DUI & criminal defense blog

In Wade v. Superior Court (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 694, the Court of Appeal reversed a trial court decision that denied a defendant’s request for military diversion in a DUI case. In denying the request, the trial court had noted that the charge of driving under the influence was “inherently dangerous.” Id. at 704. The trial […]

A search conducted by a warrant can be challenged under the Fourth Amendment.

The Court of Appeal found the trial court abused its discretion in continuing a preliminary hearing due to the pandemic over the defendant’s objection.

The testimony of a laboratory supervisor who had no involvement with the drug analysis, and the admission of the non-testifying analyst’s report, violated the Confrontation Clause.

The trial court allowed the prosecution to present expert testimony that was never disclosed to the defense. Finding that the court should have granted the motion for a mistrial, the Court of Appeal reversed the Watson murder convictions.

The prosecution may not argue evidence not available to the jury to bolster an officer’s credibility.

Drug Recognition Evaluations have not been demonstrated to reliably indicate whether someone is impaired by marijuana for purposes of driving.

Stops based solely on the registered owner’s license status are lawful under the Fourth Amendment.

If a person arrested for DUI chooses a blood test over a breath test, no warrant is required.