DUI San Fernando Courthouse, Client Age 18, 0.13% BAC

It was about 3:00 a.m. and our client was heading northbound on the I-14 at about 85 miles per hour. A California Highway Patrol Officer patrolling that section noticed our client and that her car did not have its lights on. He pulled over our client and had her exit at Golden Valley Road.

The officer allegedly observed the odor of alcohol, so a traffic stop for speeding expanded into an investigation for DUI. Our client was cooperative with police, but refused to submit to taking a preliminary alcohol screening test (PAS). Based on this refusal, she was arrested.

The client being under age 21 also made refusing to submit to a PAS test a violation of law, whereas such a test is optional for someone twenty-one or older.

The client was taken to the Santa Clarita CHP station near the Newhall Courthouse. She was then told she must submit to a breath test at the station and she did, registering a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.13% and 0.12%. She was then booked and taken to a holding cell to sober up.

As part of the processing procedure, she was asked to remove her clothing so officers could check for contraband. As she removed her bra, a small baggie with marijuana fell to the jail floor. This was a felony, violation of Penal Code § 4573.6, bringing contraband into a jail or prison.

The client’s mom came to the Santa Clarita CHP station and picked up her daughter. Before leaving, the client signed a promise to appear for her arraignment at the San Fernando Courthouse in about four weeks.

When the two returned home, they called Greg Hill & Associates. The mom explained what had happened to her daughter, herself a mom of a two-year old boy she gave birth to at age sixteen.

Greg explained how an under-21 DUI can be prosecuted, which varies from case to case based on the facts and the prosecutor’s discretion. Greg explained that it can be prosecuted as an infraction, but Greg told the mom that due to facts of this case, particularly the speeding on the freeway and the client’s BAC, Greg expected the case to be prosecuted as a DUI for someone over age 21.

Greg then explained how a refusal by someone under age 21 to submit to a preliminary alcohol screening test was problematic with her driving privileges, as the DMV may suspend her license for a year.

Greg then appeared in the San Fernando Courthouse for the client’s arraignment, but told the client to remain at home because Greg did not expect the DA’s office to include the charge of bringing contraband into a jail, a felony. Normally, on any felony, a defendant must appear in court to be arraigned in person, but here, Greg thought the facts were not strong enough for the DA’s office to add a felony charge.

Greg then appeared and was correct that the felony Penal Code § 4573.6 charge was not alleged, which was a relief.

However, the judge required our client to be present in court for her arraignment because he wanted to order the client, as a condition of own-recognizance (OR) release, to attend two Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) classes per week.

Normally, the judge can make this order and communicate it to counsel, who then relays the OR conditions to the client. However, this particular judge in San Fernando had a policy of requiring the defendant to be personally present to be told, eye-to-eye, such conditions. No other judge had such a policy, Greg explained to the client, or at least Greg had not observed this in 24 and a half years of practice.

Accordingly, the arraignment was continued for about two weeks and our client then attended the hearing, with her mom. The client explained that she was very concerned that the felony charge would be added to the complaint and explained she wanted to accept the plea bargain while it still only included misdemeanor terms and conditions.

Greg then negotiated a plea bargain wherein the client pleaded no contest to a violation of Vehicle Code § 23152(b) and was placed on three years of informal probation on the following terms and conditions: that she enroll in and complete an approved three-month alcohol awareness program (the AB 541 program), pay a court fine of $390, plus penalties and assessments (less credit for one day already in jail, reducing the total owed to about $1,400), or perform 17 hours of community service and pay a court fine of $404, and attend the Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) victim impact panel. No jail was included.

The client was happy to resolve the case quickly and avoid the risk of the case having the felony charge added later.

For more information about the issues in this case, please click on the following articles: