<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <title>Bay Area DUI Blog</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/" />
   <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/atom.xml" />
   <id>tag:,2010:/18</id>
   <updated>2010-03-30T19:09:41Z</updated>
   <subtitle>Bay Area DUI Lawyer Blog</subtitle>
   <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Commercial 4.24-en</generator>


<entry>
   <title>Preliminary Considerations for Non-Attorneys</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2010/03/preliminary_considerations_for_1.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2010://18.13024</id>
   
   <published>2010-03-30T17:32:40Z</published>
   <updated>2010-03-30T19:09:41Z</updated>
   
   <summary>If you or someone you know has been arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), the most important decisions to be made are whether to hire an attorney and, if so, which attorney to hire. Non-attorneys need to know that...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Robert Tayac</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="DUI Cases" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[If you or someone you know has been arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), the most important decisions to be made are whether to hire an attorney and, if so, which attorney to hire.  Non-attorneys need to know that DUI defense is a specialized area of the law.  There are complex issues involving the interplay between the DUI criminal case and the DUI Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) case.  Also, if an individual holds a professional license, such as a doctor, lawyer, stock broker, nurse, teacher, or pilot, there are other potential ramifications to that person's ability to continue practicing their profession.  As well, if the person arrested is a non-citizen, there are issues which may affect that person's privilege to remain the United States.

Once the decision has been made to hire an attorney, the next question is whom to hire.  The best advice I can offer is to seek out someone who specializes in DUI cases and has demonstrated familiarity in the particular court where the case will be filed.  It is not necessarily the best decision to hire an attorney simply because he or she has an office in the same city as the courthouse.  In making the decision, answering the following three questions may prove to be helpful.  First, is the attorney competent?  Second, do you trust the attorney to do what he or she said they would do?  Third, can you work work with them?

If the answer to any of the above three questions is no, you should consider interviewing another attorney.  

Please take some time to visit our websites:

<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com/Oakland.html">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href="http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.californiaduidefense.com">California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.http://www.bayareaduidefense.com/dui_lawyer/alameda/oakland_dui.html.com">Oakland DUI Lawyers</a>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Preliminary Considerations for Attorneys.</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2010/03/preliminary_considerations_for.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2010://18.13013</id>
   
   <published>2010-03-29T23:01:55Z</published>
   <updated>2010-03-30T00:19:58Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Most driving under the influence (DUI) arrests initiate two separate cases. The first case is the DUI criminal case which is ordinarily prosecuted by the District Attorney in the county where the DUI arrest occurred. The second case is the...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Robert Tayac</name>
      
   </author>
   
      <category term="DUI Cases" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Most driving under the influence (DUI) arrests initiate two separate cases.  The first case is the DUI criminal case which is ordinarily prosecuted by the District Attorney in the county where the DUI arrest occurred.  The second case is the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) DUI case which commences a driver's license suspension action if the person has a California driver's license or a privilege suspension action if the person is licensed by a state other than California.

In the DUI criminal case, the prosecuting attorney will ordinarily file a document called a "Complaint" which alleges two separate violations of the California Vehicle Code.  The first violation is driving under the influence in violation of California Vehicle Code section 23152, subdivision (a), while the second violation is driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or greater in violation of California Vehicle Code section 23152, subdivision (b).  To state it differently, the prosecuting attorney gets two chances to convict a person of DUI.

The California DMV is interested in whether a person was driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% or more.  This is one of the same charges the prosecuting attorney will allege, but there is a difference.  While the prosecuting attorney must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, the DMV must only prove the DMV DUI case by a legal standard referred to as preponderance of the evidence.  What preponderance of the evidence means is that the DMV must prove the case by establishing it was more likely than not that the person accused of DUI was driving with a blood or breath alcohol level of 0.08% or more.

Please take some time to visit our websites:

<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href="http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.californiaduidefense.com">California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.http://www.bayareaduidefense.com/dui_lawyer/alameda/oakland_dui.html.com">Oakland DUI Lawyers</a>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Avoid the 21&apos;s Saint Patrick&apos;s Day Campaign Results in Over 100 Arrests</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2009/04/avoid_the_21s_saint_patricks_d.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2009://18.6171</id>
   
   <published>2009-04-10T00:14:50Z</published>
   <updated>2009-04-10T00:22:40Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Alameda County&apos;s AVOID the 21 arrested over 100 people on suspicion of driving under the influence during their Saint Patrick&apos;s Day campaign. Lasting from Friday, March 13th through Wednesday, March 18th, crackdown efforts included 16 saturation patrols--mobile enforcement units that...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>D.P.</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Alameda County's AVOID the 21 arrested over 100 people on suspicion of driving under the influence during their Saint Patrick's Day campaign. Lasting from Friday, March 13th through Wednesday, March 18th, crackdown efforts included 16 saturation patrols--mobile enforcement units that scour the roads for impaired drives--and a DUI checkpoint. 

AVOID the 21's coalition of enforcement agencies apprehended 98 people for drunk driving and 10 for DUI arrest warrants. While Oakland California Highway Patrol officers garnered the most arrests, law enforcement agencies throughout Alameda County contributed to the campaign's success. 

The Saint Patrick's Day crackdown--the first of its kind in Alameda County--is part of expanded AVOID the 21 operations, made possible by the $944,780 grant the coalition received from the California Office of Traffic Safety in October 2008. In addition to the Saint Patrick's Day crackdown, AVOID the 21's new holiday campaigns include Cinco de Mayo and Independence Day.

Please take some time to visit our websites:

<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href="http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Sonoma County Secures $659,000 Grant for DUI Crackdowns</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2009/02/sonoma_county_secures_659000_g.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2009://18.5342</id>
   
   <published>2009-02-17T00:43:28Z</published>
   <updated>2009-02-17T00:46:13Z</updated>
   
   <summary>The AVOID Anti-DUI Program secured a $659,000 grant to fund heightened law enforcement efforts in Sonoma County over the next three years. Administered by the Petaluma Police Department and funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety, the grant will...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>Robert Tayac</name>
      
   </author>
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[The AVOID Anti-DUI Program secured a $659,000 grant to fund heightened law enforcement efforts in Sonoma County over the next three years. Administered by the Petaluma Police Department and funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety, the grant will pay for a variety of enforcement operations as well as equipment designed to increase the efficiency of DUI mobilizations.  
 
The Petaluma Police Department's Sergeant Ken Savano announced that Sonoma County law enforcement officers will engage in a number of new or expanded operations, including court stings, sobriety checkpoints, warrant sweeps, saturation patrols and multi-agency task forces. Although all Sonoma County drivers will be subject to the increased police enforcement, those with prior DUI warrants or offences will face particular scrutiny. 
 
Moreover, the funding will enable harsher crackdown policies during the holidays. In addition to expanding traditional mobilizations during the winter holiday season and the Memorial Day and Labor Day weekends, Sonoma County police departments will conduct new operations on Saint Patrick's Day, Cinco de Mayo and Independence Day. Enforcement efforts over the late-summer will be longer as well, lasting from August 21st through September 7th. 
 
In order to maximize the success of the expanded mobilizations, the Petaluma Police Department purchased improved equipment to increase the efficiency of enforcement operations. Among the new additions are a mobile command vehicle that will coordinate crackdowns throughout the county and a van equipped with the tools necessary to gather fingerprints, photographic evidence and run chemical tests at sobriety checkpoints. 

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Utah Governor Rejects Idea for Database of Bar Customers</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2009/02/utah_governor_rejects_idea_for.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2009://18.5091</id>
   
   <published>2009-02-06T00:24:15Z</published>
   <updated>2009-02-06T00:26:40Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Utah Governor Jon Huntsman announced Tuesday that he would not support a proposal to create a statewide database to track patron&apos;s visits to bars within Utah borders. The Governor stated that the proposal would unnecessarily deter tourism at a time...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Proposed Legislation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Utah Governor Jon Huntsman announced Tuesday that he would not support a proposal to create a statewide database to track patron's visits to bars within Utah borders.  The Governor stated that the proposal would unnecessarily deter tourism at a time when the state is attempting to modernize its' liquor laws and attract a higher number of tourists to the area.  

Of the proposed bar database, Governor Huntsman stated, "I think it would enhance the oddness of our laws.  I think that for most people that is a rather frightening, almost Orwellian, proposition."   Current liquor laws in the state of Utah require every customer to fill out an application and pay a fee to enter an establishment that serves liquor.  Despite the fact that bars in Utah are open to the public, they are still considered "private clubs" that only members and sponsored guests may utilize.  

The statewide database has been publicized by several members of the state legislature as a way to deter bar hopping while compromising with Governor Huntsman on his proposal to eliminate Utah's private club system.  Since taking office in 2005, Huntsman has voiced his opposition to the private club system saying it is a deterrent to tourists as well as people considering moving to the state.   According to the Governor, it is time to bring Utah into a modern era where the state trusts those legally allowed to consume alcoholic beverages.    

In response to Governor Huntsman's attempts to disassemble the private club system, Utah's bars have offered to scan customer's drivers' licenses but not enter them into a database.  Many bar owners recognize that creating a database of bar customers could potentially be as bad for business as the private club system.  However, Utah state lawmakers have gone as far as to suggest that the statewide database information could be kept as long as several weeks.  

State legislators have attempted to rally support for the bar database by hyping the database's possible usefulness for law enforcement officials in DUI investigations.  The problem with this proposal is that the database would not provide information on whether or not alcoholic beverages were purchased at the establishment, only that a person had their license scanned there.  However, Senate President Michael Waddoups has suggested, "Perhaps it would be a tool for law enforcement if there was a DUI incident to find out at least the number of establishments that someone had frequented."    

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Special DUI Court Designed to Treat Multiple Offenders</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2009/02/special_dui_court_designed_to.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2009://18.5052</id>
   
   <published>2009-02-03T00:57:38Z</published>
   <updated>2009-02-03T00:59:23Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Officials of Centre County, Pennsylvania, have announced plans to launch a brand new division within the county superior court system which is designed specifically to address the needs of driving under the influence (DUI) offenders. The new DUI court has...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Proposed Legislation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Officials of Centre County, Pennsylvania, have announced plans to launch a brand new division within the county superior court system which is designed specifically to address the needs of driving under the influence (DUI) offenders.  The new DUI court has been said to combine punishment as well as treatment into a more effective sentencing alternative in an effort to decrease driving under the influence incidents.  Centre County Board of Commissioners Chaiman John Eich predicts that that new DUI Court will reduce the repeat DUI offender rate by as much as ten to fifteen percent.  

This special court supervised program, which is funded by grant money from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, is open to individuals guilty of three or more driving under the influence offenses.  

The idea for the new DUI program came from the realization that the current method of penalizing DUI offenders has, thus far, been largely unsuccessful.   According to Judge Bradley Lunsford, "One of the drawbacks to how we treat repeat offenders now is that we essentially warehouse them.  We try to give them some therapeutic intervention, but it's really limited.  At the end of the period of incarceration we open the door and release an alcohol dependant person back into the community."  

In a departure from previous court programs, the purpose of this program is to help participants reconnect with the community while supporting the offenders on a wide range of individual needs, in addition to addiction.  Program Administrator Cathy Arbogast shed light on this new concept, explaining, "A lot of these folks have lost their homes, they don't have a job, they may have physical or mental health disorders.  It's hard to expect them to focus on their drug and alcohol treatment when they're dealing with these other things."  

The judges and program administrators who will be working in the new DUI court have emphasized that the number one priority of program staff is to create an environment of positive peer pressure in which multiple DUI offenders can succeed and make positive lifestyle changes.  "You get rewards for doing what you're supposed to be doing, which could include less community service hours or gift certificates donated from businesses," Arbogast added.    

The goal of the DUI court is to encourage the program participants to make lasting lifestyle changes that will hopefully translate into a decrease in DUI numbers.  Arbogast emphasized this point by stating, "You will get in more trouble for not showing up with your urine than showing up with a positive sample.  Showing up shows you acknowledge you need more treatment.  It's a completely different way of thinking."  

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Twice as Many Drivers Arrested New Years Eve This Year Compared to Last Year</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2009/01/twice_as_many_drivers_arrested_1.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2009://18.4658</id>
   
   <published>2009-01-06T01:01:35Z</published>
   <updated>2009-01-06T01:03:18Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Law enforcement agencies across the Bay Area have indicated that this New Years Eve yielded twice as many driving under the influence arrests as were made this time last year. Officer Hugo Mendoza of the California Highway Patrol&apos;s Golden Gate...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="CHP Advisements" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Law enforcement agencies across the Bay Area have indicated that this New Years Eve yielded twice as many driving under the influence arrests as were made this time last year.  Officer Hugo Mendoza of the California Highway Patrol's Golden Gate Division stated that officers arrested eighty four motorists for driving under the influence between 6:00 p.m. December 31 and 6:00a.m. January 1.  For the same period last year, forty one individuals were arrested under suspicion of drunken driving across the Bay Area.

Oddly enough, the California Highway Patrol reported a drop in DUI arrests during the Christmas enforcement period compared to the number of arrests made last year during the same time period.  This year, the CHP arrested one hundred eighty six drivers in the Bay Area between midnight on Christmas Eve and 6 a.m. on December 28.  Last year, two hundred thirty six arrests were made.

Of the dramatic upswing in DUI arrests, Officer Mendoza speculated, "A couple days later, now it's way up compared to last year.  It's kind of weird.  Maybe people were not drinking during Christmas and decided to go out during New Year's."  

Beginning December 12th, as part of the California Avoid Program, one hundred twenty five separate law enforcement agencies rallied to produce nearly twenty five hundred driving under the influence arrests.  The California Avoid Program is an annual holiday drunk driving crackdown which typically yields the highest levels of DUI arrests seen all year. 

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href="http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Proposed Legislation in Texas Would Allow Law Enforcement to Utilize Sobriety Checkpoints</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/proposed_legislation_in_texas.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4568</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-24T19:40:26Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-24T19:43:02Z</updated>
   
   <summary>State lawmakers in Texas are proposing a new bill which would alter existing laws to allow state law enforcement agencies to set up sobriety checkpoints, in an effort to crack down on drunk driving. In 1994, the Texas Court of...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Proposed Legislation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[State lawmakers in Texas are proposing a new bill which would alter existing laws to allow state law enforcement agencies to set up sobriety checkpoints, in an effort to crack down on drunk driving.  In 1994, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that, according to the United States Supreme Court, sobriety checkpoints cannot be used unless there are approved statewide procedures for conducting sobriety checkpoints.   
  
The proposed law, Senate Bill 298, was introduced by Texas State Senator John Carona and would give the Texas Department of Public Safety and local law enforcement agencies the authority to create field sobriety checkpoints on public highways or streets in order to determine whether individuals are driving while under the influence.  The law will take effect immediately if it receives a two thirds vote from both houses of the state congress.    

According to State Senator Carona, the law is long overdue, stating, "Texas does currently have the most DWIs, and it's one of the states that continues to fight against this legislation.  If we're going to save lives and we're going to make the roads safer for everyone, our families, our children, then this is long overdue."  

Some members of the public have also voiced their support of the new law, explaining that the sobriety checkpoints will help to encourage drivers to think about the possible consequences of their actions, arguing, "The promotion, the publicity for it makes people make a plan.  They should be doing that anyway, but they're not because too many people are being injured."  

While a portion of the public is in favor of such a measure, Texan defense attorneys overwhelmingly oppose the passage of such a law, stating that sobriety checkpoints are a violation of an individual's fourth amendment right, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.  According to Dallas defense attorney Patrick McClain, "It's a slippery slope, giving up our rights to privacy and to intrusiveness to law enforcement when we haven't done anything that indicates we have broken the law."   Members of the public have also agreed with this viewpoint, seeing checkpoints as a blatant attack on personal liberties. 

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has been a vocal supporter of sobriety checkpoints since the Supreme Court's ruling on the issue in 1990.  MADD also has a history of attacking those who disapprove of sobriety checkpoints, stating, "Opponents of sobriety checkpoints tend to be those who drink and drive frequently and are concerned about being caught."  This statement has angered numerous lawmakers and citizens, which has only served to augment opposition to the passage of sobriety checkpoints and increase hostility between those in favor of sobriety checkpoints and those who are against them.

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Grand Jury Announces That Officers Will Not Be Indicted in DUI Case</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/grand_jury_announces_that_offi.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4556</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-24T00:27:07Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-24T00:28:56Z</updated>
   
   <summary>A Santa Clara County criminal grand jury has determined that no charges will be filed against two San Jose law enforcement officers accused of ignoring evidence and mishandling a DUI investigation of a local District Attorney investigator. The decision not...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="DUI Cases" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[A Santa Clara County criminal grand jury has determined that no charges will be filed against two San Jose law enforcement officers accused of ignoring evidence and mishandling a DUI investigation of a local District Attorney investigator.  The decision not to charge San Jose police Sergeant Will Manion and Officer Patrick D'Arrigo comes just one week after District Attorney Investigator Sandra Woodall, a former San Jose law enforcement officer, pled guilty to misdemeanor driving under the influence.  The charge against Woodall was reduced from a felony in accordance with the plea agreement entered last week.

This announcement comes as the result of a nearly year-long investigation stemming from a multi vehicle accident which occurred on the evening of March 25, 2008.  According to police reports, Woodall crashed her Cadillac Escalade into two vehicles are the intersection of Branham Lane and Pearl Avenue in San Jose.  A fifteen year old girl was injured in the crash. 

Sergeant Manion and Officer D'Arrigo were the first officers to arrive at the scene of the accident.  Paramedics arrived prior to the officers and had already begun to treat Woodall of any potential injuries by the time the officers had arrived.  The on-site paramedic noted the strong smell of alcohol on Woodall's breath immediately following the accident, however, the officers failed to indicate this observation in their accident report.  Additionally, the officers did not have Woodall submit to a blood alcohol concentration test in order to determine whether she truly had been driving under the influence.  

On the night of the accident, witnesses indicated that Woodall admitted that she had been drinking prior to the accident and had recently left an alcohol rehabilitation program.  Onlookers noted her disoriented and belligerent demeanor as well.  However, Sergeant Manion and Officer D'Arrigo both noted that they did not detect any signs of intoxication, which is why they did not test her blood alcohol concentration.  Medical personnel on the scene also indicated that the officers attempted to disrupt paramedic attempts to transport Woodall to the hospital for medical attention.  Of these accusations, District Attorney Dolores Carr stated, "The allegations made were serious and called into the question the integrity of law enforcement.  The grand jury has made its decision and the district attorney will abide by it."  

The District Attorney's Office defended their decision to present the case to a grand jury by citing the numerous conflicting interests at issue, "The reason we took this case to the grand jury is because there are always these feelings of these close ties.  That's why we take it to an impartial body.  I don't see how much more unbiased that can be."   In addition to Woodall's employment as an investigator for the District Attorney's Office and time spent as a former law enforcement officer, Woodall's father in law is also employed by the District Attorney's Office and Woodall's husband is a San Jose police sergeant.  When asked whether prosecutors believed that the two men had committed a crime, Assistant District Attorney David Tomkins replied, "The grand jury answered that question."  

This announcement marks a victory for the two officers, who through this long process have maintained that they committed no wrongdoing on the night of March 25, 2008.  Their attorney, Craig Brown, reiterated this point, explaining to reporters, "I think it's the right result, obviously.  They are relieved, of course.  They always felt that they did what was right under the circumstances." 

While the decision was met with approval by law enforcement agents and those close to Sergeant Manion and Officer D'Arrigo, the public has voiced the opinion that a serious miscarriage of justice has occurred by allowing two law enforcement agents to show favoritism to one of their own without punitive repercussions.  

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>State Grant to Fund Phlebotomy Training for Police Officers</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/state_grant_to_fund_phlebotomy.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4473</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-19T01:42:06Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-19T01:44:36Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Law enforcement agencies across the state of Arizona recently announced that they will increasing the number of law enforcement officers who will receive phlebotomy training next year. This training is used for the purpose of determining the blood alcohol concentration...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Proposed Legislation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Law enforcement agencies across the state of Arizona recently announced that they will increasing the number of law enforcement officers who will receive phlebotomy training next year.  This training is used for the purpose of determining the blood alcohol concentration of an individual suspected of driving under the influence.  Over the past fifteen years, law enforcement agencies have begun to move away from Breathalyzer testing in favor of blood samples drawn by phlebotomists because they are considered far more accurate and are subject to far fewer challenges by defense attorneys.  

The money used to fund the training of these law enforcement officers is part of a $4.5 million grant package the state annually receives from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.  The state of Arizona has been provided this grant because of its status as an opportunity state, where nearly one third of traffic fatalities are linked to drinking and driving.  This grant will allow the Governor's Office of Highway Safety to put about 170 extra officers through the five day phlebotomy training program, in addition to the 100 slots available to Arizona law enforcement officers last year.  

Arizona state officials have begun to realize that, in light of the constant challenges to breath alcohol test evidence, blood evidence is more likely to lead to a driving under the influence conviction.  According to Alan Haywood, officer and program coordinator for the Department of Public Safety, "Breath testing is primarily used throughout the state, but blood is being used more and more.  We call it the CSI effect: Juries and judges want evidence, and they like the blood."  

However, this training of police officers has raised a large amount of concern amongst criminal defense attorneys as well as the general public.  By training officers to perform the duties of a phlebotomist, many worry that the likelihood of drawing a suspect's blood on the side of the road in unsafe conditions will skyrocket.  Fortifying these concerns are recent statements made by Pima County Sheriff's Deputy, Koi Greene, who stated that the hands on training she received as part of the five day phlebotomy training made her increasing comfortable with the idea of drawing blood from a DUI suspect on the side of the road.  

This confidence in roadside blood draws directly contradicts Pima County Superior Court Judge Fields' ruling made in late October which emphasized that the Arizona Department of Public Safety's (DPS) practice of drawing blood from individuals on the side of the road did not satisfy the state's health precautions laid out by the Department of Public Safety.  According to Judge Fields, the high likelihood that the blood draw would occur in an environment ill suited for such testing elevates the possibility of infection to unacceptable levels.  

Defense attorneys across Arizona have spoken out against this training, saying that an officer's ability to draw blood will result in blood work being done in situations and under circumstances that are not in the best interest of the suspect.  According to Tucson criminal defense attorney, James Nesci, "You need a license to cut hair in Arizona, but you don't need a license to puncture a vein and draw blood.  That in and of itself is frightening.  There are a couple (of) other things that go along with that.  Was the person who drew your blood mad at you?  Was it an adversarial situation?" 

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Law Enforcement Agencies Increase Use of New DUI Flashlights As Holiday Season Approaches</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/law_enforcement_agencies_incre.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4419</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-16T01:18:43Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-16T01:23:15Z</updated>
   
   <summary>This past weekend marked the beginning of California&apos;s holiday season DUI enforcement period. In Alameda County, participating law enforcement agencies were provided with brand new DUI enforcement equipment in order to isolate, test, and arrest individuals suspected of driving under...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="DUI Cases" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[This past weekend marked the beginning of California's holiday season DUI enforcement period.  In Alameda County, participating law enforcement agencies were provided with brand new DUI enforcement equipment in order to isolate, test, and arrest individuals suspected of driving under the influence.  Included in this package of new equipment is a $750 alcohol sensing flashlight, also known as a passive alcohol sensor.

In addition to providing light to law enforcement officers, the flashlights also scan for the presence of alcohol in an enclosed area.  During a traffic stop where an individual is suspected of driving under the influence, a law enforcement officer will place the flashlight inside the individual's window.  The flashlight takes in air through an intake port, which is designed to detect the presence of alcohol.  A sensor in the flashlight then visually displays the results of the scan on a color scale, ranging from red to green.  The individual will have no idea that the officer is actually testing for the presence of alcohol inside the vehicle.  

However, increased use of the passive alcohol sensors has resulted in widespread debate between avid supporters such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and staunch critics, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  

According to the ACLU, the use of this tool by law enforcement is a violation of an individual's civil rights.  "I'd be concerned this violates the state's vehicle code.  The statute requires a person to submit to this kind of testing, and if an officer just points a flashlight into the car without the individual knowing what's going on, it seems like that would be an infringement of their rights," stated Michael Risher, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California.  Because the passive alcohol sensor looks exactly like a flashlight, the driver would have no idea that they are being preliminarily screened for the presence of alcohol when an officer approaches their vehicle. 

Risher also argues that the passive alcohol sensors pose a serious disadvantage to designated drivers, who may be improperly asked to submit to chemical testing or field sobriety tests because alcohol was detected within their vehicle.  According to Risher, "We hear so much about designating a driver, but this tool kind of contradicts that.  It causes nothing more than a hassle and delay for a person doing the right thing."  

 However, Livermore police Lieutenant Mike Peretti disagrees with the ACLU's assertion that the flashlights violate any laws or civil rights.  According to Peretti, "The flashlights are nothing more than an investigative tool.  It is one of many we use.  We would never base our entire investigation of a possible drunken-driving incident on what the flashlight says.  But it lets us know that there is alcohol in the air when we stop someone."  

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>


]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Number of Drunk Driving Crashes Involving Women Skyrocket Over the Past Decade</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/number_of_drunk_driving_crashe.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4372</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-11T01:24:21Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-11T01:26:33Z</updated>
   
   <summary>According to a study released by the Automobile Club of Southern California, the number of women killed in alcohol related car accidents in California has increased dramatically over the past decade. The study revealed that the number of women drivers...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="DUI Cases" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[According to a study released by the Automobile Club of Southern California, the number of women killed in alcohol related car accidents in California has increased dramatically over the past decade.  The study revealed that the number of women drivers aged 21-24 who are involved in alcohol related accidents has risen approximately 116% between 1998 and 2007.  The Automobile Club study then compared this figure to male crash statistics, which indicated an increase over the same period of only 39%.  These findings have indicated to researchers that the female drinking pattern has been radically altered over the past ten years.  

The analysis also indicates that young women drivers, passengers, and pedestrians' alcohol related deaths and injuries have risen substantially over the past decade.  In 1998, statistics reported that approximately 1,037 women aged 21-24 were killed or injured in alcohol related crashes.  In 2007, this level rose to approximately 1,515 injuries or fatalities, displaying a 46% increase since 1998.  For men of the same age category, alcohol related deaths and injuries increased by only 18%.

The increase in female deaths and injuries resulting from alcohol related crashes also applied to females falling into the 18-20 age group.  While statistics indicated a 74% increase from 1998 to 2007 for women aged 18-20, the percent increase for men dying or being injured in alcohol related incidents increased 27%. 

These findings were presented this morning at the first annual Orange County Drinking and Driving Forum.  Steven A. Bloch, Automobile Club senior traffic safety researcher explained the Club's results, stating, "The analysis shows that young women are rapidly catching up with men in terms of risk-taking behavior and incurring the consequences of risk-taking, such as alcohol-involved motor vehicle crashes.  Reasons for this include the increase in the number of women obtaining drivers' licenses, women driving more miles and driving more aggressively like their male counterparts."  

Bloch added, "These numbers suggest a significant change in our driving culture overall.  Despite the $13,500 to $15,000 in fines, fees, and penalties associated with a DUI conviction and the threat of death or injury, young women in particular are increasingly driving in a more risky fashion."

Regardless of the large discrepancy in percent increase between male and female age groups, more generally, these statistics indicate a large increase in the number of alcohol related accidents and fatalities over the past decade.  

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>


]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Colorado DMV Backlog Leaves Thousands of Cited Drivers on the Road</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/colorado_dmv_backlog_leaves_th.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4354</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-10T01:31:49Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-10T01:34:04Z</updated>
   
   <summary>A local Colorado television station investigation has revealed that thousands of drivers who should have lost their licenses after accumulating an excess of marks on their driving record are still on the road due to a seven month Department of...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="DMV Hearings" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[A local Colorado television station investigation has revealed that thousands of drivers who should have lost their licenses after accumulating an excess of marks on their driving record are still on the road due to a seven month Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) backlog.

Under Colorado state law, when a driver accumulates twelve points on their driving record over the course of twelve months or six points on their record if the individual is under the age of eighteen, the individual's license must be revoked.  However, before the DMV can revoke an individual's license, the driver is entitled to an administrative hearing with the DMV in order to challenge the revocation of their license.  

According to the head of enforcement for the Colorado DMV, Matt Cook, it can sometimes take months before an administrative DMV hearing can be put on calendar.  As those months pass, drivers maintain full possession of their driving privileges.  Cook reiterated this point, stating, "Until you have a hearing or fail to respond to the opportunity to have a hearing, you're still licensed."  

The main problem with Colorado's DMV administrative hearing process is that the state has only seventeen hearing officers to handle all of the DMV hearings that come through the office.  Last year, the seventeen hearing officers handled approximately thirty four thousand cases, which breaks down to approximately two thousand cases per hearing officer per year.  In order to remedy this situation, Cook suggested charging drivers with more serious offenses like Vehicular Homicide or Aggravated Assault with a Motor Vehicle, which require an immediate revocation of the driver's license upon conviction.   

In response to the results of the investigation, Colorado's newly elected Speaker of the House, Terrance Carroll stated, "I'm absolutely flabbergasted and I'm trying to figure out what broke down in the system that these people still have their licenses even after committing driving offenses that should have caused them to lose their license."  

Carroll went on to say, "Now that I am aware of the problem the next step is get everyone in the same room together and figure out what we can do and what we can't do to move forward.  The next step after that is to actually ask for a legislative audit to see if we can get a handle on this and I do want to sit down with all the stakeholders to find out if there's a legislative fix we can have in January because I think we may need one." 

What Carroll found most disconcerting was the types of people who were benefitting from the DMV backlog.  He argued, "If you've reached a point where your license should be revoked because you've reached a number of violations, you've shown that you can't drive well.  You've shown that you shouldn't be on the roadway and that you're a threat to everyone else of the highways or the roadways and you shouldn't have your license."  The state of Colorado is now considering the DMV's backlog a threat to public safety, which they say will be handled accordingly.

This backlog, however, does not apply to drunk drivers.  Colorado state law requires that driving under the influence cases be given first priority for DMV hearings, which is adding to the extreme backlog of other DMV hearing requests.  As mandated by Colorado law, individuals arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence must be provided an opportunity for a hearing at the Department of Motor Vehicles within sixty days of their DUI conviction.    

Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href="http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>

]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Florida Law Limits Servers&apos; Culpability in DUI Accidents</title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/florida_law_limits_servers_cul.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4347</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-09T01:53:59Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-09T01:55:59Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Under Florida state law, a person who sells or provides alcohol to someone of lawful drinking age is not liable for any damage which may occur as a result of the drinker&apos;s intoxication. This current statute has been the source...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="MADD Related Activity" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Under Florida state law, a person who sells or provides alcohol to someone of lawful drinking age is not liable for any damage which may occur as a result of the drinker's intoxication.  This current statute has been the source of much heated debate across the state of Florida recently, with bartenders voicing their staunch support of law and activist groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving voicing their opinion that the law is overly broad and irresponsible in practice.  

The question of a bartender's culpability arose after Army Lieutenant Tyler L. Peterson and a friend spent the evening bar-hopping late November of this year.  The evening culminated in a deadly head-on collision on the Pensacola Bay Bridge which occurred as a result of Peterson driving the wrong direction on the bridge.  The accident claimed his life, as well as the life of Antonio Fulfer, who was returning home from work late that evening.    

Gulf Breeze Assistant Police Chief Robert Randall stated that Peterson and his friend, Army Captain Jesse Erickson, spent the evening at several different bars, including the Pensacola Ale House, New York Nick's, Starbuck's Billiard Room, and Intermission.  Erickson told police that he asked the Intermission bartender to stop serving Peterson because he had imbibed several alcohol beverages in quick succession.  At approximately 10:30 p.m., Peterson excused himself from the bar and headed towards the bathroom.  The accident occurred at about 12:30 a.m. that morning.  Peterson's whereabouts for the two hour period preceding the accident are unknown.  

Curt Bol was working as a bartender at Intermission the evening of the fatal accident.  He stated, "I've been doing this a long time, and I know that I have no way to control where my customers have been or whatever substances they have in their body.  I can't demand their keys.  I can't take anything from them, but somehow I am responsible?  I'm not the baby-sitter here."  

Bartender Shana Gilman voiced her support of the limit of culpability for bartenders, stating, "People serving alcohol should be responsible about who they serve and who they choose not to serve.  But there's only so much I can control.  In the end, someone can sneak out and drink in their car or they can go to another bar.  Then how much responsibility can you put on me?"

The owner of Intermission, Mike Ashby, stated that he is confident that none of his staff served  Peterson any alcoholic beverages.  However, the more important factor which must be determined, he stated, is whether Peterson was even in Intermission during that two hour window between the time he was cut off by his friend and when the fatal accident occurred.  The limited liability law is designed to protect bartenders and bar owners from liability in situations where individuals drink alcoholic beverages at a number of locations or sneak alcoholic beverages without the bartenders knowledge.  In these cases, the legislature argues, bartenders should not be held accountable for these individual's irresponsible actions.    

In support of this debate, many local bar and restaurant owners have said that they require their employees to participate in special training in order to handle individuals who have overindulged.  According to Tom Carmichael, general manager of Capt'n Fun at Pensacola Beach, "There are common sense things that you look for.  In this business you can tell when somebody has had too much, when walking and talking changes.  If the bartender makes the call to cut somebody off, nobody will override that decision." 

However, according to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the state law limiting liability should be changed.   Florida's MADD chapter has voiced their intention to push for a change to the liability law in the next legislative session.   "If you look at the current legislation, there is little motivation for a server to be cognizant of the patrons they are serving," stated Todd Rosenbaum, director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving of Northwest Florida.  Currently, the only way a bartender can be held liable is by serving a customer with a known alcohol addiction or by serving an individual under the age of twenty one.  MADD believes that this law should be changed to include liability for bartenders who are found to have served "clearly intoxicated patrons."  This proposal by MADD has drawn a large amount of criticism, as individuals question how "clearly intoxicated" would be defined and who will be responsible for drafting the definition of an individual "clearly intoxicated."   
 
 Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>


]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

<entry>
   <title>Penalties to Increase for Individuals Who Refuse to Submit to a DUI Chemical Test </title>
   <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/2008/12/penalties_to_increase_for_indi.html" />
   <id>tag:www.bayareaduiblog.com,2008://18.4346</id>
   
   <published>2008-12-09T01:17:31Z</published>
   <updated>2008-12-09T01:19:00Z</updated>
   
   <summary>Suspected drunk drivers in South Carolina will soon face harsher penalties for refusing to submit to blood alcohol concentration testing. Under the current law, drivers who refuse to the breath or blood test face an automatic license suspension ranging from...</summary>
   <author>
      <name>L.M.</name>
      <uri>http://www.bayareaduiblog.com</uri>
   </author>
   
      <category term="Proposed Legislation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
   
   
   <content type="html" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.bayareaduiblog.com/">
      <![CDATA[Suspected drunk drivers in South Carolina will soon face harsher penalties for refusing to submit to blood alcohol concentration testing.  Under the current law, drivers who refuse to the breath or blood test face an automatic license suspension ranging from three to six months.  The new law, which will go into effect on February 10, 2009, will increase this automatic suspension to six to fifteen months, depending on whether the individual has any prior convictions.  

In addition to increasing license suspension periods, the state of South Carolina is also increasing sentences for individuals with extremely high blood alcohol concentrations.  South Carolina legislators agreed that if the state was going to adopt a policy of increasing penalties for high blood alcohol levels, a change needed to be made to the license suspension period as well, so that individuals are not encouraged to refuse a chemical test.  "Anytime you raise the penalty for higher blood alcohol concentrations, you run the risk that more people will refuse the test.  So, you have to raise the penalty for refusals," stated 7th Circuit Solicitor Trey Gowdy.  

Greenville Police Chief Terri Wilfong believes that more drivers will take the extended suspension period into consideration when deciding whether or not to submit to a blood alcohol test.  

Laura Hudson, legislative liason for the South Carolina chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)stated that while South Carolina's new legislation is a step in the right direction, there are additional precautions the state could adopt to combat the drunk driving epidemic plaguing South Carolina.  Hudson argued that it would be in the best interest of South Carolina residents if suspected drunk drivers did not have the opportunity to drive while awaiting their DMV hearing.  She emphasized, "It's not about finding loopholes.  It's about public safety-or that's what it should be."  

Similar DUI refusal laws have been proposed across the country.  A new law taking effect January 1, 2009 in Illinois increases the license suspension period to six months for individuals who fail a blood alcohol test and raises the automatic suspension to twelve months for suspected offenders who refuse to submit to a chemical test.

  Please take some time to visit our websites:
<a href="http://www.sanfranciscoduidefense.com">San Francisco DUI Attorney</a>
<a href=" http://www.sanmateocountydui.com ">San Mateo DUI Lawyer</a>
<a href="http://www.marincountydui.com">Marin County DUI Defense</a>
<a href="http://www.northerncaliforniadui.com">Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers</a>
<a href="http://www.bayareaduidefense.com">San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers</a>


]]>
      
   </content>
</entry>

</feed>

