California DUI defense attorney news

September 29, 2007
Kiefer Sutherland, as agent Jack Bauer on Fox TV's "24," has seen some pretty tough nemeses.

But when city prosecutors Friday charged the actor with two counts of drunk driving and accused him of violating parole in a prior DUI case, they thrust him into the courtroom of the judge who sent Paris Hilton to jail and, when the sheriff let her out early, sent her, sobbing, right back.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael T. Sauer, amid the Hilton circus, declared that he didn't "care to be DUI judge to the stars."

But when Sutherland is arraigned Oct. 16, his case may become another showdown between the judge and Sheriff Lee Baca. Like Hilton, Sutherland is accused of violating his DUI probation. He faces a potential 18 months in jail.

When Baca released Hilton because of an undisclosed medical reason after she served three days of her 45-day sentence, Sauer sent her back.

For years, judges have watched, frustrated, as the sheriff has slashed sentences to alleviate jail overcrowding

"The only strategy is really throw yourself on the mercy of the judge. This is not a judge who is going to go easy on a celebrity," Loyola law professor Laurie Levinson, a former prosecutor, said of Sutherland's case.

"His attorney could seek to remove the judge [from the case]. But if you shoot the king and miss, there will be consequences."

Sutherland, 40, was charged with driving a vehicle under the influence and having a blood alcohol level above the 0.08% state limit after his arrest early Tuesday in Hollywood.

City attorney's spokesman Nick Velasquez said prosecutors also were seeking to revoke Sutherland's probation from a 2004 arrest.

The actor faces up to a year in jail if convicted on the new charges and six months for any probation violation.

Because of the prior conviction, Velasquez said, if convicted, "Mr. Sutherland must serve a minimum of 96 hours in jail."

Sutherland's attorney, Blair Berk, would not comment.

The actor has been convicted of or pleaded no contest to alcohol-related charges three times locally since 1989.

Paul Burglin, a DUI defense attorney and one of the authors of the book "California Drunk Driving Law," said Sutherland may be far better off than Hilton was because the public perception of the heiress was that "she was flouting the orders of the court" by driving without a license.

Still, he said, Sutherland may get a 30- to 60-day sentence. Burglin said the jail time could be served in home detention or at treatment facility.

But Burglin said a judge can exclude a defendant from such alternatives. This was the case with Hilton's sentence.

If there are no technical problems with the prosecution's case, Burglin said, Sutherland's lawyer may consider getting him to enroll him in a residential treatment program.

He said the judge should take into account Sutherland's prior performance on probation, including meeting such requirements as attending classes.

According to police, Sutherland was pulled over about 1:30 a.m. Tuesday near La Cienega and Beverly boulevards after making an illegal U-turn.

He was arrested after failing a breath analysis, allegedly registering over the legal blood-alcohol limit.

Court records show Sutherland was convicted of alcohol-related reckless driving in 1989 and 1993.

In November 2004, he pleaded no contest to one misdemeanor count of driving under the influence and was sentenced to 60 months of probation and 50 hours of community service and ordered to attend an alcohol treatment program.

He won a best actor Emmy last year for his work in "24," which is scheduled to return to the Fox lineup in January.

Sutherland, who was raised in Canada, received the Award of Excellence on Tuesday from the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists, an actors union, for his contribution to fellow Canadian performers and the entertainment industry.

California DUI criminal defense attorney news

The director of a domestic violence and rape crisis center in Merced was arrested over the weekend on suspicion of driving under the influence and a hit & run crash.

Diana Almanza was booked into the Merced County Jail at 12:59 a.m. Saturday and released a few hours later, authorities said.

Almanza is the executive director of A Woman's Place.

The charges should sound familiar to Almanza. They're the same ones she was booked on a last weekend.

In that earlier incident, Almanza was arrested in the parking lot of a Merced market. Authorities allege she went there to buy wine after sideswiping a parked car and ran up and curb and over a city street sign.

She showed signs of intoxication and that she admitted to taking Vicodin earlier in the day, officers said.

Field sobriety and breath tests put Almanza's blood-alcohol level of 0.06 and 0.07, just below the legal limit a person is considered intoxicated

California DUI Law Enforcement Criminal Defense Attorney news

California Drunk driving charge for cop

An off-duty lieutenant with the Alameda County Sheriffs Office has been charged with DUI after driving the wrong way down Mountain House Parkway, police said.

Lt. Kerry Jackson, who has spent nearly 20 years with Alameda County and currently works in the planning and research section, was first spotted at a turn signal near Mountain House Parkway and Mascot Boulevard shortly before 12:30 a.m. Sept. 9 by a San Joaquin County Sheriffs deputy, according to police.

He was reportedly on his way home, in eastern Contra Costa County, after spending Saturday evening at a Livermore winery where Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern was celebrating his 50th birthday, law enforcement officials said.

It was unclear if he made any stops between leaving the party and his eventual citation.

Sheriff Ahern called it an unfortunate incident.

It will be handled by the local law enforcement agency, Ahern said through a spokesman. Jackson is going to have to face the consequences of the court system likeanybody else and, additionally, hes also going to be subject to an internal affairs investigation.

After the signal light changed, Jackson, who was driving a 2000 Ford Explorer, turned north onto Mountain House Parkway, but he was traveling in the southbound lanes and quickly pulled over, police said.

The California Highway Patrol was summoned to investigate a possible California DUI / driving under the influence.

Following field examinations, Jackson was cited on California DUI / suspicion of driving under the influence and driving with blood-alcohol content of 0.08 percent or more, both misdemeanors, according to a CHP investigator.

If convicted, Jackson faces a suspension of his drivers license, a fine and possible jail time or probation.

California DUI criminal defense attorney news

Filed 9/26/07 P. v. Sherman CA1/4

Opinion following remand by U.S. Supreme Court

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JOHN PAUL SHERMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.
A112297
(Lake County

Super. Ct. Nos.

CR033793 & CR902302


This case is before us on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further consideration in light of that court’s decision in Cunningham v. California (2007) ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 856, 868-871 (Cunningham). The parties have provided supplemental briefing addressing both Cunningham and the California Supreme Court’s recent interpretation of Cunningham in People v. Black (2007) 41 Cal.4th 799 (Black II). After further consideration in light of both Cunningham and Black II, we affirm the judgment and sentence.

background

Defendant John Paul Sherman pleaded guilty to hit and run drunk driving and related offenses. A superior court judge sentenced defendant to an upper term upon finding aggravating facts or circumstances related to the offense and offender. Defendant appealed, claiming that his sentence was unconstitutional because the sentence was founded on facts not tried and determined by a jury. (U.S. Const., 6th Amend.) In our original decision issued on September 14, 2006, we rejected defendant’s claim on the authority of our Supreme Court, which had held that the federal constitutional right to a jury trial on fact-finding does not apply to judge-imposed upper term prison terms under California’s sentencing law. (People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238, 1254-1264 (Black I); Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455.)

Several months after our decision was filed, the United States Supreme Court held that an upper term may not be imposed by a judge unless an aggravating fact used in sentencing is proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt or is established by the defendant’s admissions or prior convictions. (Cunningham, supra, 127 S.Ct. at pp. 868-871).) The federal high court vacated Black I, upon which we had relied, and remanded it to the California Supreme Court for further consideration in light of Cunningham. (Black v. California (2007) ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 1210.) The United States Supreme Court also vacated our decision and remanded this case for further consideration in light of Cunningham.

The California Supreme Court recently considered the application of Cunningham to California sentencing, and held that imposition of an upper term sentence does not violate a defendant’s right to a jury trial where “at least one aggravating circumstance was established by means that satisfy Sixth Amendment requirements and thus made him eligible for the upper term.” (Black II, supra, 41 Cal.4th at pp. 805-806.) Consistent with the Sixth Amendment, there are two types of aggravating facts that may be used to impose an upper term without a jury determination of those facts. “First, a fact admitted by the defendant may be used to increase his or her sentence beyond the maximum authorized by the jury’s verdict. [Citation.] Second, the right to jury trial and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt do not apply to the aggravating fact of a prior conviction.” (People v. Sandoval (2007) 41 Cal.4th 825, 836-837.) The Sixth Amendment does not include the right to a jury determination on the fact that prior convictions occurred, or “other related issues that may be determined by examining the records of the prior convictions.” (Black II, supra, at p. 819 & fn. 8.)

In Black II, the court affirmed an upper term sentence where a sentencing brief and probation report listed, as an aggravating circumstance, that defendant Black’s prior convictions were “numerous or of increasing seriousness.” (Black II, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 818 & fn. 7; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(2).) As will be seen, this same aggravating fact made defendant Sherman eligible for the upper term, and thus defeats his appellate challenge to the sentence imposed.

facts and Trial
court proceedings

A. Case No. CR033793

Testimony at the preliminary hearing established that defendant was driving while “extremely intoxicated” on April 27, 2003. He had been embroiled in a verbal altercation with other men, who then rammed defendant’s pick-up truck with their own vehicle. Defendant fled in his truck at a high rate of speed and, while rounding a corner, spun out and struck a pedestrian. The pedestrian was knocked to the ground, suffered a concussion, and sustained lacerations to her hand when it struck, and broke through, the truck’s side window. Defendant did not stop to aid the pedestrian, and did not report the accident. Instead, defendant went to a residential garage to change a flat tire on his battered truck. The police found him there, “reek[ing]” of alcohol and too drunk to stand up. Defendant was arrested and made several attempts to escape the police vehicle while being transported to jail. Defendant also refused to have his blood alcohol level tested. The police checked the status of defendant’s driver’s license and found that it was suspended or revoked.

The People charged defendant with drunk driving with injury to another (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)); hit and run driving with injury to another (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a)); attempted escape from police custody (Pen. Code, § 4530, subd. (b)); and driving with a suspended or revoked license (Veh. Code, § 14601.2, subd. (a)). In connection with count one for drunk driving with injury, the People also alleged that defendant had prior convictions from January 2000 for drunk driving (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)) and alcohol-related reckless driving (Veh. Code, §§ 23103, 23103.5). It was additionally alleged, on count four’s charge of driving with a suspended license, that defendant had two prior convictions from 2001 for driving with a suspended license.

In June 2004, defendant pleaded guilty to counts one (drunk driving with injury) and two (hit and run driving with injury), and admitted the prior drunk driving and reckless driving convictions alleged on count one. The remaining counts were dismissed, with defendant’s agreement that the trial court could consider the facts underlying the dismissed counts in sentencing. (See People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754, 758 [sentencing court may consider facts underlying dismissed counts with defendant’s agreement].) The negotiated plea did not promise a particular sentence, but the court advised defendant of the maximum possible sentence and explained that the sentencing range was two to four years on count one, and sixteen months to three years on count two. The court also advised defendant that his sentence would be based, in part, on a probation department report and recommendation. Defendant’s counsel stipulated that the preliminary hearing transcript could be received as a factual basis for the plea.

B. Case No. CR902302

In a separate case, defendant was charged with drunk driving (and other offenses) committed on June 9, 2004, less than two months after the hit and run incident. (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a).) Defendant pleaded guilty to drunk driving and admitted three prior convictions for drunk driving and reckless driving. As in the earlier case, the court advised defendant of the sentencing range and that the court would review the probation department’s report when selecting a sentence.

C. Sentencing

The probation department submitted a sentencing report that recommended imposition of the upper term of four years on count one (drunk driving with injury), and a concurrent upper term of three years on count two (hit and run driving with injury) in case No. CR033793. (Pen. Code, § 18; Veh. Code, §§ 20001, subd. (b)(2), 23153, subd. (a), 23566, subd. (a).) In case No. CR902302, the probation officer recommended a consecutive eight month term.

The probation officer’s report listed four circumstances in aggravation of the hit and run crime: defendant “engaged in violent conduct which indicates a serious danger to society”; “defendant’s prior convictions as an adult are numerous”; “defendant was on summary probation when the crime was committed”; and “defendant’s prior performance on summary probation was unsatisfactory.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421 (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5).) The report listed eight prior convictions for drunk driving, reckless driving, driving with a suspended license, public intoxication, resisting a peace officer, attempted escape from custody, battery, and inflicting corporal injury on a cohabitant.

Two circumstances were listed in mitigation: defendant committed the hit and run driving offense under “almost exculpat[ory]” circumstances because it appears he was fleeing from a motorist trying to ram defendant’s truck, and defendant voluntarily acknowledged wrongdoing at an early stage of the criminal process by pleading guilty. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.423 (a)(4), (b)(3).) The probation officer noted, however, that the second mitigating circumstance did “not carry much weight” because the guilty plea was a bargained exchange for the dismissal of other charges.

At the sentencing hearing in August 2005, the trial court noted that it “takes these sentencing matters very seriously” and had “spent some time” reading the probation officer’s report, during which the court “made two pages of notes” in the course of its review and consideration of the report. The court adopted the probation officer’s recommendation and imposed the upper term on both counts in the hit and run case upon finding that defendant’s conduct indicates a serious danger to society, defendant’s prior convictions are numerous, defendant was on probation when the crime was committed, and defendant’s prior performance on probation was unsatisfactory. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421 (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5).) The court made the terms on the two counts in the hit and run case concurrent (No. CR033793), and imposed a consecutive eight month term for the later drunk driving conviction (No. CR902302), for an aggregate prison term of four years, eight months.

discussion

As noted above, our high court has held that imposition of an upper term sentence does not violate a defendant’s right to a jury trial where “at least one aggravating circumstance was established by means that satisfy Sixth Amendment requirements and thus made [defendant] eligible for the upper term.” (Black II, supra, 41 Cal.4th at pp. 805-806.) The right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment does not apply to the fact that prior convictions occurred, or “other related issues that may be determined by examining the records of prior convictions.” (Id. at p. 819 & fn. 8.)

“The determinations whether a defendant has suffered prior convictions, and whether those convictions are ‘numerous or of increasing seriousness’ [citation], require consideration of only the number, dates, and offenses of the prior convictions alleged. The relative seriousness of these alleged convictions may be determined simply by reference to the range of punishment provided by statute for each offense. This type of determination is ‘quite different from the resolution of issues submitted to a jury, and is one more typically and appropriately undertaken by a court.’ [Citation.]” (Black II, supra,41 Cal.4th at pp. 819-820.) In Black II, the California Supreme Court affirmed an upper term sentence where a sentencing brief and probation report listed, as an aggravating circumstance, that defendant Black’s prior convictions were “numerous or of increasing seriousness,” and the probation report provided an account of defendant’s five convictions. (Id. at p. 818 & fn. 7.)

This case is indistinguishable from Black II. As in Black II, defendant here is eligible for the upper term by virtue of his numerous prior convictions. The probation report relied upon by the sentencing court listed eight prior convictions, far more than are necessary for a finding of numerosity. (See Black II, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 818 [upholding numerosity finding for five convictions and citing case upholding numerosity finding for three convictions].) In pleading guilty in the trial court, defendant admitted two prior convictions, and does not deny on appeal his long record of prior convictions.1 Defendant’s only argument against the application of Black II is that the California Supreme Court’s reasoning in that case was “incorrect.” Defendant makes the argument to preserve the issue for federal review. As defendant acknowledges, we are bound by Black II. (Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 57 Cal.2d at p. 455.)

Iv. disposition

We affirm the judgment and sentence.

_________________________

Sepulveda, J.

We concur:

_________________________

Ruvolo, P.J.

_________________________

Reardon, J.



1 We need not address whether aggravating facts sufficient to support defendant’s sentence were established by defendant’s admissions in entering his guilty pleas. We affirm defendant’s sentence on the independent ground that aggravating facts were established by defendant’s documented record of prior convictions, consistent with the Sixth Amendment.

California ( San Diego ) DUI / Drunk Driving defense law

The Simon Issues Touch Your Self Help: On Driving Drunk


Touch Your Self Help: On Driving Drunk
Sep 26, 2007

In his inaugural column, our resident self-improvement guru confronts the celebrity drunk driver in all of us.

Touched.

This is the word we often use to describe "crazy" people, a shortening of the colloquial "touched in the head." It’s an easy method for writing off those who are different than us: "Oh, and don’t be surprised if Jerry puts those turtles in his pants – he’s a bit touched." It makes us feel better, superior to others.

But honestly – aren’t we all a bit touched?

Take one of my clients, Mary. She’s a 28 year old paralegal, twice divorced, who compulsively clutters and cries whenever she sees a Jew. Just watching her walk down the street, gum wrappers falling from her pockets, tears rolling down her cheeks, one might be tempted to say that Mary is touched. But would you say the same thing if you knew that Mary was raised in an ultra-restrictive household where even the slightest bit of tidying up was met with a sound beating? Probably not. Would you use that same word if you knew that Mary was once abducted by space aliens? Maybe. Until you found out that those space aliens... were Jewish.

Not so touched now, huh?

The truth is that there’s something wrong with all of us; we’re all touched in a way. You, dear reader, probably think that you’re overweight, overly gay and unfit to raise children. And you’re probably right. But being as pathetic as you are doesn’t mean that you can’t heal and plan to accomplish your dreams. It starts with identifying those outside forces that have caused your defects.

It starts with touching yourself.

And I’m here to help.

***

Welcome to Touch Your Self Help. I'm Dr. Chad*.

For years, I have helped people just like you touch themselves through my lectures, writings and one-on-one sessions. My clients have ranged from world-famous celebrities to complete assholes nobody even recognizes. My patented techniques for self-advancement, such as The List and The Purchase, have inspired ordinary citizens to become captains of industry and have made thousands of children rich beyond their wildest dreams. Yet, I have remained “in touch” with myself, a humble, handsome servant to all humankind.

As this is my inaugural column for The Simon, I'm tempted to relate the details of my personal story – my years of struggle, my stunning night of revelation, and my long, hard path to redemption. I feel as if I should perhaps give an overview of my many proven self-help techniques (which I share with all who seek them and do not keep a "secret"). However, since I'm quite sure that you're just as impatient as you are fat, I've decided to jump right into a topic, as I will in every column, and let you pick up the details along the way. Who knows, you may have already picked up on something!

This week, I'd like to discuss a despicable practice in our culture, a practice known as drunk driving. Almost 18,000 people are killed every year in alcohol-related traffic accidents**, and almost every single one of these accidents is caused by a crazy celebrity. Okay, maybe not every accident, but it sure seems that way, huh? A night doesn't pass without another famous person being busted for DUI – Nick Nolte, Mel Gibson, Paris, Nicole and Lindsay – Bill Murray on a goddamned golf cart – and now Kiefer Sutherland! By the way, wouldn't it have been cool if Kiefer had secretly inserted a dart into the breathalyzer, fired it into the cop's jugular and then escaped through a manhole? Wow, look at that Jack Bauer go!

Seriously, though, I shouldn't joke. What Mr. Sutherland did was very careless and he's just lucky he didn't kill anybody. I mean, how many drinks did he have, anyway? 24?

(Sly smile.)

Okay, okay - obviously, there is an underlying problem at work whenever anybody decides to drive after imbibing intoxicating substances such as alcohol, marijuana or Air Infusions Ocean Blue Glade (with its subtle blend of natural scents, so sweet to huff). And that problem is addiction. The addiction to going places.

Where did Kiefer really need to be, anyway? Where do any of us really need to be, other than with ourselves? Think about it. All of us spend so much time in our cars every day, stuck in traffic, listening to jerks on talk radio who think they know everything. It's enough to make anybody crazy, even if they've got a nice buzz going. And all that pollution! It's a well documented fact*** that the pollution from our cars is not just warming up the globe and killing off polar bears, but is also making us very upset in our past lives. Did you know that I was once a famous Roman Orator known for his romantic poetry, and that now, because of all this pollution, I was also known for coughing? Look it up the next time you think about going for a drive in your Hummer, cocktail in hand or not.

Tell you what – why don't we all just take a moment to touch ourselves and discover why we're so eager to be somewhere else all the time. Are you ready? Good. Let's begin.

To properly touch yourself, first find a quiet place, perhaps a shower stall or closet, and relax. If this is the first time for you, know that touching yourself can be a little scary. You've got a lot of things built up inside that may be difficult to let out. If it helps, imagine that I'm there with you, touching myself. I know that I'm imagining you.

Now, find that zone in your body that feels a little uncomfortable and touch it with your mind (or whatever). Okay – think back. Who was the first person to insist that you go somewhere other than where you were? Was it Mommy, trying to get you out of the room while she vacuumed? Or maybe it was Daddy, so sick of your goddamned crying that he just didn't want to see your ugly face anymore. Whomever it was (probably Daddy), go ahead and forgive them. If there's one thing I've said over and over to my clients, it's that grownups don't know everything. The truly horrifying truth is – those grownups that you knew as a child were just as hopelessly messed up as you. But it wasn't their fault. As you'll come to learn through my writing, nothing is ever anybody's fault. Ever.

Okay. You've discovered the forces that have compelled you to go places. Now let's focus on the future – on change. As many of you know, one of the main tools I use when effecting change is The List. With The List, you can plan to accomplish almost anything, simply by writing it down. I'll discuss the details of this patented methodology in later columns. Right now, let's go ahead and put it into practice. What are some things you can do to avoid going places, and therefore avoid driving to them drunk? Already thought of some? Great, let's write them down on our list:

Things to Do Instead of Going Places

-Stay in bed.

-Don't answer phone, door, or to sound of own name.

-Make a drawing!

See, by using The List, you have now unlocked the power of intent. You may not stop going to places, but at least now you've got a written record of the fact that you were trying to stop. Say you didn't have this written record. You get in your car with a bellyful of Sierra Mist, drive off a cliff and smash yourself to pieces on the rocks below. What would people say about you? They'd say you were an irresponsible bastard, that's what. But what if they were to find your list among the remains? "God bless him," they would then say. "He was trying to stop going places, but going places just got the better of him. Or her, if it's a woman reading this column and imagining herself in this hypothetical situation."

Wow. See? Just by using my simple methods, you've already risen in the estimation of your peers. It's almost like you're a celebrity yourself! Way to go!

Well, I hope you've enjoyed touching yourself with me, and I hope we've all learned a thing or two about drunk driving (reminder – it's bad). Take care of yourself, and please be sure to check back in with me next time – it can only get better. I don't mean this column, of course – I mean your shitty life.

***

*Title self-granted.

**Sadly true.

***Actually documented only here, and not very well.

San Diego DUI criminal defense attorney - DMV news

September 26, 207

SPRINGFIELD — The state should have an easier time suspending the licenses of drunken drivers under legislation signed Tuesday by Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich.

Secretary of State Jesse White said the legislation gives his office ''more weapons in the war against drunk driving.''

''This legislation sends a very strong message that driving while intoxicated is always unacceptable, '' White said in a statement issued by the governor's office.

First among several changes, Public Act 95-627 provides that, in statutory summary suspension hearings, the failure of a police officer to respond to a subpoena ''shall not, in and of itself, be considered grounds for the rescission of an implied consent suspension.' '

The legislation, which goes into effect on July 1, 2008, provides that hearings may proceed based on police reports and other available evidence, assigned whatever probative value the hearing officer deems appropriate.

The law also amends section 6-201(a)(7) of the Illinois Vehicle Code, which provides for an automatic one-year cancelation of licenses for people convicted of drug crimes while in actual physical control of a vehicle.

The change is intended to tighten the standards for issuing a restricted driving permit. Under current law, such a permit is premised in part on whether ''the person is able to demonstrate that no alternative means of transportation is readily available.'' The new law states that petitioners ''must'' demonstrate such lack of alternate transportation.

The legislation also ends the eligibility of fourth-time drunken driving offenders to obtain restricted driving permits, and expands the range of offenders who can get restricted driving permits only if they install an ignition interlock device.

Now, convictions for involuntary manslaughter or reckless driving can count toward the two convictions that mandate an interlock device. 720 ILCS 5/9-5.

The legislation allows the secretary of state to suspend the license of anyone — without a preliminary hearing — whom the evidence shows committed perjury or filed fraudulent documents in a statutory summary suspension hearing.

The signing came one month and one day after Blagojevich signed legislation that requires breath-testing ignition interlock devices for all first-time DUI offenders. Public Act 95-400.

San Diego California DUI criminal defense attorneys find death cases the hardest to deal with at time of sentencing.

A young LA-based lady had been struck by a suspected San Diego drunk driver.

A neurosurgeon told them that Whitney Young, a student at Mesa College, had suffered massive brain injuries and that they should assume she was going to die. What the doctor couldn't tell the parents was when.

Whitney Young, 19, an aspiring teacher from Palos Verdes Estates, clung to life for four days as dozens of friends and family members flocked to her bedside.

Young died Nov. 16, hours after Eric Joseph Leeman, the man accused of causing her death, was arrested in the College Area, not far from where Young was struck.

At the end of an emotional hearing, Judge Peter C. Deddeh sentenced Leeman to 11 years in prison. Leeman pleaded guilty Aug. 23 to gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and admitted he fled the site of the collision.

He could have been sent to prison for up to 15 years.

Leeman, 21, originally was charged with second-degree murder, but the charge was dropped in exchange for the guilty plea. Had he been convicted of second-degree murder, Leeman could have been sent to prison for 15 years to life.

Witnesses testified during a preliminary hearing in March that a car hit Young about 3:15 a.m. Nov. 12 as she and a group of friends crossed Montezuma Road near Rockford Drive. The car didn't stop or slow down.

Pieces of the car broke off on impact. A San Diego police officer later saw in a nearby driveway a 1997 BMW that matched the description of the one that hit Young.

Leeman, who was not taking college classes or working at the time, was arrested at his College Area home.

Witnesses testified that they had seen him drinking heavily at a party hours before the collision.

His voice cracking with emotion, Leeman apologized in court for the pain he caused Young's family. He said he initially lied to friends and family about the damage to his car “not out of self-preservation, but out of shock because I caused the death of another human being.”

California DUI lawyer update

Breath test for diabetes may be possible: study
Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:07pm EDT
Email | Print | Digg | Reprints | Single Page | Recommend (-) [-] Text [+] Featured Broker sponsored link
¥ € $ - Learn. Practice. Trade.By Julie Steenhuysen

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Diabetic children exhale higher levels of a chemical when their blood sugar is too high, U.S. researchers said on Monday, suggesting that a simple breath test could one day replace finger stick testing as a way to monitor diabetes.

Using a chemical analysis method devised for air pollution testing, researchers at the University of California, Irvine, found children with type 1 diabetes exhale much higher levels of methyl nitrates when their blood sugar is too high.

Type 1 diabetes is the most common form of diabetes in children. It occurs when the immune system goes haywire and starts attacking insulin-producing cells in the pancreas.

People with type 1 diabetes must monitor their blood sugar levels frequently using devices that pierce the skin to extract a small quantity of blood.

"It's invasive. It's painful and it can be expensive," said Dr. Pietro Galassetti, a diabetes researcher at University of California, Irvine. "What we are trying to do here is to come up with something completely noninvasive."

Galassetti said he believes it may be possible to develop a breath analysis test to monitor blood sugar.

He and colleagues tested the breath of 10 children with type 1 diabetes. They took air samples while blood sugar levels were high, and continued to take samples as blood sugar levels fell in response to insulin.

Chemists then examined these samples and found methyl nitrate was as much as 10 times higher than normal.

San Diego California DUI Criminal Defense Lawyer Info

California DRUNK DRIVING - EVIDENCE OF PARTITION RATIO

Because evidence is admissible to challenge the ultimate fact of intoxication under the generic DUI statute, and personal partition ratio evidence is relevant to that fact, we hold that a defendant may introduce otherwise admissible evidence of his personal partition ratio in defense of a generic (Vehicle Code section 23152(a)) DUI charge. But testimony about general partition ratios is irrelevant. Court erred in not allowing defendant to present evidence of personal partition ratio, but error harmless in light of strong evidence that defendant's driving was impaired.

People v. McNeal (C.A. 4th, 9/21/07, E041226) 07 C.D.O.S. 11514

San Diego DUI Criminal Defense Lawyer web update

Cops write in to complain and name names about other cops that have written them tickets.

The hypocrisy is astounding. All of the “victim” officers have a sob story about how they were in a hurry and that the other cop didn’t show them any “courtesy” by letting them go.

Their stories include gems like “I didn’t realize the speed changed from 65 to 45”, or “I was late to training”. They then nominate the cop for “Dick of the Month”. The site is http://www.copswritingcops.com/home.html .

You can search for cops from your home jurisdiction, too.

This may be helpful for San Diego Criminal Defense Attorneys.

San Diego DUI criminal defense attorneys good news

Driving while impaired and reckless driving charges against Miami Dolphins receiver Chris Chambers will be dismissed after a plea deal was reached with prosecutors.

Lawyer George Laughrun said that under terms of the deal, he will enter a guilty plea for speeding on Chambers' behalf in a hearing Wednesday. Chambers will not have to appear in court, meaning he will be available to practice with the Dolphins as scheduled.

A call placed to Mecklenburg County Assistant District Attorney Bruce Lillie was not immediately returned.

Chambers was arrested July 14 after being pulled over several miles south of downtown Charlotte. Chambers was charged with DWI despite a blood-alcohol level of .06 per cent, below the legal limit of .08 per cent. The police report said Chambers failed field sobriety tests.

Laughrun claimed Chambers misunderstood the officer's instructions on what number to stop on when counting backward.

"He didn't miss a number and wasn't slurring his words," Laughrun said. "He was very co-operative."

Chambers, Miami's top receiver, has 21 catches for 302 yards through three games, but has been held without a touchdown in the Dolphins' 0-3 start.

Chambers, who made the Pro Bowl in 2005, was the third Dolphin to face charges since the end of last season. Defensive tackle Fred Evans was waived after being charged with multiple counts of battery on a law enforcement officer following an incident on South Beach. Linebacker Joey Porter was charged with misdemeanour battery in March after being accused of punching Cincinnati Bengals offensive lineman Levi Jones after an incident in Las Vegas.

San Diego DUI criminal defense lawyers news

A former state attorney accused of driving drunk before a crash that killed another driver will go on trial in February.

Judge Grant Hawkins set Terry Record's trial for Feb. 25 during a hearing this morning in Marion Superior Court. After the May 6 death of Jimmy R. Cash, 46, Record was charged with two felony counts of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, causing death, and one count of reckless homicide.
A group of Cash's family members attended today's hearing. Outside court, they said they were waiting for justice to be served and were hopeful now that a trial had been set.
"We feel that it's been long enough," said Chet Seidensticker, Cash's stepson. Cash's wife, Terry, nodded.
The judge asked the prosecutor and Record's attorney to stick to the trial date.
Record, 27, was driving his car 60 mph when he ran a red light at Southeastern Avenue and Pleasant Run Parkway and plowed into the side of Cash's Ford pickup, nearly splitting it in two, police said. Record had been drinking at a strip club a mile away, and police said his blood-alcohol content measured between 0.15 and 0.17, about twice the level at which Indiana drivers are considered drunk.
Record is on home detention while he awaits his trial. If convicted of the most serious charge, he could face six to 20 years in prison. After the crash, the Indiana State Department of Health fired Record from his job as a staff attorney.

California DUI criminal defense lawyers should all help Jack.

There's nothing Jack Bauer can't handle.

Kiefer Sutherland, on the other hand, the 24 star, was arrested on misdemeanor California DUI / driving under the influence in the early morning hours Tuesday, after allegedly failing a field sobriety test, the Los Angeles Police Department said.

Sutherland was stopped at the corner of La Cienega and Beverly at 1:35 a.m. after officers spotted the Emmy winner allegedly making an illegal U-turn. After making the stop, the officers made the actor do a field sobriety test, which he failed.

According to police, a field sobriety test was administered at the scene, clocking Sutherland's blood-alcohol level over the 0.08 percent legal limit for the state of California. The Breathalyzer allegedly revealed the 40-year-old's blood-alcohol level to be more than twice the legal limit.

Earlier in the night, the actor, along with fellow network talent, was spotted at the Fox Fall Eco-Casino party, held at the nearby Area nightclub.

LAPD officers arrested Sutherland at the scene and transported him to the Hollywood police station, where he was formally booked on the misdemeanor California DUI charges at 4:09 a.m.

He was ultimately released at 5:42 a.m. after posting $25,000 bail, according to the L.A. County Sheriff's Deparment Website. TMZ reported that authorities deemed Sutherland "cooperative and mellow" during the encounter.

The arrest marks Sutherland's second DUI bust in the past five years. He was also busted in September 2004 and pleaded no contest to the charge. He was sentenced to 60 months' probation and 50 hours of community service. As he is now a repeat offender, if he's convicted on his current charge, he must serve a mandatory minimum of five days in jail.

The actor is due in court on Oct. 16.

Meanwhile, despite its inauspicious beginning, the day won't be a complete washout for Sutherland.

The Canadian-born thesp is set to receive the Excellence Award from the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists in an afternoon reception scheduled to take place at the Los Angeles home of the Consul General of Canada, Alain Dudoit. The prestigious honor is doled out only every two years to an ACTRA member working in L.A.

24 returns to the Fox schedule in January.

San Diego California drunk driving criminal defense attorney news

Former heavyweight champion Mike Tyson pleaded guilty Monday to charges of drug possession and DUI / driving under the influence stemming from a traffic stop last year as he was leaving a nightclub.

The terms of Mike Tyson's plea agreement, entered Monday in an Arizona court, included the dropping of a felony charge of possession of drug paraphernalia and a second misdemeanor DUI charge.

In a hushed voice, Tyson, 41, told Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Helene F. Abrams that he was under the influence of alcohol and cocaine when officers stopped him for driving erratically Dec. 29 in Scottsdale.

"I had possession of cocaine, and I drove under the influence," he told the judge, his voice barely audible.

Tyson pleaded guilty to a single felony count of cocaine possession and a misdemeanor DUI count. A felony charge of possession of drug paraphernalia and a second misdemeanor DUI charge were dropped, according to the terms of a plea agreement.

Tyson faces a maximum of four years and three months in prison when he is sentenced Nov. 19.

The former champion walked out of the courtroom flanked by his Criminal Defense lawyers and got into a black SUV. He did not stop to answer questions.

DUI Criminal Defense lawyer David Chesnoff said Tyson has been clean and sober for eight months and has been talking to community groups about his own drug problems.

"It's obvious this was a crime he was committing against himself," his Drunk Driving Criminal Defense Attorney said.

Police stopped Tyson after the boxer had spent the evening at Scottsdale's Pussycat Lounge. An officer said he saw Tyson wiping a white substance off the dashboard of his black BMW, and that his speech was slurred. Authorities found bags of cocaine in Tyson's pocket and in his car.

Tyson told officers later that he used cocaine "whenever I can get my hands on it," and that he preferred to smoke it in Marlboro cigarettes with the tobacco pulled out.

According to a court document, Tyson admitted to being an addict.

Tyson also told police that he used marijuana that day and was taking the antidepressant Zoloft.

Since his arrest, Tyson checked himself into an inpatient treatment program for what his lawyer called "various addictions." Tyson's DUI criminal defense lawyer had said previously that he'd try to keep the boxer out of prison.

"You never know," Tyson's DUI criminal defense attorney said. "If there had been more people interested in his well-being and health along the way, we wouldn't be here now."

County Attorney Andrew Thomas said Tyson should be put in prison, noting that Tyson was convicted of rape in Indiana in 1992 and pleaded no contest to misdemeanor assault charges in Maryland in 1999.

"Mike Tyson is a repeat offender with a violent past," Thomas said during a news conference. "I believe only a prison sentence will send the right message and properly protect the public."

In 1986, Tyson became the youngest heavyweight champion in history when, at 20, he knocked out Trevor Berbick. He lost his title four years later when he was knocked out by James "Buster" Douglas. By 1997, Tyson's career hit a low point when he bit Evander Holyfield's ear during a fight.

San Diego California DUI criminal defense attorney news

A man accused of driving drunk and leaving the scene of a freeway crash that killed his 9-year-old son agreed Monday to waive his right to a probable cause hearing and go straight to trial.

Marcos Sanchez Munoz, 33, is charged with gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, hit-and-run causing death, child endangerment, leaving the scene where a death occurred, two counts of driving under the influence and misdemeanor charges of driving with a suspended license and driving without insurance.

His cousin, Raul Munoz Sanchez, also waived his right to a preliminary hearing and stipulated to a trial date of Dec. 3.

A readiness conference was scheduled for Nov. 13.

Raul Munoz Sanchez is charged with being an accessory after the fact and misdemeanor charges of driving under the influence with a prior conviction, giving false information to a police officer, obstructing an officer and driving without a license.

Deputy District Attorney Melissa Vasel told a judge this summer that Marcos Sanchez Munoz was under the influence about 1:40 a.m. on July 14 when he plowed into a stationary car on the shoulder of westbound Interstate 8 near Texas Street.

A witness saw a man running from the scene, but the defendant did not call 911, Vasel said.

Officers patrolling the area came upon the crash site and found Alex Munoz -- a third-grader at Linda Vista Elementary -- dead in the front passenger seat, the prosecutor said.

Police saw a white pickup truck circling a restaurant parking lot, Vasel said.

When officers arrived in the defendant's neighborhood, the driver of the white truck accelerated and went down an alley, the prosecutor said.

At that point, the truck was being driven by Raul Munoz Sanchez, whose blood-alcohol level was 0.19 percent when he was arrested, Vasel said.

Marcos Sanchez Munoz, the front-seat passenger in the truck, had a blood-alcohol level of 0.11 percent three hours after the fatal crash, the prosecutor said. He faces up to 15 years in state prison if convicted, and his cousin faces up to three years behind bars if convicted, Vasel said.

California drunk driving criminal defense attorney news


COTATI, Calif.—A Cotati man is facing up to four years in state prison after being convicted of California DUI for the ninth time, authorities said.
Malcom Osgood McCoy, 61, had a blood-alcohol level of 0.31 percent—nearly three times the legal limit for driving—during his latest arrest, said Barry McBride, a Sonoma County deputy district attorney.

McCoy was already inebriated when a witness spotted him buying more alcohol from a market, McBride said. The witness urged McCoy not to drive, but he drove off anyway, and the witness followed him home.

At the time, McCoy was on parole after serving a 16-month prison sentence for two prior drunken-driving convictions. He did not have a driver's license and was not allowed to drink alcohol.

California Highway Patrol officers found McCoy passed out inside the house, and had the witness place McCoy under citizen's arrest because he had seen McCoy behind the wheel.

A jury on Friday convicted McCoy of drunken driving for the incident, his ninth drunken driving conviction since 1986, prosecutors said.

District Attorney Stephan Passalacqua said the verdict "sends a message to all impaired motorists that their actions will not be tolerated by this community."

———

California Drunk Driving criminal defense lawyer / California DUI attorney news

A California Highway Patrol officer who lost both legs in a traffic accident last year is returning to work on “bionic legs” after proving his fitness with tests such as running the 100-yard dash in 20 seconds.

“I probably still could outrun four or five guys in my office, even on these legs,” Officer Mike Remmel joked Wednesday after demonstrating his new protheses at the CHP training academy in West Sacramento.

Remmel, 47, is the first double amputee ever to be cleared for field duty after passing the CHP's 14 difficult “critical tasks” test using what officers call his “bionic legs,” said CHP spokesman Tom Marshall.
Besides sprinting the length of a football field, new cadets and veterans returning from injuries must run 550 meters in two minutes, climb a steep hill, drag a weight and complete several agility tests.

Remmel spent more than a year in rehabilitation and training before passing the last test and getting his doctor's clearance Aug. 10, exactly 19 months after he lost his legs. He quietly returned to work four days later. CHP brass recruited him to give a motivational talk to cadets Wednesday and invited the media.

Remmel was completing a traffic accident investigation just after dusk Jan. 10, 2006, alongside Highway 49 in the Sierra Nevada foothills near his hometown of Sonora. A confused 80-year-old driver struck him at 45 mph, sending him flying 23 feet over a tow truck.

He lost his left leg above the knee, his right leg below the knee. Tow truck drivers used tourniquets to keep him alive until he could be flown by helicopter to a hospital.

Three days later, Remmel came out of sedation after a near constant series of surgeries. He almost immediately began telling the CHP officers crowding around his bed that he would one day rejoin them on patrol.

“I'm setting my goal to return to the field, to field duty,” Remmel recalls saying. “No one believed me then.”

He learned to use a $40,000 computerized leg that can gauge his stride and react accordingly – technology recently developed largely for wounded soldiers returning from Iraq. A $10,000 carbon fiber leg fills the spit-and-polish black uniform shoe on his right leg.

To pass the CHP's running tests, Remmel used a $30,000 pair of lighter, springier metal legs. He's run the 100 yards in 17.2 seconds – 18.6 seconds when he's wearing his bulletproof vest and gun belt.

“When I first started doing this, I was falling every 10 yards or so,” Remmel said in an interview. Now he is so fast that he is considering competing in sports events for athletes with disabilities.

Remmel is two inches shorter now than his original six feet. Though he asked his prosthetists to make him an extra inch taller, they opted instead for a lower center of gravity.

Using his computerized legs, Remmel played golf again for the first time Monday – and shot a better score than before the accident. In June, he kayaked five miles up a lake, then hiked the last mile to one of the prime Sierra fishing lakes where he and his buddies used to backpack before he lost his legs.

“I needed my old life to come back as much as possible,” Remmel said of his internal motivation. “I needed to know that nothing 'ended' – and so far it hasn't.”

With 20 years in the CHP, Remmel could have retired on disability. But he said his experiences as an officer helped drive his determination to put on the uniform again.

“I've watched people's lives change in a moment through no fault of their own,” Remmel said. “It was just my turn.”

Remmel never sued the driver who hit him, although she was cited and lost her license.

“Money's fine. But I needed to feel like I was doing something with what I had after the accident,” Remmel said. To sue, “you'd have to ask what's a leg worth? And I couldn't come up with an answer.”

San Diego California DUI criminal defense attorney news

Prosecutors on Friday filed misdemeanor drunk driving charges against a top-ranking Los Angeles County sheriff's executive who was arrested on suspicion of a Caliofrnia DUI or driving his county-issued car while intoxicated.

Division Chief Michael Aranda, 62, who has served nearly 40 years with the department, was arrested June 12 after a late-night traffic stop on the 14 Freeway near Acton.

As chief of the department's Technical Services Division, Aranda supervised the crime lab and computer systems.

Sheriff Lee Baca placed Aranda on paid administrative leave two weeks ago after learning that the state Department of Motor Vehicles had suspended Aranda's driver's license.

Aranda has since agreed to resign from the department. He will remain on paid leave until his employment ends Oct. 16, said sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore.

A 911 call started a chain of events that led to Aranda's arrest, officials said.

California Highway Patrol officers started looking for Aranda's county-issued car, a black 2007 Chevrolet Impala, after someone called the emergency line and reported that the car was being driven erratically.

Officers stopped Aranda near Crown Valley Road and arrested him because he appeared to be intoxicated, a CHP spokesman said.

Aranda was off-duty at the time of the arrest. Like dozens of other sheriff's executives, he had been issued a county car to drive to and from work.

The CHP, Sheriff's Department and district attorney's office all refused to disclose the results of a test of Aranda's blood-alcohol content.

The decision about whether to file charges against Aranda took more than three months.

Aranda is scheduled to appear for arraignment Oct. 10 at the Newhall courthouse, said Sandi Gibbons, a district attorney spokeswoman.

California DUI criminal defense attorney news

Pleasanton police and the California Highway Patrol will conduct separate DUI checkpoints late Saturday and early Sunday.

The checkpoints will be conducted on roads with established DUI problems. Agencies publicize checkpoint plans in advance to deter motorists from driving after drinking.

Besides arresting impaired drivers, officers also will check motorists' driver's licenses.

The Pleasanton checkpoint will be from 8 p.m. Saturday until 2 a.m. Sunday and is funded by a grant from the state Office of Traffic Safety.

The CHP checkpoint will be from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday in south Livermore.

San Diego DUI criminal defense attorney news

September 19, 2007

SAN DIEGO: A man accused of San Diego DUI / drunk driving and causing a traffic collision that killed a 76-year-old woman pleaded not guilty yesterday to murder and other charges.

John Joseph Taskey Jr., 45, also is charged with gross vehicular manslaughter and felony driving under the influence in connection with the Sept. 13 crash that fatally injured Rosa A. Degerman of San Diego.

San Diego Superior Court Judge David Szumowski set Taskey's bail at $1 million and appointed the Public Defender's Office to represent him. If convicted of the charges, he could be sentenced to 15 years to life in prison.

Prosecutors said Degerman was riding in a car with family members on westbound Interstate 8 when it was allegedly rear-ended by a pickup near West Mission Bay Drive shortly after 6:30 p.m.

An 11-year-old girl's shoulder was broken in the crash. Degerman died at a hospital the next morning.

Deputy District Attorney David Grapilon told the judge that Taskey has had five previous DUI convictions in the past decade. He was on parole from the last conviction when the collision occurred.

California DUI criminal defense lawyers rarely have to deal with such a person.

Police say man arrested for eighth DUI

September 19, 2007

A man awaiting sentencing on a previous driving-under-the-influence charge was arrested on his eighth DUI charge Tuesday in Tortugas, Doña Ana County sheriff's deputies said.

Deputies were on a separate call when a white Ford -150 pulled into a driveway in the 3500 block of Paroquia Street. The driver David Torres, 48, of the 3400 block of South Highway 28, went up to shake the hand of a deputy, who was his former probation officer.

Deputies noticed Torres had slurred speech, bloodshot eyes and smelled of alcohol. Torres allegedly failed a field sobriety test and had a revoked driver's license.

Deputies said Torres' drunken-driving arrest record dates to 1986 in El Paso.

California DUI criminal defense lawyers represent politicians.

A Sebastopol councilwoman is fighting her DUI arrest in May, claiming her Fourth Amendment rights were violated.

Andy Martinez, attorney for Linda Ruta Kelley, says the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department's and California Highway Patrol's prolonged detention to conduct a general investigation violated Kelley's right to privacy and her freedom from government search and seizure.

Martinez is asking for a suppression of evidence. A hearing in Sonoma County Court is scheduled Oct. 11.

Kelley's Chevrolet pickup was pulled over by a sheriff's deputy at 2:15 a.m. on May 20 on Main Street in Guerneville. The deputy and a responding CHP officer smelled alcohol in the truck and on Kelley's breath. Kelley admitted to having three drinks, according to court papers.

The deputy said Kelley, 53, was driving 10 mph in a 25 mph zone and her registration had expired the month before. The deputy also said her license plate was obscured. The CHP officer noted Kelley's eyes were red and watery and her speech was slurred.

Kelley did not perform field sobriety tests and she was arrested and taken to the Sonoma County Jail where two breath tests revealed a blood alcohol level of 0.09 percent. Driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent or higher is illegal in California. Kelley faces two misdemeanor drunken driving charges.

Martinez claims it is unclear what vehicle code violation Kelley was stopped for because she was not cited for having an expired registration and there is no indication the deputy investigated that further. There also is no mention of an obscured license plate in the deputy's report, Martinez claims.

The stop and detention should have been no more than a cite and release, Martinez states in his motion to suppress the DUI evidence, including Kelley's statements to the deputy and CHP officer.

The Sonoma County District Attorney's Office also is investigating allegations Kelley caused vandalism to a truck parked near her home by scratching it with a key in August. Kelley was re-elected to the council last year.

A Chicago Kent College of Law Professor is featured in this non-DUI case.

LAS VEGAS

In a scene of legal deja vu, a grayer, heavier O.J. Simpson stood handcuffed in court Wednesday to face charges that could put him behind bars for life. And there is no Johnny Cochran around to save him this time.

The prosecutor who failed to get him a dozen years ago was there to watch, and news cameras tracked his every move as if they were covering a slow-speed chase.

But as Simpson made his $125,000 bail on charges including kidnapping and armed robbery, legal experts were questioning: Could a former football star who beat a double-murder rap really do hard time for a crime that sounds like a bad movie?

Police have laid out a case that makes Simpson the leader in an armed holdup of sports memorabilia collectors, and they arrested a fifth suspect in the case Wednesday. Some of the facts — including a curious recording of the confrontation — don't seem so clear-cut.

Legal experts say that issues such as who had rightful ownership of the goods and the reputation of witnesses in the sometimes less-than-reputable world of memorabilia trading could cloud the prosecution's case.

Simpson has insisted he was merely retrieving items that were stolen from him earlier.

Alfred Beardsley, one of the collectors who says he was robbed at gunpoint by Simpson and several other men, told NBC's "Today" show before Simpson's hearing that he didn't think an audiotape made at the scene was accurate. Beardsley was arrested on a parole violation Wednesday.

The other victim, Bruce Fromong, was recovering from a heart attack in a Los Angeles hospital. The man who arranged the meeting between Simpson and the two collectors, Tom Riccio, has a criminal record.

"The credibility of the cohorts in the enterprise would be a key issue at trial," said University of Southern California law professor Jody Armour.

Agreed, said Dennis Turner, a professor at the University of Dayton School of Law. "This is a pretty shady world and pretty shady characters dealing with each other in a pretty shady way."

A key difference with the 1995 murder trial is that there are plenty of witnesses this time who place Simpson at the scene, including hotel video surveillance. Simpson has made no secret he went to the hotel room intending to take the memorabilia and told The Associated Press that a man who came with him brought a truck to cart away the goods.

"It's not like the murder case involving his ex-wife and Ron Goldman, where Simpson had a completely different story in which he said, 'I wasn't there,'" said Doug Godfrey, a professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. "A prosecutor only has to show intent. And the intent is, 'Were you acting in concert with someone with a gun to take property from someone?' If you were, you're guilty of armed robbery."

Simpson attorney Yale Galanter said: "You can't rob something that is yours."

Simpson furrowed his brow as the judge read the list of charges against him. Gone was the slight smirk he flashed when he was arrested.

He answered quietly in a hoarse voice and nodded as the judge laid out restrictions for his release, including surrendering his passport to his attorney and having no contact with co-defendants or potential witnesses.

Simpson did not enter a plea.

Galanter said after the hearing that the $125,000 bond was reasonable.

The oddity of the case has attracted a swarm of reporters, including Marcia Clark, who unsuccessfully prosecuted Simpson for the 1994 murders and was reporting for "Entertainment Tonight." A helicopter television crew followed Simpson's vehicle leaving the court, strangely reminiscent of the slow-speed chase in which he once fled police in a white Ford Bronco.

Simpson, 60, flew home to Miami later Wednesday in a spectacle just as surreal. US Airways emptied a plane so he could board first with Galanter and his girlfriend, Christine Prody.

Simpson sat in seat 6D, an aisle seat in economy class. Passengers who boarded behind him took pictures with cell phones and cameras. He nodded and smiled as they passed.

Simpson was arrested Sunday after a collector reported a group of armed men charged into a hotel room at the Palace Station casino and took several items.

The Heisman Trophy winner spent three nights in jail after being charged with kidnapping, robbery with use of a deadly weapon, burglary while in possession of a deadly weapon, coercion with use of a deadly weapon, assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit kidnapping, conspiracy to commit robbery and conspiracy to commit a crime.

Four other men have been arrested on many of the same charges, and police were still looking for another suspect.

Charles Howard Cashmore, 40, surrendered to police Wednesday and was scheduled to appear in court Thursday morning. Cashmore brought in items that are believed to have been taken, police said without elaborating.

Authorities allege that the men went to the room Sept. 13 on the pretext of brokering a deal with two longtime collectors, Beardsley and Fromong. According to police reports, the collectors were ordered at gunpoint to hand over several items valued at as much as $100,000, including football game balls signed by Simpson, Joe Montana lithographs, baseballs autographed by Pete Rose and Duke Snider and framed awards and plaques.

Beardsley told police he expected that night that the collection would earn $35,000 from the "client" he had never met.

Beardsley told police that one of the men with Simpson brandished a pistol, frisked him and impersonated a police officer, and that another man pointed a gun at Fromong.

Authorities said Beardsley, of Burbank, Calif., was paroled in March 2006 after serving 11 months of a two-year sentence for stalking a woman in Riverside County.

He was arrested at his room at the Luxor hotel Wednesday for violating parole. A California corrections spokesman said Beardsley was required to get written approval before traveling more than 50 miles from home or leaving home for more than 24 hours.

Beardsley was held without bail pending an extradition hearing Thursday.

Court records show Riccio also has a criminal history, including grand larceny in Florida in 1984, when he received three years of probation; and felony arson in 1995, in California, for which he was sentenced to two years.

Riccio has said he was not concerned with how his past might affect his credibility "because everything's on tape. That's why it's on tape."

He also said he had been promised some form of immunity by prosecutors.

Two other defendants, Walter Alexander, 46, and Clarence Stewart, 53, were arrested and released pending court appearances. Stewart turned in some of the missing goods and Alexander agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, authorities said. Suspect Michael McClinton, 49, of Las Vegas, surrendered to police Tuesday. Jailers were unable to say whether Cashmore or McClinton had retained a lawyer.

Police have not identified the remaining suspect they are seeking.

Armour said if the other suspects who have been arrested turn on Simpson in exchange for lighter sentences, it could help the prosecution, but also damage their credibility. Allegations of a setup could also cast doubt on the testimony of the memorabilia dealers, he said.

"But at the end of the day, that may not matter as much as whether they think he (Simpson) deserves some punishment for something," Armour said.

California DUI defense lawyer news

Police departments win honors

The Fresno and Clovis police departments were honored recently during the California Law Enforcement Challenge in San Diego.

The Fresno traffic enforcement bureau won the Chief's Challenge for the fifth consecutive year.

The bureau was recognized for its traffic safety program, and also won first-place honors for the best DUI program in California. Those efforts are credited with reducing traffic fatalities in the city.

The Fresno department competes against other agencies that employ 500 to 1,000 officers.

Clovis received a second place award for its efforts to reduce speed, improve traffic safety and reduce the number of impaired drivers.

The agency also took second place for its "AVOID the 17" multiagency DUI campaign, which involved 17 local agencies in a coordinated crackdown.

DWI criminal defense lawyer news

An Arkansas State Organization launched a statewide law enforcement recognition program honoring officers from across the state for exemplary service in drunk driving enforcement during the past year.

The awards were presented Monday at the Governor’s Mansion Great Hall and consisted of a participating agency award, a certificate and commemorative pin for officers suitable for uniform wear. Mothers Against Drunk Driving staff and volunteers presented the awards.

The award has been developed in cooperation with the Arkansas State Police Highway Safety Office as an annual recognition of committed law enforcement officers who help keep roads safe from alcohol-impaired drivers. The commemorative pins have the Omnibus DWI Code 5-65-103 representing the statute used for citing offenders with drunk driving charges.

When officers are committed to keeping impaired drivers off the roadways, communities are safer and the public reaps the benefit of their hard work, said Teresa Belew, executive director for MADD Arkansas “We are pleased to recognize officers and agencies across the state for their good work.”

The mission of Mothers Against Drunk Driving is to stop drunk driving, support the victims of this violent crime and prevent underage drinking. For more information about MADD, visit www.madd.org.



Charles Leech, who accepted an award, is formerly of Stuttgart.

“He was the top officer for his agency and is a participant in a new program that provides uniform pins to officers to wear to signify the DWI arrests they have given over a years time,” Belew said.

This is the first year MADD has done the program and Leech is the first recipient for Craighead County.

“He was also selected to go to the national conference in St. Louis,” she said. “He is recognized as a leader among law enforcement and Craighead County makes a statement for their commitment to support their deputies aggressiveness in DWI enforcement in their community.”

SAN DIEGO DUI criminal defense attorney news

A man pleaded not guilty on Tuesday to charges that he killed a woman in a San Diego DUI /California DUI-related collision this past week.

John Joseph Taskey is accused of San Diego DUI / driving under the influence and rear-ending a family on westbound Interstate 8 last Thursday.

The family was traveling in a caravan of two cars, with three passengers in the car that was hit. All three passengers were injured, including a 76-year-old grandmother, who later died.

"Mr. Taskey is charged with murder and vehicular manslaughter gross with injuries and with priors, he is looking at a potential maximum of 15 years to life on the murder charges," said Deputy District Attorney David Grapilon.

Taskey has five prior San Diego DUI or DUI convictions. He went to prison for his last San Diego DUI or a DUI and was on parole at the time of the accident. His bail is set at $1 million.

California DUI defense attorney news

Michael Dimitras, the 20-year-old man who killed two former high school classmates in a California DUI / drunk driving crash, was sentenced to just over six years in prison Tuesday, a term called inadequate by the victims' families.

A probation report had recommended Dimitras be sentenced to seven years and four months, a term prosecutors agreed with. Sacramento Superior Court Judge Gary Ransom handed down the sentence of six years and four months in exchange for Dimitras' guilty plea to California DUI.

The sentencing followed 90 minutes of emotional statements by the families of 18-year-old Kendall Lui and 19-year-old Brian Haight.

The two were killed July 4, 2006, in the crash that followed a rafting trip with fellow Bella Vista High School graduates. Dimitras, who was the group's designated driver, had a blood-alcohol content of 0.09 percent when he crashed his sport-utility vehicle into a pole along Folsom Boulevard.

The victims' families said they thought Dimitras should have faced more serious charges and questioned why he was given a shorter prison term than those who commit less serious crimes.

"Brian's only weakness was trusting the wrong people," Haight's father, Douglas, said. "And he trusted Michael Dimitras to drive him home safely."

Dimitras swiveled in his chair as several of the victims' loved ones spoke.

Lui's sister, Jordan, said Dimitras had "single-handedly ruined the lives of two families" and that she was "sickened by the lack of remorse by Michael Dimitras and his family."

While accepting the California DUI plea deal, Dimitras said he was "truly remorseful" for the crash.

"What I did was so terrible that I don't know what I can do to possibly make up for it," Dimitras said, speaking slowly and turning to face a packed courtroom.

San Diego drunk driving criminal defense lawyers should warn clients not to run from or fight San Diego DUI police officers.

SAN DIEGO DUI news

San Diego Police officer got his nose broken in a fight with an alleged San Diego DUI driver trying to evade arrest for speeding.

A San Diego Harbor Police officer noticed a Jeep speeding southbound on Pacific Highway Monday.

The officer watched the Jeep come to a stop at Ash Street, then make a left turn onto Ash Street, allegedly running the red light.

The officer then attempted to stop the Jeep. A high-speed chase ensued through Mission Hills and Old Town, reaching speeds of 60 mph.

The pursuit ended when the suspect made a U-turn on Harney Street and collided with the pursuing cruiser. The suspect resisted arrest and during the struggle caused the injury to a San Diego Police Department officer who assisted with the San Diego DUI stop.

The driver was identified as 45-year-old Michael Hudon of San Diego. He was booked into the San Diego Central Jail Tuesday on suspicion of evasion, San Diego DUI and battery of a police officer.

San Diego California DUI defense attorneys hear about DUI checkpoints. This is different.

Alcohol surveys spur complaints

A motorist who was stopped wants a halt to voluntary testing that is so "persistent" it feels like a DUI checkpoint.

Roberto Sequeira says he was traveling northbound on Hwy. 119 in Gilpin County with his family one night recently and was stopped at a traffic checkpoint by a research group saying they were attempting to collect data on drugs and alcohol and asked if they could breathylize him. Posing for a portrait in his car in Boulder on Monday, Sept. 17, 2007, Sequeira says he repeatedly asked if they were law enforcement officials and said he was not interested in participating in the study, but was not given clearance to leave.

The Gilpin County Sheriff's Office was apologizing Monday after a weekend effort to help a research group led to complaints about what appeared to be a DUI checkpoint - but wasn't.

Sheriff's officials who participated in the stops now acknowledge that the nonprofit organization requesting voluntary DUI and drug tests from drivers was overly persistent, according to complaints.

"It was like a telemarketer that you couldn't hang up on," said Gilpin County Undersheriff John Bayne.

Sgt. Bob Enney said deputies assisted the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation in stopping motorists at five sites along Colorado 119 for surveys on any drug and alcohol use. Surveyors then asked the motorists to voluntarily submit to tests of their breath, blood and saliva. At least 200 drivers were tested, Enney said. About five motorists later complained, he said.

Roberto Sequeira, 51, said he and his wife, Terry, were detained for 15 minutes Friday evening despite their protestations that they needed to get their sleepy 10-year-old child back to their home in Nederland .

He said they had to deal with two Pacific Institute researchers. After Sequeira's repeated refusals, the officials offered his wife, who was driving, $100 in an attempt to get the couple to participate in a DUI breath test.

"I think it's very dangerous," said Sequeira, a Boulder radio personality on Latino issues. "Sometimes at checkpoints, unfortunate things happen. I don't think they're authorized to do what they're doing, and I view it as a gross violation of law-enforcement protocol."

The research is part of a nationwide study partly financed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Pacific Institute officials defended the initiative. They said the collection of vital statistics measuring, over time, the number of people driving under the influence helps gauge the impact of laws and enforcement policy changes.

The survey, which began in July and will continue in other locations through November, is conducted every 10 years.

"We've been literally surveying thousands of people," said John Lacey, the director of the Alcohol, Policy and Safety Research Center in Calverton , Md. , through which Pacific Institute conducted its research. "So you can imagine if you stop people in the middle of the night, there will be complaints."

The survey results are anonymous and aren't shared with police, he said.

He said the researchers try to be sensitive to those not wanting to participate, but they push a small subset of those who initially refuse to reconsider - even offering incentives.

"If we don't do that, the criticism will come out that we had so many who were refusers," Lacey said.

Bayne said a similar study conducted in Gilpin County 2 1/2 years ago by the same researchers resulted in no complaints. But he added that last weekend's effort was more aggressive.

"The people were too persistent," Bayne said. "Some people didn't feel it was voluntary."

Cathryn Hazouri, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said the participation of sheriff's officials and the blue jumpsuits worn by the survey team may have confused some of those who were stopped. But she said the fact that surveyors stressed that the DUI and drug tests were voluntary eased her concerns about the incident.

Sequeira has invited Pacific Institute officials to appear on his radio show broadcast in Boulder and Denver on KGNU community radio, 88.5 FM and 1390 AM. The show airs at 7 p.m. Tuesdays.

Recalling Friday's incident, he said Gilpin County sheriff's officials directed him to pull over on Colorado 119 about 10:45 p.m. when his family was returning from a dinner. He said neither he nor his wife had been drinking.

They were greeted by "youthful, college" surveyors dressed in jumpsuits and blue generic caps.

"We had a 10-year-old in the back who's tired, we tell them thanks but no thanks, we have to get this child back home to bed," Sequeira said.

He said a worker persisted, saying that the researchers would assist in driving the family home if they needed assistance.

When the Sequeiras again demurred, a supervisor offered them a $100 money order.

"We say, 'No, thank you, we have to get our child home,"' Sequeira recalled. "At this point, both clones start chortling at us and ridiculing us."

Sequeira plans to file a complaint at the Gilpin County courthouse seeking to force the organization to stop the roadside tests.

"I want them to cease and desist their unethical, unsafe and unqualified roadside practice," Sequeira said.

For now, Gilpin County officials don't have to decide whether they would participate with the group again. For now, the surveys in that county are completed.

SAN DIEGO California DUI criminal defense attorney news

A police officer was punched in the face late Monday night while helping to arrest a suspected San Diego drunk driver, who had to be subdued with the aid of a Taser.

The incident began about 11:15 p.m. when a Harbor Police officer tried to pull over a man driving a white Jeep whom he allegedly saw speeding down Pacific Highway and running through traffic lights, said Harbor Police Sgt. Kathleen Fabregast. The Jeep driver refused to pull over, which led to a pursuit through Mission Hills and Old Town at speeds up to 60 miles per hour.

The chase ended in a cul-de-sac on Harney Street, when the driver made a U-turn and allegedly collided nearly head-on with a Harbor Police cruiser, the sergeant said. The driver then fought with officers taking him into custody, in the process punching an officer from the San Diego police Central Division in the face.

The man was shot with the electric stun gun and finally taken into custody. He was booked into County Jail on suspicion of San Diego DUI, evading arrest and battery on a police officer.

San Diego California DUI criminal defense lawyer news

CARLSBAD California – A suspected drunken driver was arrested Monday afternoon after he was spotted speeding and driving over curbs on a busy North County road.
The 39-year-old man was driving a brand-new black Ford truck south on El Camino Real at Palomar Airport Road just before 11:30 a.m. when witnesses called police to report the man driving recklessly, police said.

Officers followed him to La Costa Avenue where he was arrested.
Police say the driver may have caused an earlier three-car accident on El Camino Real and Arenal Road.

San Diego DUI Blood Test Regulations

§1219.1. Blood Collection and Retention.

(a) Blood samples shall be collected by venipuncture from living individuals as soon as feasible after an alleged offense and only by persons authorized by Section 13354 of the Vehicle Code.

(b) Sufficient blood shall be collected to permit duplicate determinations.

(c) Alcohol or other volatile organic disinfectant shall not be used to clean the skin where a specimen is to be collected. Aqueous benzalkonium chloride (zephiran), aqueous merthiolate or other suitable aqueous disinfectant shall be used.

(d) Blood samples shall be collected using sterile, dry hypodermic needles and syringes, or using clean, dry vacuum type containers with sterile needles. Reusable equipment,if used, shall not be cleaned or kept in alcohol or other volatile organic solvent.

(e) The blood sample shall be deposited into a clean, dry container which is closed with an inert stopper.

(1) Alcohol or other volatile organic solvent shall not be used to clean the container.

(2) The blood shall be mixed with an anticoagulant and a preservative.

(f) When blood samples for forensic alcohol analysis are collected post-mortem, all practical precautions to insure an uncontaminated sample shall be employed, such as:

(1) Samples shall be obtained prior to the start of any embalming procedure. Blood samples shall not be collected from the circulatory system effluent during arterial injection of embalming fluid. Coroner's samples do not need a preservative added if stored under refrigeration.

(2) Care shall be taken to avoid contamination by alcohol from the gastrointestinal tract directly or by diffusion therefrom. The sample shall be taken from a major vein or the heart.

(g) In order to allow for analysis by the defendant, the remaining portion of the sample shall be retained for one year after the date of collection.

(1) In coroner's cases, blood samples shall be retained for at least 90 days after date of collection.

(2)Whenever a sample is requested by the defendant for analysis and a sufficient sample remains, the forensic alcohol laboratory or law enforcement agency in possession of the original sample shall continue such possession, but shall provide the defendant with a portion of the remaining sample in a clean container together with a copy or transcript of the identifying information carried on the original sample container.

Eve was recently seen wearing her California drunk driving ankle bracelet during fashion week in New York. The SCRAM ankle bracelet was similar to those worn by other celebrities.

Eve's California DUI defense attorney entered a no contest plea for her, the singing star was required to wear the SCRAM alcohol monitoring ankle bracelet for 45 days.

In addition, Eve was given 36 months of probation, required to enroll in an alcohol education program, and pay about $1,400 in fines, damages and penalties.

Eve was arrested back in April for suspicion of California DUI after she wrecked her gold sports car on Hollywood Boulevard.

California drunk driving criminal defense attorney news

Soap Star Pleads Not Guilty in DUI Case

September 17th 2007

Sean Kanan, a former "General Hospital" cast member and "Karate Kid III" star, pleaded not guilty today to two misdemeanor California DUI charges.

Kanan was not in court today, instead pleading through his California DUI attorney. He is charged with misdemeanor counts of California driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, and California driving with a blood-alcohol level of .08 percent or higher.

He is due back in court on October 22.

San Diego California DUI criminal defense attorney news

High-Protein Diet Proves Key to Defense Win in Drunk Driving Case

After failing an alcohol breath test, a Georgia man beat charges of drunk driving when his attorney argued that his .10 alcohol level was caused by a high-protein diet rather than by excessive drinking.

The novel argument was made by defense attorney William C. Head, an Atlanta attorney who specializes in drunk driving defenses.

Head says this is the first time he has used the defense at trial, so he's batting 1,000 so far. He says scientific evidence and expert testimony -- as well as the arresting police officer's honest testimony -- convinced the jury that Mark Redstrom's diet made the breath test unreliable.

The high-protein defense is based on the theory that a human body produces its own alcohol if carbohydrates are suddenly consumed after being eliminated from the diet for a prolonged time.

Experts do not yet know how much body-generated isopropyl alcohol it would take to intoxicate a person, Head says. But Georgia drunk driving law specifies that a person's level of intoxication is "from alcohol consumed."

Some other states, including Wisconsin and New Jersey , have laws that do not distinguish between alcohol consumed and alcohol generated by the body, Head says. So the defense Head used might not be as effective in those states.

The 'Designated Driver'

Redstrom, whose friends called him "Buddha," started a high-protein diet after seeing photographs of himself from Christmas 1997. In five months, he lost more than 50 pounds, slimming down to 165 pounds, Head says.

The regimen eliminates carbohydrates from the diet and boosts protein intake. Redstrom's roommate testified that Redstrom would get up every morning and set out 14 parcels of food, his allotment for the day, along with water.

The roommate's testimony and "before" pictures of Redstrom compared to his slim appearance in court established the defendant's strict compliance with the diet.

On the night Redstrom was arrested, he volunteered to be the designated driver for his friend's bachelor's party. Head says his client drank about four beers in the course of five hours at the party, held at a notorious strip club in Atlanta .

For the last two and a half hours of the party, he didn't drink at all, his attorney says. He was angry with the strip club management for not getting the groom-to-be onto the stage and just trying to sell drinks and make money.

After taking his friends home that night, Redstrom was on his way home when the police stopped him for speeding. It was 3:23 a.m. and the police officer clocked Redstrom at 58 mph in a 45-mph zone, Head says.

The officer conducted fiel