Everyone knows that it's illegal to drive a car while you are impaired by alcohol. The legal blood-alcohol limit, 0.08%, is one of those numbers we can all cite off the top of our heads, like 3.14 or 867-5309. Unfortunately for a lot of my clients, though, the rules about driving under the influence of drugs are still a mystery. I'll do my best to break it all down in today's blog post.
There's a lot of overlap in the way that courts handle "driving under the influence of alcohol" cases and cases where defendants are accused of driving under the influence of drugs. There are also enough differences, though, that I thought the subject deserved a post.
Drunk Driving (DUI)
Section 23152 of the California Vehicle Code defines various "DUI" crimes. VC 23152(a), for instance, says that it is illegal for anyone to operate a vehicle while he or she is "under the influence of alcohol", regardless of the person's actual blood-alcohol concentration. To be convicted under this section, the DA does NOT need to prove that your blood-alcohol concentration was above the legal limit of 0.08%. Prosecutors only need to prove that you were "impaired" due to alcohol, and that you could not operate a vehicle with the skill and care of an ordinary, sober person (whatever that means). To make their case against you, the DA will introduce evidence that you had been observed driving badly, you "appeared disoriented" after the traffic stop, and you performed poorly on field sobriety tests, etc.
VC 23152(b), on the other hand, specifically prohibits anyone from driving a motor vehicle while his or her BAC is greater than 0.08%, regardless of whether or not that person is actually "impaired" by alcohol. Even if you can "hold your liquor" and you perfectly nail all of the field sobriety tests like a champion, you can still be convicted of violating VC 23152(b) if a chemical test determines that your blood alcohol concentration is above the legal limit of 0.08%.
Starting on July 1, 2018, it will become illegal for anyone who has a BAC of 0.04% or greater to drive a car while a "passenger for hire" is present in the vehicle. VC 23152(e) includes a definition of "passenger for hire" that makes it clear that this section applies to Uber and Lyft drivers who have a few pops on the clock, but who might still be below the legal limit of 0.08% that applies to other motorists.
Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID)
This is where is gets really interesting. VC 23152(f) makes it illegal for anyone to drive a car while he or she is "under the influence of ANY drug". "Any drug" means exactly that. If the DA can prove that you were dangerously impaired by some substance, it is not a defense to argue that the drug was prescribed by your doctor (like Ambien), or that the drug is legal in California (like marijuana).
DUID cases, then, usually turn on a couple of obvious questions: how impaired is too impaired to drive? And how convincingly can prosecutors prove this driver's exact degree of impairment? Typically, police officers will testify about their objective observations (swerving, speeding, driving too slowly, etc.). A certified "Drug Recognition Expert" ("DRE") will also tell the jury that he observed your pupils, your heart rate, your performance on cognitive test, etc., and that he formed the opinion that you were under the influence of some drug or combination of drugs. A toxicologist from the crime lab will explain how your blood was drawn, stored and tested. The toxicologist's reports will outline the substances that were found in your blood. Based on the totality of all these observations from state-appointed "experts", the DA will attempt to convince a jury that you were dangerously impaired by drugs at the time of driving.
Even if the DA can prove that you were on drugs, that's not the end of the story -- and it doesn't necessarily mean that you're guilty of a crime. In addition to proving that you had consumed drugs before driving, the DA must also prove that those drugs actually made you unsafe behind the wheel. Of course, some prescription drugs might have the effect of making a driver more attentive or capable behind the wheel when those drugs are used in therapeutic doses under a doctor's supervision. Some of those same substances might make a driver completely unsafe if they are abused, mixed with other drugs, or if a patient has an adverse reaction. Adderall, for instance, is essentially an amphetamine. When used properly, the drug performs wonders for individuals who suffer from ADD. When abused, though, Adderall is addictive and dangerous. If a defendant is accused of driving under the influence of Adderall (or Xanax, or Vicodin, etc.), his defense attorney might demonstrate to the jury that the levels of the drug found in his blood stream are within a "therapeutic range", where the driver is actually safer than if he would have been if he hadn't taken his meds that morning.
Allegations of driving under the influence of marijuana are even more complicated, since the drug may affect individual users differently. Marijuana toxicology reports are especially strange. Marijuana blood tests typically identify levels of both active delta-9 THC (the chemical that is currently causing impairment in the user, and THC metabolites, sometimes called "carboxy THC", or "COOH-THC". COOH-THC is a chemical that is produced within the body after the user has already metabolized whatever he or she previously smoked. COOH-THC is not psychoactive. It remains detectable in the user's blood stream for weeks after his or her most recent use, but it does not indicate that user's current level of impairment. Delta-9 THC and COOH-THC should not be confused with each other. Even high levels of COOH-THC are absolutely irrelevant in determining whether or not a suspect is too high to drive. High levels of COOH-THC may be relevant, however, to prove that the defendant is a regular user and, thus, has a high tolerance to the drug.
In most of the cases I've handled where my clients are accused of driving under the influence of drugs, the DA's strongest piece of evidence is my client's own statement to police. They admit that they "smoke a little", or a that they took some prescription drugs. Statements like those can turn a minor traffic stop into a major arrest. Without a confession, police might not have even suspected drug use. Even if the officer had believed that the suspect was under the influence of drugs, there might not have been enough evidence to make an arrest or to sustain a conviction. By talking to cops, though, suspects can make the DA's job very easy.
The Orange County District Attorney's Office has decided to make a priority out of aggressively prosecuting DUID cases. Their agency actually receives grants from various highway safety groups to specifically target these offenses. Those grants are used to hire teams of prosecutors who exclusively handle DUID charges. The Orange Bubble is a bad place to be arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of drugs. Local prosecutors like to play hardball with these cases, but that doesn't mean that they have an advantage in court. In fact, their aggressive attitude toward DUID often means that they choose to pursue weak cases, where the evidence just doesn't support a conviction.
Fullerton is especially a DUI / DUID enforcement hot spot. The crowds of out-of-towners and college students who fill the bars and clubs between Commonwealth and Wilshire fuel a steady stream of DUI arrests every weekend. All Fullerton Police officers are actually instructed to swarm the downtown area around closing time, unless they are responding to some other pressing matter. They are also specifically trained to watch for drivers who are impaired by drugs and / or alcohol. Fullerton police have reportedly been using a controversial new saliva test that can instantly test drivers for the presence of marijuana. And just like the OCDA, the Fullerton Police Department receives grant money for traffic safety, which they use for DUI enforcement (which generates more money...).
If you or a loved one has questions about driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, call us for a free attorney consultation. 714 449 3335. Ask for John. Our local staff has extensive experience defending against all types of DUI / DUID charges in Orange County.
Thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment