunken driving. The group favors ignition locks for first-time offenders.

"When the limit was .10, it was very difficult to get it lowered to .08," said Jonathan Adkins, a spokesman for the governors group. "We don't expect any state to go to .05."

The advocacy group Mothers Against Drunk Driving welcomed the board's recommendation, but rather than push for a lower blood-alcohol content level, the group is fighting to eliminate drunken-driving entirely. MADD is pushing for better technology to prevent convicted drunken drivers from operating a vehicle after drinking and to make law enforcement more visible.

"As a mother whose child was killed by a drunk driver, the most important thing to me is preventing as many families as possible from suffering similar tragedies," said MADD National President Jan Withers. "MADD is focused on eliminating this completely preventable tragedy from our roadways."

The American Beverage Institute, a trade group representing 8,000 restaurants, blasted the report for focusing on moderate drinkers rather than more dangerous drunken drivers.

The average woman reaches 0.05% blood-alcohol content after one drink, according to the institute. But more than 70% of drunken-driving fatalities are caused by drivers with at least 0.15%, representing six or seven drinks, it said.

"This recommendation is ludicrous," said Sarah Longwell, the institute's managing director. "Further restricting the moderate consumption of alcohol by responsible adults prior to driving does nothing to stop hard-core drunk drivers from getting behind the wheel."

• Administratively suspending a driver's license immediately when a driver is arrested for being drunk.

• Suggesting states require steering locks on vehicles driven by convicted drunken drivers that would test the driver's breath before returning to the road. The group also recommended incentives through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to encourage states to adopt the locks.

• Creating special courts to handle drunken-driving cases.

• Documenting the last place drunken drivers had a drink before their crashes.

More than 100 countries set drunken-driving levels at 0.05%, leaving the U.S. as one of few developed countries with a higher level, according to board staffers.

The board's recommendation follows an effort in the European Union, which set a goal of cutting alcohol-related fatalities in half by 2010 and succeeded. Europe is now trying to cut the crashes in half again over the next decade.

The NTSB meeting came on the 25th anniversary of a fiery crash in Carrollton, Ky., that killed 25 people and injured 34 others when a pickup driven by a drunken driver hit a school bus returning from a church trip to an amusement park.

In 1982, the safety board previously recommended that states reduce drunken-driving limit from 0.10% to 0.08%. Utah became the first state to lower its limit in 1983, but all states hadn't followed suit until 2004.

In 1982, about half of all highway deaths involved alcohol-impaired driving and killed 21,113 people. The number of deaths has been cut in half since then, but about 10,000 deaths a year still represent about one-third of traffic fatalities. The numbers have held steady since 1995.

"We have made progress since that deadly night in Kentucky, but not nearly enough," Hersman said.

Continue reading "CALIFORNIA DUI DEFENSE: NTSB Says States Should Lower Blood Alcohol Level from .08 to .05. " »

From The Washington Post. Click HERE for original story.

By Ellen Nakashima, Published: March 27

Federal investigators in Northern California routinely used a sophisticated surveillance system to scoop up data from cellphones and other wireless devices in an effort to track criminal suspects — but failed to detail the practice to judges authorizing the probes.

The practice was disclosed Wednesday in documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California — in a glimpse into a technology that federal agents rarely discuss publicly.

The investigations used a device known as a StingRay, which simulates a cellphone tower and enables agents to collect the serial numbers of individual cellphones and then locate them. Although law enforcement officials can employ StingRays and similar devices to locate suspects, privacy groups and some judges have raised concerns that the technology is so invasive — in some cases effectively penetrating the walls of homes — that its use should require a warrant.

The issues, judges and activists say, are twofold: whether federal agents are informing courts when seeking permission to monitor suspects, and whether they are providing enough evidence to justify the use of a tool that sweeps up data not only from a suspect’s wireless device but also from those of bystanders in the vicinity.

In Northern California, according to the newly disclosed documents, judges expressed concerns about the invasive nature of the technology.

“It has recently come to my attention that many agents are still using [StingRay] technology in the field although the [surveillance] application does not make that explicit,” Miranda Kane, then chief of the criminal division of the Northern California U.S. attorney’s office, said in a May 2011 e-mail obtained by the ACLU.

As a result of that, she wrote, “effective immediately, all . . . applications and proposed orders must be reviewed by your line supervisor before they are submitted to a magistrate judge.”

The Justice Department has generally maintained that a warrant based on probable cause is not needed to use a “cell-site simulator” because the government is not employing them to intercept conversations, former officials said. But some judges around the country have disagreed and have insisted investigators first obtain a warrant.

“It’s unsettled territory,” said one U.S. law enforcement official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the record.

In a statement, Christopher Allen, a spokesman for the FBI, said the bureau advises field offices to “work closely with the relevant U.S. Attorney’s Office to adhere to the legal requirements” of their respective districts.

One of the problems is there is “scant law” addressing the issue of cell-site simulators, said Brian L. Owsley, a federal magistrate judge in the Southern District of Texas, who in June wrote a rare public ruling on the issue. He denied an application to use a StingRay, in large part because he felt the investigating agent failed to explain the technology or how it would be used to gather the target’s cellphone number.

Continue reading "Little-Known Surveillance Tool Called Stingray Raises Concerns by Judges, Privacy Activists" »

In this case, the prosecutor failed to give photographs to the public defender to the preliminary examination. The public defender contended, after he found out about the withholding of evidence, that the pictures were exculpatory and that the failure to disclose them violated Brady (373 U.S. 83).

The California Court of Appeal agrees that Brady applies pre-prelim! "We conclude that a defendant has a due process right under the California Constitution and the United States
Constitution to disclosure prior to the preliminary hearing of evidence that is both favorable and material, in that its disclosure creates a reasonable probability of a different outcome at the preliminary hearing. This right is independent of, and thus not impaired or affected by the criminal discovery statutes."

They do note that Brady operates differently at a prelim: "Accordingly, the standard of materiality is whether there is a reasonable probability that disclosure of the exculpatory or impeaching evidence would have altered the magistrate's probable cause determination with respect to any charge or allegation." This case resolves an issue left unclear in the recently
decided Gutierrez (2013 WL 940786; 2013 Cal.App. LEXIS 192; 2013 DJ DAR
3157; DJ, 3/14/13) case, which described the defense right to Brady "at" the
preliminary hearing.

This California Court of Appeal is quite specific in declaiming our right to discovery "prior to the preliminary hearing." Los Angeles County Public Defender Albert Camacho
was appellate counsel on this big win.

Bridgeforth v. Superior Court; 2013 DJ DAR 3947; DJ, 3/26/13; C/A
2nd, Div. 1

Continue reading "San Diego Criminal Lawyer Blog: Brady Discovery Applies Prior to Prelim" »

By GILLIAN MOHNEY
March 23, 2013

Click HERE for ABC news story, and video.

David Ranta has suffered a massive heart attack just two days after being exonerated of murder and leaving prison for the first time in 23 years, his attorney told ABCNews.com.

Lawyer Pierre Sussman said that Ranta, 58, was being treated in an New York hospital after suffering a severe heart attack Friday night. He did not provide further details.

Ranta was freed from prison Thursday after serving 23 years of a 37.5 year sentence for the murder of Brooklyn rabbi Chaskel Werzberger in 1990.

Ranta left a Brooklyn courtroom Thursday after a judge said he was free to go and his family cheered. On the way out he told reporters that the sensation of walking freely out of the courthouse was "overwhelming."

COLTON, Calif. (KABC) -- A grieving father is demanding answers after his daughter, her best friend and the woman driving the two girls were killed by a suspected drunken driver who has not been charged nearly two months after the crash.

Click HERE for link to story.

Kylan Allen, 12, and her best friend, 13-year-old Haven Penman, were being driven by Allen's grandmother, L.E. Mason, to a church gathering on the evening of Jan. 18 when they were struck by another vehicle in Colton.

Penman and Mason died at the scene. Allen was critically injured and died a few days later.

"She was just an innocent lady trying to take her little girls to a church function," said Allen's father, Keith Allen.

The driver of the other vehicle, 29-year-old Michael Hughes, was arrested by Colton police for driving under the influence, but no charges have been filed.

Allen says there are questions about whether or not his mother-in-law failed to yield before the crash, but he wants to know why a suspected drunken driver is free.

"He hasn't been prosecuted for anything yet, no charges have been brought up," the father said. "I can't understand this and I just want some justice for my daughter Kylan, and Haven."

The district attorney's office tells Eyewitness News the case is still under investigation.

Continue reading "INLAND EMPIRE NEWS: Family Angered that Suspected Riverside DUI Driver Still Not Charged in 3 Deaths" »

Super Bowl Sunday is a picnic for cops. Whether your team is winning (and you're cheering), or whether you team is losing (and you're crying) chances are there's alcohol involved. Your best bet is to host a party at home. If not, make sure you are the designated driver, or have one. Catching drunk drivers for cops on Super Bowl Sunday is like shooting fish in a barrel.

GO RAVENS!!!!

Now that we've gotten that out of the way......

If you want up to date information on DUI checkpoints in Southern California, make sure you check with MrCheckPoint at https://twitter.com/MrCheckpoint

Stay safe. GO RAVENS!

Continue reading "San Diego DUI Defense: Find Out Where Checkpoints Are NOW" »

SAN DIEGO DUI DEFENSE: BEWARE OF DUI CHECKPOINT THIS SUPERBOWL

Okay, think about it... it's Super Bowl weekend. And chances are you're not in New Orleans with my cousin Chris. He can afford to walk around the Latin Corner three sheets to the wind. But if you are planning to go to a Super Bowl party - and cheer my BALTIMORE RAVENS ON TO VICTORY - you'd better plan to be the designated driver, or have the party at your own home.

Cops will be setting up DUI Checkpoints and roving patrols all over San Diego, Orange County, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles.

How smart is it to drive a two-ton killing machine through the streets with, say, a .16 blood alcohol level? Not very. In fact, it is inherently dangerous for you and everyone in your vicinity. How about.... How smart is it to take a cab instead of driving? How about, since it'sSuper Bowl Sunday (or in this casepre-SUper Bowl Sunday!) and we all know we are going to imbibe, just plan to take a cab from the start? Yes, now we are getting smarter.

Yes, think about it. A GOOD DUI attorney will charge you about $5,000 or upwards pre-trial to work up your DUI case. Yes, people, there are defenses to high blood alcohol DUI's. I just got an offer of a wet reckless misdemeanor on a felony DUI with injury case that was originally charged as a felony. I also just got an offer of a straight misdemeanor to another DUI with injury case. Both clients were in the Navy, and could not have the felony without it ruining their careers. I recently sued San Diego's top DUI cop in federal court and won a settlement from the City because the cop falsified the basis for his stop. Yes, there are cheap attorneys out there and they will always claim to do cheaply what the best of us do for the cost of our experience. But you get what you pay for. I personally don't hire doctors that hawk themselves as "cheaper than the other guy." Nor would I ever hire an attorney that hawks himself for cheap.

Some cases California DUI can be won. Some California DUI cases cases can't be won. It depends on how competent your lawyer is, how the cop did the investigation, if the machines used were properly calibrated, and what you said at the time of the investigation, amongst other things.

Remember, anyone with a law license from the State of California can take your money and represent you on a DUI. That doesn't mean that they know what they are doing. Would you request advice from a novice if you had cancer? Of course not.

Now, if you haven't read it before, read it now. And if you have read it before, read it again. This article is chock full of info on what to do if you get stopped for a DUI and arrested.

It's starting now. Police agencies all over California are setting up roadblocks, and putting officers on overtime, to make as many DUI arrests as possible. It will be like shooting fish in a barrel. Hopefully, the tips below will come in handy for you over this Super Bowl weekend.

1. Make make sure you know where your license, registration and proof of insurance are. DUI officers historically write in their California DUI reports (putting only facts that harm you in them) that the suspect "fumbled for his wallet" and couldn't find his registration. They use this to try to show you were impaired. Be prepared.

2. When you get signaled by the DUI officer to pull over for a DUI assessment, do so immediately and safely. Roll down your window and put your hands on the steering wheel.

3. If a DUI officer asks you if you know why you are being pulled over, remember you don't have to answer. What a dumb question! He knows why he is pulling you over. He is pulling you over to assess you for drunk driving, and he's using the fact that you might have committed some minor vehicle code violations as an excuse. Don't make any admissions to him. So, you can just ask him, "why?"

4. The next question the DUI officer is likely to ask is, "Have you had anything to drink tonight." Remember your rights? You are not required to speak to officers. I know, I know, you think, "But if I don't talk to the officer, he will be mad." Let him be. You are not at a social gathering; he is not invited to your next birthday party. So don't worry about how he feels. He is collecting evidence against you. Don't give him any. It is best to say, "Officer, I appreciate what you do for a living, but I don't wish to answer any of your questions." You do NOT have to answer. The less from you he gets, the better for you in the long run. He is gathering evidence. But, you say, maybe he will let me go if he knows I'm being honest with him. NO. Most people who are pulled over and have alcohol on their breath get arrested. It's just a fact of life. Don't give him anything to put in that report that he can use against you later.

5. He may then say, "I'd like you to complete a series of tests for me." Again, let him know that you do not wish to participate in any tests. You are not required to comply. DUI officers try to give a series of field tests to determine if you are impaired. I have NEVER known any officer to do these as per the standardized protocol. I hold a certification authorized by the United Stated Department of Transportation to administer these tests, and was required to pass a practical and written test to get that certification given by a nationally re-known sergeant with the Idaho State Police. Cops learn how to do these, and then promptly forget them, making up their own "tests." Do not do them. Do NOT let the officer collect more false "evidence" against you. Just reiterate that you do not wish to perform and tests. It's your right.

6. The DUI investigation officer may then tell you he wants you to take an in field breath, hand held, breath test. Do not take this "test." It is unreliable, and regularly exhibits blood alcohol numbers higher than what you really are. The cop really, really wants you to do this now, because you have made no statements, and you have refused his field "tests." He wants this badly. He NEEDS some evidence. Do not do it. You are NOT required to blow into the little hand held machine.

7. The officer will most likely arrest you, cuff and take you downtown. You will be required to take a breath or blood test. You must choose to take one of these tests, or he will take what is called a "forced blood test" and your driver's license will be suspended for a full year.

A few pointers: If you are still absorbing alcohol, the breath test will read high. It is also an INDIRECT measurement of blood alcohol level. If you take blood, you won't get a result for at least a week. Also, law enforcement labs don't use the proper amount of sodium fluoride and potassium oxalate in the blood tubes, so you can attack those results later. Personally, I wouldn't let anyone hired by the city or county to draw my blood, after learning all I know about the incompetence of the people drawing the blood, and the lack of sanitation protocol in place. Why risk infection? (See, article on frightening practices in the San Diego crime lab).

If you are arrested, you will be released within 12 hours on your promise to appear. You will received a pink piece of paper called a "DS-367." This document tells you that you, or your lawyer, must call the Department of Motor Vehicle within ten days of the arrest to secure a hearing to determine whether or not the DMV will take your license. Do not miss this deadline or you will be suspended automatically.

So, be careful. Don't drink and drive if you can help it. Drive safely. Don't talk to cops. Be polite, but do not let them gather damaging evidence against you. And when you get home call this Southern California DUI Defense lawyer. DUI Defense is hard. But it's not impossible.

Continue reading "San Diego DUI Defense: Beware of DUI Checkpoints During Super Bowl" »

It's nearing the holidays and you want to go skiing in Banff for New Year's. But you've been convicted of a DUI.

Having a DUI on your record used to be a major impediment to vacationing in Canada. See, http://www.californiacriminallawyerblog.com/2009/11/california_dui_conviction_many.html for my previous article on the difficulties of entering Canada with a DUI conviction. The difficulty was because DUI is considered an "indictable offense," much life a felony in the U.S., foreigner's with such convictions were not allowed entry.

Canada's new policy is in direct response to waning tourism.

New Canadian policy lets first-time offenders a one-time exemption. But the exception is limited. Americans with more than one DUI still canot enter without going through the same red tape you had to cut through previously. And, it doesn't help Americans who want to do business regularly and who need to come and go frequently. Those, too, will have to go through the mountains legal red tape previously required of the first time offender.

Here are the rules: Americans with a single DUI must not receive any term of imprisonment in connection with their sentence and must have no other convictions or charges that could render them inadmissible. If eligible, these Americans can receive a free Temporary Resident Permit in lieu of paying the normal fee of $200.

Note: Isn't it interesting how Canada - who reviled and repelled those American citizens with a mere single DUI - changed its tune when money came into play? I guess "safety" isn't as important as money. Or maybe the Canadians saw just how ridiculous it was to impose wuch hardships on people who, well, just want to go to Banff.e Star Tribune reports that Canada has eased its strict policy denying Americans entry into Canada if they have a single DWI conviction. In the past, Americans with a single DWI conviction often were deemed inadmissible because DWI is considered an "indictable offence" in Canada. An "indictable offence" is similar to a felony in the American system. Canada's new policy is in response to lost tourism revenue.

The new Canadian policy effective March 1, 2012, allows certain first-time offenders a one-time exemption. Importantly, the policy doesn't help Americans enter Canada more than once and doesn't help those with more than one DWI or other conviction triggering inadmissibility.

Under the new policy, Americans who are convicted of a single DWI must not receive any term of imprisonment in connection with their sentence and must have no other convictions or charges that could render them inadmissible. If eligible, these Americans can receive a free Temporary Resident Permit in lieu of paying the normal fee of $200.

Continue reading "ENTERING CANADA WITH A DUI; CANADA RELAXES RESTRICTIONS" »

I write and re-write this article every season and every year. But time and time again I see friends and people I know who have read it coming to me because they got arrested in San Diego, Orange County, Imperial County, Riverside, San Bernardino or Los Angeles for a DUI.

Okay, think about it... How smart is it to drive a two-ton killing machine through the streets with, say, a .16 blood alcohol level? Not very. In fact, it is inherently dangerous for you and everyone in your vicinity. How about.... How smart is it to take a cab instead of driving? How about, since it's the holiday season and we all know we are going to imbibe, just plan to take a cab from the start? Yes, now we are getting smarter.

Yes, think about it. A GOOD DUI attorney will charge you about $5,000 or upwards pre-trial to work up your DUI case. Yes, people, there are defenses to high blood alcohol DUI's. I just got an offer of a wet reckless misdemeanor on a felony DUI with injury case that was originally charged as a felony. I also just got an offer of a straight misdemeanor to another DUI with injury case. Both clients were in the Navy, and could not have the felony without it ruining their careers. I recently sued San Diego's top DUI cop in federal court and won a settlement from the City because the cop falsified the basis for his stop. Yes, there are cheap attorneys out there and they will always claim to do cheaply what the best of us do for the cost of our experience. But you get what you pay for. I personally don't hire doctors that hawk themselves as "cheaper than the other guy." Nor would I ever hire an attorney that hawks himself for cheap.

Some cases California DUI can be won. Some California DUI cases cases can't be won. It depends on how competent your lawyer is, how the cop did the investigation, if the machines used were properly calibrated, and what you said at the time of the investigation, amongst other things.

Remember, anyone with a law license from the State of California can take your money and represent you on a DUI. That doesn't mean that they know what they are doing. Would you request advice from a novice if you had cancer? Of course not.

Now, if you haven't read it before, read it now. And if you have read it before, read it again. This article is chock full of info on what to do if you get stopped for a DUI and arrested.

It's starting now. Police agencies all over California are setting up roadblocks, and putting officers on overtime, to make as many DUI arrests as possible. Hopefully, the tips below will come in handy for you over this holiday weekend.

1. If you drive in California during the holiday season, and you plan on having a cocktail or two, make sure you know where your license, registration and proof of insurance are. DUI officers historically write in their California DUI reports (putting only facts that harm you in them) that the suspect "fumbled for his wallet" and couldn't find his registration. They use this to try to show you were impaired. Be prepared.

2. When you get signaled by the DUI officer to pull over for a DUI assessment, do so immediately and safely. Roll down your window and put your hands on the steering wheel.

3. If a DUI officer asks you if you know why you are being pulled over, remember you don't have to answer. What a dumb question! He knows why he is pulling you over. He is pulling you over to assess you for drunk driving, and he's using the fact that you might have committed some minor vehicle code violations as an excuse. Don't make any admissions to him. So, you can just ask him, "why?"

4. The next question the DUI officer is likely to ask is, "Have you had anything to drink tonight." Remember your rights? You are not required to speak to officers. I know, I know, you think, "But if I don't talk to the officer, he will be mad." Let him be. You are not at a social gathering; he is not invited to your next birthday party. So don't worry about how he feels. He is collecting evidence against you. Don't give him any. It is best to say, "Officer, I appreciate what you do for a living, but I don't wish to answer any of your questions." You do NOT have to answer. The less from you he gets, the better for you in the long run. He is gathering evidence. But, you say, maybe he will let me go if he knows I'm being honest with him. NO. Most people who are pulled over and have alcohol on their breath get arrested. It's just a fact of life. Don't give him anything to put in that report that he can use against you later.

5. He may then say, "I'd like you to complete a series of tests for me." Again, let him know that you do not wish to participate in any tests. You are not required to comply. DUI officers try to give a series of field tests to determine if you are impaired. I have NEVER known any officer to do these as per the standardized protocol. I hold a certification authorized by the United Stated Department of Transportation to administer these tests, and was required to pass a practical and written test to get that certification given by a nationally re-known sergeant with the Idaho State Police. Cops learn how to do these, and then promptly forget them, making up their own "tests." Do not do them. Do NOT let the officer collect more false "evidence" against you. Just reiterate that you do not wish to perform and tests. It's your right.

6. The DUI investigation officer may then tell you he wants you to take an in field breath, hand held, breath test. Do not take this "test." It is unreliable, and regularly exhibits blood alcohol numbers higher than what you really are. The cop really, really wants you to do this now, because you have made no statements, and you have refused his field "tests." He wants this badly. He NEEDS some evidence. Do not do it. You are NOT required to blow into the little hand held machine.

7. The officer will most likely arrest you, cuff and take you downtown. You will be required to take a breath or blood test. You must choose to take one of these tests, or he will take what is called a "forced blood test" and your driver's license will be suspended for a full year.

A few pointers: If you are still absorbing alcohol, the breath test will read high. It is also an INDIRECT measurement of blood alcohol level. If you take blood, you won't get a result for at least a week. Also, law enforcement labs don't use the proper amount of sodium fluoride and potassium oxalate in the blood tubes, so you can attack those results later. Personally, I wouldn't let anyone hired by the city or county to draw my blood, after learning all I know about the incompetence of the people drawing the blood, and the lack of sanitation protocol in place. Why risk infection? (See, article on frightening practices in the San Diego crime lab).

If you are arrested, you will be released within 12 hours on your promise to appear. You will received a pink piece of paper called a "DS-367." This document tells you that you, or your lawyer, must call the Department of Motor Vehicle within ten days of the arrest to secure a hearing to determine whether or not the DMV will take your license. Do not miss this deadline or you will be suspended automatically.

So, be careful. Don't drink and drive if you can help it. Drive safely. Don't talk to cops. Be polite, but do not let them gather damaging evidence against you. And when you get home call this Southern California DUI Defense lawyer. Dui Defense is hard. But it's not impossible.

Continue reading "CALIFORNIA DUI DEFENSE: HOW TO AVOID A DUI THIS THANKSGIVING" »

The defendant took prescription Ambien and then fell asleep. He ended up driving and was arrested and convicted of DUI drugs. His defense was that he was sleep driving.

This Court of Appeal articulates the rules governing involuntary intoxication (a complete defense) as opposed to voluntary intoxication (no defense). They uphold instructions telling
the jury that if it found that the defendant knew or had reason to know that his use of Ambien could cause sleep driving, this was not involuntary intoxication. If he didn't know and couldn't reasonably have known that his use of Ambien could cause sleep driving, this was involuntary intoxication and the resulting unconsciousness is a complete defense to driving under the influence.

People v. Mathson; 2012 DJ DAR 15322; DJ, 11/8/12; C/A 3rd

Have you ever heard of the published compilation hearsay exception? California Evidence Code sec. 1340 says that a statement in a published compilation is admissible against a hearsay objection if the compilation is used and relied on as accurate in the course of
business.

Here, the DA got in testimony from a detective that the detective ran a cell phone number through Entersect, an online database, and the number came back to the defendant. The Court of Appeal says that the published compilation hearsay exception contemplates "an organized,
edited presentation of a finite quantity of information that, if not printed on paper, has been recorded and circulated in some fixed form analogous to printing."

There's no showing of that here. Moreover, there's that requirement that the information be relied on as "accurate." The mere fact that the police department uses the site, and pays for it, doesn't make it accurate. The C/A finds that admission of this information was error, though harmless.

People v. Franzen; 2012 DJ DAR 15281; DJ, 11/7/12; C/A 6th

As is usually the case, the streets will be swarming with cops this labor Day weekend. Expect roving saturation patrols in urban areas like the Gaslamp District and Del Mar Plaza, as well as plenty of DUI checkpoints.

If you are arrested, please contact my office at (866) 464-6662.

Below is just a sampling of checkpoint locations. Avoid at all cost.

SAN DIEGO:

Friday, August 31 – 6 p.m. to 2 a.m. in Encinitas, Santee and Poway, California

Saturday, September 1 – 6 p.m. to 2 a.m. in Imperial Beach

Saturday, September 1 – 6 p.m. to 2 a.m. in Santee (AVOID)

CHULA VISTA:

6 p.m. Friday to 2 a.m. Saturday and additional checkpoints Saturday and Sunday nights.

IMPERIAL BEACH:

Sheduled checkpoint from 8 p.m. Saturday to 2:30 a.m. Sunday, along with saturation patrols.

RANCHO SAN DIEGO:

Scheduled checkpoint from 7 p.m. Saturday to 1:30 a.m.

OCEANSIDE:

Scheduled checkpoint Friday between 8 p.m. Friday and 3 a.m. Saturday.

SANTA ANA:

Saturday, September 1 – 7:30 p.m. to 1:30 a.m.: Fist Street between Fairview & Bristol

SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO:

Friday, August 31 - 6 p.m. to 2 a.m.: Camino Capistrano at La Palma Street south of Del Obispo.