Traffic Crimes

Commerce Man Pleads Not Guilty in DUI Crash

According to an article from examiner.com, a Los Angeles county man was recently taken into custody on suspicion of driving under the influence and causing an accident. The 23-year-old man is said by police to have been the cause of the accident that involved a reported four other vehicles. Though the man was not said to have been injured in the crash, a 9-year-old girl that was a passenger in the man’s car was seriously injured and died shortly after arriving at a nearby hospital for treatment. The man now faces charges including vehicular manslaughter, DUI, and child endangerment and could use the help of an experienced Los Angeles drunk driving defense attorney.

Reportedly, the man did not notice the slow down in traffic while traveling along the Northbound I-5, and swerved to avoid the vehicles in front of him but barreled into other vehicles as a result. The crash took place at 1AM in the city of Carlsbad.

Though driving under the influence and driver inattention were the main culprits in causing this tragedy, not all accidents that occur under suspicion of DUI are the same. Dangerous road conditions, faulty auto products, and other drivers that are not accused of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol can all be the primary cause of a traffic accident. Thus, it is imperative that all details of any crash are thoroughly examined to determine exactly who was at fault so that accountability can be distributed accordingly.

The Number of DUI-Charged Women Rising

A recent article in The Seattle Times reported on an alarming trend that can have an impact on motorists anywhere in the country, particularly Los Angeles, where commuting via passenger car is as commonplace as taking the subway is in New York. According to the article, the number of women arrested for driving under the influence nationwide rose 28.8% higher in 2007 than it was in 1998. Interestingly enough, the number of men arrested for DUI decreased 7.5% over the same time period, indicating that woman are now more likely to engage in reckless behavior than they ever have been in the past.

Based on FBI figures relating to arrests, the state of California experienced an increase as well in the number of women driving under the influence. That is, 18.8% of all DUI arrests in California in the year 2007 involved a woman driving under the influence, while, in 1997, women only accounted for 13.5% of all DUI arrests. Numerous explanations have been given as to the reason why this deadly trend is becoming more and more prevalent across the country. Some cite that women tend to drink more at home than men do, and consequently hide their drinking problems until after an accident has occurred, at which point preventative measures to help curb the problem are too late. Others cite the current economic tide as reasoning as to why women are more likely to succumb to driving while under the influence. That is, as more and more men, and women alike, lose their jobs, there is a definite increase in pressure placed upon the shoulders of women, many of whom take on the dual roles of homemaker and financial contributor towards the well-being of the family. This added pressure, unfortunately, has led to increased drinking habits on the part of women

California DUI Arrests Rise, Yet Percent Convicted Drops

According to the California Department of Motor Vehicles, both the number of DUI arrests and DUI convictions in the state of California rose during the time period of 2001-2007. In 2001, there were a total of 176,490 DUI arrests in California. In 2007, that number rose to 203,866. As far as convictions go, 2001 boasted 140,440 convictions of DUI in the state of California, while in 2007 there were 153,348 such convictions. Interestingly, while the number of overall arrests and convictions has risen over the years, the percentage of convictions in relation to arrests has actually dropped. In 2001, 80% of arrests resulted in conviction, while in 2007, 75% of arrests led to convictions.

The question then arises as to why the percentage of convictions has dropped over the years. In fact, a close examination of the data provided by the California DMV shows that the percentage of convictions did not rise during the period of 2001 to 2007, with percentages either remaining the same or decreasing over the seven year period. What has changed over the years? The way the human body absorbs alcohol? Or the effectiveness of law enforcement tests to conclude how much alcohol is present in a person’s bloodstream?

Alcohol is not digested by the human body, but instead is absorbed into the bloodstream. As blood passes through the lungs, traces of alcohol move across the lung membranes and are released into the air when a person exhales. Depending on the concentration of alcohol in the body, the amount of alcohol released during exhale will either increase or decrease, and is representative of how high a person’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is.

Law enforcement officials use a variety of tests to determine whether or not a person has a BAC higher than the legal limit. From simple tests of observation involving agility, balance, and perception, to more complicated tests incorporating the use of devices, such as breathalyzers and intoxilyzers, law enforcement is always evolving its ways in which to tell whether or not a person is under the influence of alcohol.

Sobriety Checkpoints: Always Accurate?

According to the Los Angeles Police Department’s website, “the purpose of the Sobriety/Driver’s License checkpoint is to reduce the number of traffic collisions involving intoxicated and unlicensed drivers through enforcement and public awareness.” For all intensive purposes, sobriety checkpoints are a great addition to the policing of any community. Under ideal circumstances, these checkpoints can reduce the number of alcohol-impaired drivers on the road, thus making it safer for all other motorists. However, it is imperative that these checkpoints are properly maintained, and that innocent drivers are not singled out and punished for infractions relating to Los Angeles DUI offenses that they really didn’t commit.

At sobriety checkpoints, law enforcement officers can ask a motorist to vacate his or her vehicle, and possibly ask them to undergo a battery of tests meant to determine whether or not the driver is in fact driving while under the influence of either alcohol or drugs. However, if these tests are not administered properly, or if the law enforcement officials already are convinced that the motorist is in fact under the influence, then the ensuing test can be relatively biased, thus creating the potential for error and misjudgment.

Law enforcement officials are trained to look for indicators that an individual is under the influence. These include bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, fumbling fingers, the smell of alcohol on one’s breath, and the presence of open alcohol containers in the car. To improve the chances of accurate determination in regard to whether or not a person is under the influence of alcohol, it is highly desired that officers go through DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) training prior to being assigned to work a sobriety checkpoint.

Driving Under the Influence…of Your Inbox

A recent article in The Miami Herald discussed the long-winded debate over texting and driving, and whether or not texting should be banned altogether. For Californians at least, this debate ended some time ago, with texting while driving now being against the law, just as cell phone usage without a hands-free device is. However, not even half of the states across the country have imposed such rules on texting, despite the fact that there have been numerous studies warning of the dangers involved with driving while being distracted with any task other than simply driving.

The article cited a study done by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute in which texting while driving was deemed to be the equivalent of driving under the influence, and resulted in increasing the likelihood of an accident occurring by an astounding 23 times. The distraction that cell phone use creates, whether through having a traditional, verbal conversation, or through text messaging, is enough to increase the chance of loss of control of vehicle, which could certainly lead to property damage and very well could lead to personal injury, up-to and including death.

California’s law forbidding texting while operating a motor vehicle is relatively clear cut. If a driver is seen with a cell phone in hand, and it is reasonably deemed that the cell phone is being used for texting, whether that involves reading, composing, or sending a text, then that driver will be hit with a monetary fine that grows with ensuing infractions. However, the law banning cell phone usage for making calls while driving, unless the usage is considered hands-free, does not ban a person from selecting or entering a telephone number for the purpose of making a call (though it is strongly urged that drivers do not attempt to dial while operating a motor vehicle). There in lies the problem, particularly if a person is in fact dialing a cell phone but is accused of texting instead.

Man Charged in L.A. DUI Now in NV Prison

Nevada’s The Record-Courier recently reported about a 50-year-old man who had a previous DUI felony conviction in Los Angeles in 1997, and was recently sentenced again to a second prison term for felony driving under the influence in Gardnerville, Nevada. His blood alcohol content at the time of the crash was .209, about two and a half times the legal limit. The man was sentenced to five years in prison, but could be out on parole as early as two years.

Though it was reported that the man had previously sobered up since his last conviction, even attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, he relapsed in 2008, possibly beginning to drink again over the fact that he had been diagnosed with throat and bladder cancer. Even under such extenuating circumstances, the law is the law, and the man will need to serve his jail time just like anyone else would. However, one could wonder whether or not the man’s sentence was as minimal as possible.

According to Nevada law, any person who has previously been convicted of a felony, such as driving under the influence, regardless of whether or not that conviction was in the state of Nevada, will serve prison time for a second felony committed. For the many Californians, particularly those from the Los Angeles area, that visit Nevada each year, it is important to realize that your actions in California will travel with you to Nevada, and vice-versa. With drinking such a prevalent part of Nevada cities, such as Las Vegas and Reno, it is important to remember to always take the steps needed to be as safe as possible, including those steps needed to allow for the safety of those around you.

Tustin Teen Charged with Car Crash Murder

According to The Orange County Register, an 18-year old, male from the North Tustin area was recently charged with second–degree murder for crashing his parents’ car, resulting in the loss of life of his 16-year-old, female passenger. The driver was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crash boasting a blood alcohol content of 0.11. His female passenger, though wearing a seatbelt, died from massive, blunt-force trauma.

It was reported that the young driver had previously, the very day of the crash, in fact, been warned by a juvenile court judge that driving involved taking on a tremendous amount of responsibility. Though the driver’s friends warned him of his intoxication level, and advised against driving the vehicle, those warnings were not taken into full consideration, with the ensuing result being the crash. The driver now faces 15 years to life in prison, and will be sentenced in October 2009.

Driving under the influence can often, but not always, lead to a loss of life, but does always have a detrimental impact on those involved, regardless of the extent to which they are a part of the crash. In any event, it is important to remember that the circumstances of the case must be examined, all influences that may have lead to the incident need to be taken into consideration, and the best possible defense should always be afforded to those being charged with driving under the influence.

South Pasadena Seek Dismissal of Tickets Issued In Bus Sting

The South Pasadena police department wanted to penalize drivers who were failing to come to a complete stop while school buses were stopped with their flashing red lights on. To catch drivers who were disobeying this law, they set up a sting operation to catch the violators. Now it appears that the tickets they handed out are not valid, according to anarticle in the Los Angeles Times.

The $500 a piece citations were handed out by the South Pasadena police department during a sting in which two police cadets walked on and off a school bus parked on Huntington Drive near Milan Avenue. According to the article, however, “The vehicle code specifies that drivers may not pass a school bus with its red lights flashing when it is “stopped for the purpose of loading or unloading any schoolchildren.”

After meeting with the city attorney, the police determined that they didn’t meet the requirements for the code and decided to ask the courts to dismiss the citations.

Reckless Driving Charges for Los Angeles Man Involved in Several Accidents

Los Angeles Times staff writer Joanna Lin reported that physician Christopher Thomas Thompson, 59 will stand trial in court for reckless driving charges. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Amy D. Hogue heard testimony from Los Angeles police officer Robert Rodriguez and cyclists allegedly involved in separate altercations before ruling on Thompson’s case. Thompson faces felony and misdemeanor reckless driving charges including causing serious injury.

Thompson is accused of driving in front of cyclists and then abruptly stopping causing injuries to three bikers. The accidents occurred on a thin stretch of Mandeville Canyon Road a residential road in Brentwood. Officer Rodriguez said in court that Thompson had told him he was “tired of them” and that he stopped in front of the cyclists to “teach them a lesson.”

In July, Ron Peterson, 40 had his front teeth and nose broken and suffered scarring to the face when he went through Thompson’s rear view window. Another cyclist Christian Stoehr 29, suffered a separated shoulder that needed to be operated on, and required metal implants, he now suffers from chronic arthritis and soreness in the joint.

No matter what your specific situation, if you have been accused of a violent crime in California, you need to hire an aggressive Los Angeles violent crime defense attorney. At the Law Offices of Lawrence Wolf, our criminal defense lawyers have the experience and knowledge that are required to defend even the most challenging violent crime case. If you have been arrested for carrying out a violent crime, you may be looking at a prison term of 25 years to life. Please call [number type=”1″] for a free consultation.