Oakland DUI Court

If you have been arrested in Oakland for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), and Oakland DUI, you have several things that you need to do immediately. Here is a start: First, do a chronology of the day and day before. Most people are arrested in the early morning hours, so you will want accurate information including the day before from the time you awoke and got up and ate breakfast all the way through the time you were released from jail. Second, your license should have been taken, and you were given a pink piece of paper as a temporary license; it is only good for 30 days, and on it, there is some small bold print that tells you that you only have ten (10) days to contact the DMV for hearing or your license will be suspended. CALL LAWYER AND HAVE THEM DO IT FOR YOU. MY OFFICE WILL DO THAT FOR YOU FOR FREE, and that way it is done correctly with proof that the DMV was contacted. There are thousands of these per year and your phone call can be lost, so without proof, you don't get the hearing and lose your license. Additionally, many people call or go to an Oakland DMV field office for their DUI, a field office is where you get your driver's license, and this is the wrong place. If that is what you do, you will lose your unless 99% of the time, so have my office do if for correctly and for FREE if this is an Oakland DUI or anywhere in the Bay Area, but especially if it is from Oakland. Third, show the attorney that you are truly interested in your case by making an appointment and bring all of your papers that were given to you from the police, your chronology, list of any witnesses, and do it quickly to discuss all of your options and defenses for an Oakland DUI, and do it face to face. My consultations are FREE, and most of the time our conversations, which are confidential, bring out other evidence that we need to get to help you, and when you see how bad some of these tests are, you will feel much better that you actually have a chance. I have a breath machine in my office, and have you take a test to show you how bad the results can actually be in your Oakland DUI. Finally, don't fall into the trap that just because the police officer said that you were guilty you are; that simply is not true. Some people are guilty and some are not, and some are guilty to a lesser degree that will come into play with an Affordable Oakland DUI Attorney. All of the evidence is collected and applied when talking with the Judge and District Attorney in your Oakland DUI case. Remember, time works against you in an Oakland DUI case, so do your in-person interview with the attorney right away.

Breath Testing Flaws of Blood to Breath Ratio

The California Supreme Court just ruled in an appealed case, People v. McNeal, that a defendant in a criminal DUI trial charged with violations of California Vehicle Code Section 23152(a) has the right to provide evidence that the breath test may be flawed scientifically to the result for impairment because a persons blood to breath ratio, which is presumed as an average to be 2100/1, which may be flawed as if varies from person to person and time to time. The 2100/1 is just an average, and an average person can be as low as 1250/1 or as high as 2950/1 which dramatically effects the test result. For Example; a person may read .13 on the breath test which the machine is set to presume that the person taking the test is 2100/1, but lets assume he or she is not. Then the actual blood alcohol level could be higher depending on the blood to breath ratio or lower which could make the person taking the test a true alcohol level of .05 which is not illegal.
The law regarding the Per Se charge of 23152(b) prohibits this information from coming before the jury based on the erroneous decision, without any scientific foundation, that everyone is 2100/1. However, this does not apply to the first Count as stated above. Obviously, if one is not of the ration of blood to breath in one Count in the same breath test, that person cannot be any different in the Second Count which the jury will now once again after many years of denial be able to hear evidence of during a DUI trial.
Additionally, the Preliminary Alcohol Screening Test (PAS) has the same issues of 2100/1, and as it is a field sobriety test, the right to challenge its capacity set at 2100/1 is now also available to the defend against these erroneous readings. Rights that have been denied to American Citizens for many years are now being restored. Constitutional rights to present evidence in favor of the defendant under the 6th Amendment.
While the breath testing machines do a good job as evidential tools, they lack many capacities. The right to show a defendant's innocence has been restored by the People v. McNeal decision of the California Supreme Court, and a great day for justice has appeared in California.

Oscar Grant Trial and Change of Venue

Protest of Oscar Grant at Oakland, California can cause a change of venue. While most people are outraged at the shooting of Mr. Grant by the BART Police, they may actually be hurting themselves in seeking justice by the riots and now heavy protesting during the Preliminary Hearings that have just occurred. The demonstrations are so strong to convict the Officer who shot Mr. Grant of Murder that anyone who would be a potential juror would be intimidated for fear of reprisal not to convict the Officer.
The best policy for those who are seeking justice, is to allow the District Attorney to follow the procedures and present their case at trial without disruption. So much protesting has been going on, not to mention those riots, that the defense will most certainly move for a change of venue arguing, correctly, with so much outrage in the daily review of this case by the local citizens that the Officer could never get an impartial jury in Alameda County. That is not good for the local citizens who are actually, unintentionally, helping the defense in their quest to move the case to a venue far from Alameda County. This is similar to the bog bite deaths in San Francisco that had to be moved to Los Angeles for trial several years ago.
The change of venue not only deprives the local citizens who wish to attend and watch the trial for assurance that all the evidence is presented that opportunity, but it also taxes all of the citizens with the cost of the change of venue to a different location which Alameda County residents are responsible for to the new venue.
Justice has a way of prevailing when we take a breath, step back, and not try to individually interfere with the legal process to and undue advantage in the court proceedings. All of the protests cause the local press to give so much coverage that it would be almost impossible to find jurors that have not already been influenced by the coverage caused by the protests. I hope the trial remains here in Alameda County, but the protests tend to be chasing it away.
Donald Gray Drewry, Oakland Criminal Defense Lawyer

Never Trust CHP Reports

You just can't trust the Government. The Government has all the power because they have the money, and we have been taught that the police are here to help us. Sadly, this just is not always true. Recently, I went into trial where the arresting officer had died. Yet, the Government decided to proceed the charges of Driving Under the Influence by bringing in five (5) other police officers. Here is the interesting part.
In a DUI case, in California, there are two (2) parts. One is civil; that is the DMV hearing. The second part is the criminal charge or charges. When my client was charged we immediately requested the DMV hearing which must be done within ten (10) days. We received copies of the police report and what is known as a DS-367 form under penalty of perjury stating the reason for the stop. Due to an illness, GERD, a disease that interferes with breath testing giving extremely high false positive results, my client with medical records and testimony of a medical doctor, my cleint won the DMV hearing.
A few months later, the District Attorney of Contra Costa County, California filed the criminal charges. We again received the police reports. The reports were exactly the same as those in the DMV hearing, as they should have been. A month or so after the criminal charges were filed, the arresting officer of my client, unfortunately, was killed in a car accident. There needs to be someone to testify as to the reason for the stop to meet 4th Amendment Constitutional grounds to proceed. As the officer was dead and there was nothing in either of his reports about any other officer being present, I was duty bound to file a motion to suppress evidence as there was no one to testify. The day before the hearing, the District Attorney's office supplied us with what appeared to be a supplemental report from another CHP officer dated the same day of the arrest of August 18, 2007. It appeared to have been lost or at least separated from the original report, however, there was no mention of this officer or of his specific observations, and there should have been.
This case went to trial. During the cross-examination of the police officer who wrote the supplemental report, Officer Borgen, he testified that he had been off duty in his personal vehicle on his way to work when he spotted my client allegedly weaving and speeding, so he called, not dispatch, but the arresting officer directly cell phone to cell phone, and my client just happened to exit where the arresting officer was located; still there was nothing in the arresting officer's report about this. Additionally, during the trial, Officer Borgen testified that some had asked him to write the supplemental report, it had never been cleared with a sergeant, and without notes he recalled the events, and wrote the report in February 2008 six (6) months later even though the report is dated August 18, 2007.
The District Attorney was aware of this. Other police officers were aware of this. Officer Borgen was aware of this, and yet the report is deemed official and trustworthy??? When asked why it was improperly dated, Officer Borgen stated that the computer automatically puts the date in, and he could not correct it. When asked why he couldn't white it out and write in the correct date to allow the reader to know of this inaccuracy and properly investigate, he just sat there. The report is falsified and the CHP and the DA think that it is alright to present this evidence to the defense without explanation as if it were done at the time of the event!!!! And, the CHP computers cannot allow the officers to properly write the date they wrote the report???
This deceitful and false report writing causes all persons arrested by the California Highway Patrol a great need to investigate every aspect of every report, and of course, the CHP will not cooperate. This is criminal. The notes collected and written at the scene are always thrown away, and there is no audio or video tape of the incident which leaves the citizen at the total mercy of the arresting officer in court.
This is the reason you need an attorney and have to fight the Government. Too many innocent people are charged and reports fabricated. This one was discovered, but who will do anything about it??? No One. Never Trust CHP Reports