Los Angeles DUI Defense InformationPosted on: February 5, 2009 at 12:35 p.m.Driving under the influence (DUI) charges create serious problems for the accused. Jail time, fines, probation, alcoholism counseling and other repercussions will dramatically change the life of anyone found guilty of DUI. Having a Los Angeles DUI defenselawyer who is familiar with Los Angeles DUI laws can make the process substantially less stressful and will achieve the best possible outcome. Two primary methods are used in order to determine whether or not a driver is, in fact, under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The first is a field sobriety test administered by a police officer and the second is a breathalyzer test. Both are inherently flawed and unreliable, but Los Angeles courts often fail to address this issue. As a result, many people have their record, driving privileges, home life and careers ruined. Experienced and knowledgeable Los Angeles DUI defense lawyers who are aware of the problems with breathalyzer tests and field sobriety tests are a major asset to anyone facing DUI charges. Field sobriety tests, commonly referred to by officers and DUI defense lawyers as "FSTs" can be any one or combination of a dozen physical tests administered by an officer after pulling over a driver suspected of driving under the influence. Some of the most common are standing on one leg, walking a straight line and nystagmus (an officer asks a subject to follow an object such as a pen with their eyes). Since studies by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have determined the above three tests as the most effective in determining a driver's sobriety (or lack thereof), many states have adopted them as the standard battery of tests. Los Angeles law enforcement agencies have largely ignored these recommendations and many officers may still administer whichever FST they prefer. The problem with many FSTs, even the above three, is that they are largely subjective and can be difficult for many sober people to pass. Extenuating factors such as minor illnesses or tiredness can give many people trouble with balance and memory. The extent to which someone pulled over on suspicion of driving under the influence "passes" or "fails" these arbitrary tests is also at the sole discretion of the law enforcement official on the scene. Anyone pulled over on suspicion of DUI may decline to take these FSTs since they are not actually required by law. Breathalyzer testing can also be extremely unreliable, as any competent DUI defense lawyer knows. Most breathalyzer machines work by attempting to detect ethanol, or ethyl alcohol, in the breath. The problem here is that the breathalyzer machine will detect any one of a number of chemical compounds that are similar in chemical structure to ethanol, but are not, in fact, alcohol at all. Even if someone who gets pulled over has no ethanol at all in their body, the breathalyzer machine may detect other substances in the subject's breath and interpret them as alcohol, unfairly laying the grounds for a DUI charge. Medical conditions such as diabetes, fasting, dieting and even certain types of bread products can all cause chemical compounds in the breath that can be misinterpreted by breathalyzer machines as ethanol, contributing to a falsely high blood alcohol reading. There are other problems with breathalyzer testing machines as well: many are highly susceptible to malfunctions; others must be kept within specific temperature ranges to function properly; tiny remnants of condensation from prior tests can often accumulate in the testing tubes; and so many more. A qualified DUI defense lawyer knows how unreliable Field Sobriety and breathalyzer testing can be and a good DUI lawyer also knows how difficult it is to actually determine blood alcohol levels using these methods and will fight to defend you. Tagged as: violent crimes defense Comments:Nicholas on July 16, 2009 at 9:54 a.m. wrote:These blogs you have published are very informative and I really enjoyed reading them. I live in New Mexico where the DWI rate is very high. I don't know how exactly California works, but in New Mexico a person who gets into their car in a parking lot and chooses to wait until they sober up before they drive can still be arrested, charged, and convicted with a DWI. Some states such as Iowa, (Iowa Code 321J.2, http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=IowaCode&ga=83) and Indiana, (Code 9-30-5, http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title9/ar30/ch5.pdf)have a law called Operating While Intoxicated (OWI). In Iowa or Indiana it is possible for a person to sit in their vehicle so long as they do not operate it and allow their body to sober up. A lawyer in Albuquerque, NM published a blog about this, http://romerolaw.blogspot.com/2009/07/dwi-driving-while-intoxicated.html. If you get a chance take a look at it and leave a little feedback as to what you think. Do you see California following these other states lead and allowing people to choose a safe alternative to driving by letting people sit in the safety of their own vehicle while their bodies filter out the alcohol? I would like to know your thoughts on the subject. I frequently look over blogs and hope to see some of your feedback posted on a blog i read. Thanks, -Nicholas Kestenbaum Eisner & Gorin LLP has been recognized as one of the best U.S. law firms, based on the experience, professionalism, and ethics of its criminal defense lawyers and attorneys. We aggressively defend clients in all Southern California courtrooms on state and federal charges, including DUI, DMV, misdemeanor, felony, juvenile cases, in the following communities and courthouses. |





























