CA DUI Attorneys

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHARLES P. SUBRAMANI, Defendant and Appellant
Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, Division Four
October 31, 1985

The defendant drove his vehicle striking broadside a vehicle injuring the driver and the passenger. Driver suffered minor injuries but passenger sustained substantial injuries. Defendant was charged as follows on V counts, felony driving under the influence and causing injury to the driver (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)); felony driving under the influence and causing injury to the passenger (§ 23153, subd. (a)); felony driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more and causing injury to the driver (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b)); felony driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more and causing injury to the passenger (§ 23153, subd. (b)) and misdemeanor driving with a suspended license. Prior to trial, defendant pleaded guilty to count V. Defendant was convicted of both felony and misdemeanor driving under the influence and driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more based upon one collision in which two persons were injured. The defendant challenged the judgment.

Issues:

Whether the misdemeanor drunk driving counts must be vacated?
Whether the defendant is being properly charged with more than one count from a single act of drunk driving which caused injury to more than one person?

Discussion:

This court held that the defendant could be charged only with one count of felony drunk driving (i.e., with violations of subds. (a) and (b) of § 23153); the injuries of either or both of the victims could be used as proof of the charge. Here, however, the prosecutor charged separate felony counts for each victim; that was improper. Because the felony convictions involving injury to victim Blackwell (counts II and IV) were properly charged and are supported by substantial evidence, they can stand. The misdemeanor counts (counts I and III) involving Brown are mere surplusage and therefore must be stricken.

This court held that while such dual conviction is proper, dual punishment is prohibited by Penal Code section 654. (People v. Duarte, supra, 161 Cal.App.3d at pp. 446-447.) The trial court correctly applied that principle by ordering that the execution of the sentence on one of the felonies (count IV) was to be stayed in accordance with Penal Code section 654.

Conclusion:

This court hence reversed the judgment against defendant only as to the misdemeanor convictions and affirmed the judgment in all other respects. Defendant was properly charged and convicted of felonies for both driving under the influence and driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group.  They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions.  The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

 

Originally published here.

---

Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

---

1. What is the legal Blood Alcohol Content (“BAC”) in California?

0.08%, meaning that approximately 8% of your blood consists of alcohol. For minors (persons under 21 years old) this amount is even lower at 0.01%. However, under California law, you may be still convicted of drunk driving under California Vehicle Code 23152(a) even if you are driving under the influence of any amount of alcohol or drugs.

2. What are enhancement penalties?

Enhancement penalties are circumstances that serve to increase the penalties associated with your DUI. Examples are:

Driving with a Minor under the age of 14 in the vehicle at the time of the DUI
Refusal to Submit to or Failure to Complete Chemical Test
Excessive Blood Alcohol Level .20 or Above
Second or Subsequent Offense Involving Alcohol or Drugs – Multiple DUI’s within Ten (10) Years
Speeding 20 or More mph on the Street or 30 or More mph on Freeway + Reckless Driving Under California Vehicle Code §23103
Impoundment of Vehicles or Sale as Nuisance
Fourth or Subsequent DUI Conviction Within Ten (10) Years Makes Current DUI Chargeable as a Felony
Prior Felony DUI Conviction Within Ten (10) Years Makes Current DUI Chargeable as a Felony
DUI in Highway Construction or Maintenance Zone
DUI in Safety Enhancement Zone (e.g. Golden Gate Bridge)
Bodily Injury inflicted on Another Person

Each one of these Enhancements carries specific penalties that will dramatically alter the direction your case takes.

3. Will I have to come to court or to my DMV hearing?

Your time is valuable and the answer to this depends on your case. In most cases an experienced DUI attorney can appear on your behalf and you will not have to make any appearances at all. However, your attorney might ask you to attend certain hearings for strategic reasons as well.

4. Will I lose my Driver’s License?

In some instances the arresting officer will confiscate your license during the arrest. If this happens they will typically provide you with a temporary license that will be good for 30 days. In any case, you will have 10 days to schedule a DMV hearing. If you are convicted of a DUI by a court, your license will most likely be suspended or revoked for a period of time to be determined by the court. Enhancements will affect the period of the suspension and any other punishments. Also note that as of July 1, 2010, the DMV will require Ignition Interlock Devices in certain DUI cases throughout California.

5. Will I have to serve Jail time?

If you are convicted of a DUI you may have to serve time in jail, however, with the aid of a skilled DUI Attorney, your chances of proving your innocence and avoiding any jail time will go up exponentially and dramatically.

6. What are the typical penalties for a DUI?

The penalties for a DUI will vary from case-to-case and court-to-court. However, if you do not have a skilled DUI Attorney to help you, you can almost always expect more severe penalties and disappointing results.

7. Do I need an attorney to help me protect my rights after a DUI charge?

The reality is that you have several options available to you; one of them is to try and represent yourself. However, this course of action is similar to someone operating on themselves. Attorneys spend years learning about the law and its application in law school and we spend even more time mastering our profession as practicing members of the Bar and it is unwise to try to represent yourself if you can afford an alternative.

If you cannot afford an attorney, you can apply to recieve assistance from a public defender. While public defenders are attorneys licensed by the CA bar, they often have exasperating caseloads, which leave little time available to focus on each case. Whether you hire a private attorney or are appointed a public defender, you should feel comfortable with the attorney who is representing your case and, in essense, what happens in your life.

Originally published here.

---

DUI Partners

---

Drunk Driving