DUI Category Archives — Page 27 of 41 — Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney Blog Published by Los Angeles & Southern California Criminal & DUI Defense Attorney — Medical Marijuana Defense Attorney Michael Kraut

Published on: May 12, 2014

One of the Most Awful and Unfair DUI Arrests of Recent Memory

Do you sometimes wonder why Los Angeles DUI defense attorneys do what we do?

After all, isn’t it a universally “good thing” that police officers scoop dangerous drivers off the street and punish people who make dumb decisions that ultimately take lives?

Obviously, the police can and do awesome work to protect us all, and even the most aggressive DUI defense advocate believes we should live in a world with consequences.

But a recent case out of Wisconsin demonstrates dramatically why teams like the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers do what we do.

On February 20, 2013, a 25-year-old Wisconsin woman, Tanya Weyker, suffered a broken neck (in four places), after a sheriff’s deputy hit her car, sending it into a tree. As the woman told Fox News, “it was a miracle I wasn’t paralyzed.”

It was already a bad and horrible situation for Weyker. But it got much worst.

The sheriff’s deputy who hit her, Joseph Quiles, blamed her for the accident and arrested her for DUI, sending her into a legal and logistical nightmare. Weyker had been prescribed Vicodin for wisdom teeth that she had had out, but she hadn’t taken that drug for a week. She did say at the scene that she had had “a few sips” of a friend’s drink. Deputies also noticed that she had red, bloodshot eyes. But then again, she was crying from the pain of her accident (she had just been knocked into a tree and had broken her neck in four places!)

Even though she was too hurt to take a breath test or blood test, authorities still arrested her on five charges, including DUI with injury. In California, that’s a very serious charge, punished by CVC 23153, and it can lead to a felony conviction and over a year behind bars.

Even more awfully, in the police report, Deputy Quiles wrote that he had come to a full stop at the stop sign and that Weyker didn’t have her lights on. Weyker happened to have a Toyota Camry, which always turns on the lights automatically, so he was factually incorrect. And Weyker’s blood tests came back completely negative, meaning she not been DUI in the least.

Two days after the accident, surveillance footage of the accident emerged and showed that Quiles was clearly at fault. But instead of exonerating and apologizing profusely to Weyker, law enforcement continued to pursue the case.

Meanwhile, Quiles has finally admitted to causing the crash. Here is a transcript from an internal investigation:

Investigator: “You believe that you probably did roll [through the stop sign]?”

Quiles: “Yes. Yes I do.”

Investigator: “Because of that, do you believe you are at fault for this accident?”

Quiles: “That’s correct.”

Weyker has filed a complaint, which could pave the way for her to launch a civil suit against that police department.

If you or someone you love needs a DUI defense, call a Los Angeles DUI defense attorney with the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers immediately for a free consultation.

Published on: May 9, 2014

Los Angeles DUI Checkpoints and Police Patrols Abound Over Cinco de Mayo

by Michael Kraut

Cinco de Mayo is a joyful celebration that sweeps the Southland every year, but it’s also a time when many people drive under the influence in Los Angeles.

The holiday is over 150 years old — it was kicked off in 1862, after Mexicans defeated the French in a pivotal skirmish called the Battle of Puebla. But police are still trying to understand the dynamics of “celebratory DUIs” during Cinco de Mayo and other major holidays, including Labor Day weekend, Memorial Day weekend, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Super Bowl Sunday, and Valentine’s Day.

The LA Weekly reports that officers set up diverse patrols throughout the Southland for the holiday. On Friday night, for instance, the Los Angeles Police Department set up checkpoints on Western Avenue and 8th Street. They also set up checkpoints in Koreatown from 8 PM until 2 in the morning, as well as checkpoints in East Hollywood at Vermont and Melrose. Other Friday checkpoints included a 7 PM to 1 AM patrol at Huntington Drive and Popular Avenue in El Sereno and a South Los Angeles checkpoint at Avalon and Manchester Avenue. LAPD ran another checkpoint in Lancaster from 6 PM to 2 AM on Friday.

Published on: May 7, 2014

$100,000 Bail Set for Man Who Rammed Cars at Southern California DUI Checkpoint

by Michael Kraut

Authorities arrested 34-year-old Eric Paul Ivanoff for driving under the influence in Southern California, after he caused an awful accident last Friday evening in Orange County.

Police in the community of Cypress had set up a checkpoint, which had been operating for just 30 minutes, when Ivanoff’s vehicle smashed into several cars waiting in line. The force of the collision injured three people badly enough that they had to be hospitalized. (All were listed in stable condition, as of this posting).

But then Ivanoff made the situation worse – much worse – by hopping on his vehicle and fleeing the scene. Authorities found him shortly after and arrested him. Allegedly, he resisted arrest and even injured one of the officers who pursued him. Cypress Police reported that “three victims were transported to a local hospital, two of whom were transported to a trauma center with moderate injuries.”

After booking Ivanoff on charges of hit and run, DUI, resisting arrest, and resisting arrest with violence, authorities set his bail at $100,000.

Obviously, the whole story is scary and sad for many reasons. The situation illustrates, dramatically, how DUI defendants can make their situation much, much worse, even after getting caught or stopped by the police.

As Ivanoff approached the checkpoint, he might have been self-conscious. Perhaps he had consumed several drinks before getting behind the wheel. So he might have anticipated that police would have arrested him. Getting busted at a checkpoint is obviously no fun, and a misdemeanor DUI charge can lead to several days in jail, the loss of your California driver’s license, mandatory alcohol school, tough probation terms, spikes on your car insurance rates, and other indirect problems.

However, since he hit and hurt other people, he likely will now be charged per California Vehicle Code Section 23153 (the injury DUI law). This means that he could face over a year behind bars for each person he hurt while driving DUI.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, he (allegedly) got out of his car, fled the scene, and then attacked an officer. Each one of those mistakes, on its own, could complicate his defense tremendously. Hit and run is a serious crime, as is resisting arrest, as is resisting arrest and then hitting an officer.

Fortunately, no one died in the accident, but it holds important object lessons.

If you or someone you love faces complex Los Angeles DUI charges, call the effective and thorough legal team here at the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers for a confidential case consultation.
Continue reading

Published on: May 5, 2014

Did Your Los Angeles DUI Accident Give Someone Whiplash?

by Michael Kraut

According to the Los Angeles DUI injury section of the California Vehicle Code — 23153 — if you injured someone while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of drugs or alcohol, prosecutors can subject you to a fearsome array of punishments, such as:

•   Felony jail time (over a year behind bars);
•   Lots of alcohol school;
•   Strict probation;
•   Fines and fees;
•   Loss of CA driver’s license for over a year;
•   Other harsh penalties;

Obviously, DUI injury cases are fraught because the stakes of any legal action – for both sides – are so high. If you’re a victim, you may face major medical bills that could add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars as well as lost work time, problems with your relationships, and so forth. As a defendant, you likewise face the unpleasant possibility of having to pay in perpetuity for the victim’s medical care and damages. The legal battle can draw in multiple stakeholders, including various insurance companies, and get complicated as well as emotional.

Given the high stakes and potential drama, you might want to learn what injuries are truly compensable. One of the most interesting types of injuries is whiplash. It’s “interesting” because personal injury claims often sue (and win) for big judgments on whiplash claims.

Whiplash is understood as a painful condition that can lead to lots of agony (not to mention therapeutic bills) and persist for years to decades. But there has always been some controversy over the diagnosis of whiplash. Some radical critics contend that whiplash is effectively a psychosomatic disorder – that’s a fancy way of saying “it’s all in your head.” Now, most whiplash sufferers will tell you that such pain is obviously not “in my head.” But this oversimplification of the critics’ position actually mischaracterizes what they’re saying.

The whiplash “counter argument” boils down to this: the structural damage, if any, caused by so-called whiplash-inducing car accidents is minor, and it cannot account for the range or duration of symptoms that victims report.

As evidence, critics will often point to a very curious (and controversial) series of studies, most famously a study out of Norway that analyzed the so-called Norwegian whiplash epidemic from a few decades ago. Researchers noticed an epidemic numbers of whiplash claims erupted shortly after insurance companies begin to accept whiplash claims. They wondered if the labeling of the diagnosis, itself, was fanning the epidemic somehow.

To try to figure this out, they took a look at whiplash-inducing car accident cases in Lithuania… and found some pretty shocking results. In Lithuania at that time, no one had really heard of whiplash, so the diagnosis was unknown. Amazingly, researchers found that the Lithuanians who got hurt in car accidents did not report the whiplash symptoms – and this remained true even when the researchers adjusted for potential confounders. Without getting into the science, the Norway Lithuania study (along with many others) seems to at least suggest that some cases of whiplash may indeed be created and/or perpetuated by non-structural factors.

So what does this mean for your Los Angeles DUI injury defense?

Not necessarily much!

But the situation illustrates how complex and eccentric DUI defenses can sometimes get. To that end, you want a Los Angeles DUI law firm that has a rich body of experience and excellent in-house resources to help you build a sound case. Look to attorney Michael Kraut and his team at the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers for help with your defense. As an ex-prosecutor and deputy district attorney, Mr. Kraut has the relationships, wherewithal, and experience to assist you.
Continue reading

Published on: April 29, 2014

Parents of Young Woman Killed by DUI Driver Sue Congresswoman and the Federal Government

by Michael Kraut

Last December 6th, 27-year-old Mallory Dies was killed in a Santa Barbara crash, and authorities arrested driver Raymond Morua in connection with the fatal Southern California DUI.

Morua had been working as an aid for Congresswomen Lois Capps, when he hit Dies after leaving a holiday party in Downtown Santa Barbara. Now, Dies’s parents, Matt and Raeona Dies, have filed a wrongful death suit against Morua… and named Congresswoman Capps and the Federal Government as defendants.

The plaintiffs claim that Representative Capps hired Morua, even though he had two DUI convictions as well as convictions for embezzlement and hit and run under his belt. Capps also failed to monitor his behavior or his driving. The lawsuit claims that Morua had been working for Capps on the night in question — as the plaintiff’s attorney put it “Mr. Morua has said under oath, under penalty of perjury, that he was on the job… [and this makes] Lois Capps … responsible.” Congresswoman Capps claims that Morua had NOT been working for on the night in question, and she issued statements of empathy: “My heart goes out to the family of the victim… I lost a daughter way before her time, and it’s a heartache.”

The 27-year-old had been on life support for several days before she passed away from her injuries. Her family claims that they incurred medical bills to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they want compensation. Morua could face two decades behind bars on his May 28 sentencing.

We’ve been talking a lot recently about Los Angeles DUI manslaughter laws — such as Penal Code 191.5 (a), which defines gross vehicular manslaughter while DUI. But even if you don’t kill someone, you can face substantial jail time (over a year), just for injuring someone while driving DUI. According to California Vehicle Code Section 23153 (a) and (b), your penalties will depend on how many people got hurt and the nature of those injuries. If a person got seriously hurt, prosecutor can ask for a “great bodily injury” charge, which is an enhancement, and it can lead to three additional years of jail time. For help coming up with an appropriate defense against your Los Angeles DUI charges, call attorney Michael Kraut and the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers team immediately to schedule your free consultation with us.
Continue reading

Published on: April 23, 2014

24/7 Sobriety Programs or Interlock Ignition Devices: Which Work Better for Deterring Los Angeles DUI Recidivism?

by Michael Kraut

A profound debate is going on in the Los Angeles DUI defense community (and the DUI community at large): What techniques and strategies work best for preventing so-called “recidivist” behavior?

Even though the justice system can be quite punitive with respect to DUI driving, all stakeholders in the system want the same things – safer roads, fewer people killed, and drivers who strive to be safe and mindful.

Of course, authorities have tried various strategies to achieve those ends.

One common technique used to stop recidivist behavior is the so-called Interlock Ignition Device (IID). Here in Los Angeles – and other spots around the country – even first time offenders can be ordered to install IID devices in their vehicles. Basically, you cannot start your car unless you blow into a permanent breathalyzer device on your vehicle. If any alcohol taints your breath, your car won’t start.

Offenders must pay to install and maintain these devices, and IID programs bring in millions of dollars a year to various state coffers. However, there is a new type of anti-recidivism strategy — championed by the National Sheriffs Association and other groups — called “24/7 Sobriety.”

South Dakota and two other states have been using this program in place of IIDs to stomp out recidivism, and some evidence suggests that it may be quite effective. Basically, an offender must take breath tests twice a day, every day, for a duration of time. Apparently, drivers who constantly monitor their sobriety tend to be far more mindful and less likely to hop behind the wheel while over the limit.

Mike Leidholt, a South Dakota sheriff who helped to implement the first statewide 24/7 Sobriety Program, has spoken highly of the initiative “Of all the wonderful programs that sheriffs are initiating, I have not seen one that as successful in reducing recidivism, managing corrections problems, and reducing alcohol-related crashes as the 24/7 Sobriety Program.”

Meanwhile, however, the program has met stiff resistance from Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). Jan Withers, MADD’s National Director, recently wrote an editorial protesting the National Sheriffs’ Association’s push for 24/7 sobriety in Florida, writing: “MADD believes that amendments allowing for twice a day testing or 24/7 sobriety programs are okay, but these programs should never replace the use of ignition interlock for a convicted drunk driver.”

While groups like MADD and the National Sheriffs’ Association hash out how to stop recidivism, it’s well worth taking time to consider the legal consequences of recidivism in the Golden State. Every time you get convicted for a new DUI (within 10 years), your punishments ratchet up substantially. You might face:

•   Additional jail time;
•   Additional alcohol school;
•   Stricter probation terms;
•   A longer license suspension.
•   The elevation of a misdemeanor to a felony.

For help coming to terms with your Los Angeles DUI charges, call Michael Kraut of the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers immediately to set up a consultation with him and his team. Mr. Kraut is a former city prosecutor who bring years of successful work, great relationships, and a Harvard Law School education to help his clients succeed.
Continue reading

Published on: April 21, 2014

Horrendous News – 16-Year-Old Girl Dies After DUI Driver Hits Her Apartment

by Michael Kraut

This awful news qualifies as one of most disturbing Los Angeles DUI stories of the year: a 16-year-old girl died over the weekend, after a suspected DUI driver smashed into her Palmdale apartment complex.

Police found a mini-van jammed inside a building on 10th Street and Avenue R East at around 4 in the morning. Per Sheriff’s Lieutenant Ken Wright (from an interview he did for KNX 1070), “The vehicle was embedded into the building and went into the bedroom of a 16-year-old girl who has passed away as a result of injures from the accident.”

16-year-old Giselle Mendoza had attended Palmdale High School. Her father, Alberto Mendoza, was inconsolable – calling himself “destroyed.” Meanwhile, 20-year-old Roberto Rodriguez – also of Palmdale – has been arrested on suspicion DUI.

Per Lieutenant Wright “[Roberto] has been taken to the hospital to be treated for his injuries and will be booked for vehicular manslaughter … preliminary investigation indicates he was under the influence of alcohol.”

A local eyewitness, James Fisher King, told reporters: “I saw a car coming down 10th, east, about 80-85 miles per hour, and didn’t stop or hesitate. Just right into the building. Boom.” Another girl — just 14-years-old — almost also perished in the accident. Rodriguez’s car plowed through her bedroom as well. But she had been sleeping on the couch that night, fortuitously. Rodriguez made his $100,000 bail, which outraged the victim’s father, who said “You have a lot of money… and you spend money, and come out. And forget it. Somebody died… it’s not fair.”

The powerful emotions that follow a DUI accident in which someone dies can lead to unbelievable amounts of grief, confusion, and frustration on both sides of the equation. It’s easy for people to jump to conclusions about who caused the accident and why and what should be done. However, it’s critical to conduct a sober assessment of the facts.

Prosecutors can choose from an array of charges in DUI accidents that lead to injury or death. A typical non-injury DUI might be charged per California Vehicle Code Section 23152. An injury DUI, on the other hand, might be charged per CVC 23153. The difference between these codes is not just one number – it’s the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony.

If someone dies in an accident in which DUI is suspected, prosecutors can seek vehicular manslaughter charges. There are different grades of this charge, as well. “Gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated” is defined by California Penal Code Section 191.5 (a). Prosecutors face a very stiff burden of proof in such cases, but the punishments can be comparably severe. Depending on what happened, the offender can face anywhere from probation to 10 years behind bars in a California prison for every person who died in the crash.

To construct an appropriate defense to your charges, contact a Los Angeles DUI criminal defense attorney at the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers today to schedule a free consultation with a former prosecutor and Harvard Law School educated attorney.
Continue reading

Published on: April 7, 2014

Should Certain Los Angeles DUI Offenders Be Punished Much More Harshly Than Others?

by Michael Kraut

Are all Los Angeles DUI offenders equal?

Obviously, the simple answer is no. For instance, let’s say you just got pulled over at a checkpoint. A police officer gave you both breathalyzer and field sobriety tests. You failed both. Now, you face a misdemeanor charge of violating California Vehicle Code Section 23152.

Alternatively, let’s say you hurt somebody while committing the same crime. Suddenly, you face charges under a different law – felony charges! – per California Vehicle Code Section 23153. There are other ways the law slices and dices DUI offenders. The law stipulates different punishments, depending:

•   If you were under age when you got behind the wheel while DUI;
•   If you’re a repeat offender (the law suggests more intense punishments for second and third time recidivists);
•   If you committed additional crimes while DUI, such as hit and run, battery against a police officer, etcetera;
•   If you were egregiously over the legal limit.

But are these classifications “fine grained” enough? More to the point: might there be certain classes of offenders who should be punished far more harshly than “standard” Los Angeles DUI offenders?

For instance – and we’ve all seen drivers like this – but let’s say you see a 19-year-old kid in a hot rod car speeding while likely DUI on the 405. He cuts across 4 lanes of traffic and nearly causes four wrecks before police pull him over. He behaves extremely aggressively/recklessly/obnoxiously. In an ideal world, perhaps the 19-year-old should lose his license for ten years and be forced to write handwritten apologies to everyone he almost killed.

Obviously, that wouldn’t/shouldn’t happen. But that’s the gut reaction many of us have, when we see drivers behaving super obnoxiously: “that guy should have his license taken away forever and should be thrown in jail, just for being a jerk.”

We’ve all had those thoughts – even people who defend DUI drivers for a living!

The question is: is there scientific merit to such thinking? Are superb obnoxious drivers, for instance, more likely to get into injury crashes? If we could catalogue drivers in a more fine grained way, could we come up with more appropriate punishments for certain crimes? Even if we COULD slice and dice the galaxy of offenders like that, would we really want to? Practically speaking, this strategy would open up a whole raft of moral and legal questions.

The problem is inherently complicated and messy – and that’s the point of this thought exercise. Dealing with DUI is an inherently messy exercise. The law cannot foresee every situation, nor spell out every contingency plan. And that’s why it’s so important for a defendant to work with a seasoned Los Angeles DUI lawyer. You need to stay on track and avoid getting confused or misled.

If you haven’t already retained an attorney, call Michael Kraut of the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers today to explore your defense options. Mr. Kraut is a seasoned former prosecutor; he can help you come to terms with your charges and get excellent results.
Continue reading

Published on: April 1, 2014

New Book Challenges Validity of Los Angeles DUI Treatment Methods

by Michael Kraut

If you’re arrested and convicted for driving under the influence in Los Angeles, you can face a gallery of potential punishments, including but not limited to:

•   DUI alcohol school;
•   Fines and fees;
•   Jail time;
•   Mandatory driver’s license suspension;
•   Mandatory installation of IID device in your car (which prevents you from driving unless you blow a “non-alcoholic breath” into a machine);
•   Harsh probation terms.

A standard remedy in DUI cases is rehab. The court can mandate that you enter rehabilitation to “get sober” and stop being a danger to the society.

12-step programs are ubiquitous in California. But they are surprisingly far less effective than the conventional wisdom would have you believe, at least according to Harvard University psychiatrist, Dr. Lance Dodes, author of the controversial but compelling new book, The Sober Truth.

Dr. Dodes (who co-wrote the book with his son, Zachary) argues that Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) has a success rate of only 5% to 10%. Astonishingly, most rehab facilities do not keep track of recidivism rates beyond a year.

The Dodeses provide compelling research that suggests that 12-step approach just doesn’t work for 90% of the people who enter the program. Nevertheless, AA remains the “standard candle” — the default treatment for alcoholism in our society. The Dodeses argue that other treatment methods have had far higher success rates — yet public health authorities don’t seem to care.

In fact, even though AA does work for 5-10% of people, 5-10% of alcoholics will spontaneously get better without ANY intervention. In other words, at least statistically speaking, AA treatment appears to be the equivalent of no treatment at all.

Dr. Dodes offers his own pet theory about what really causes addiction, which he details in another book, The Heart of Addiction. His central thesis is that addiction is a kind of compulsion – it’s not a “brain disease” caused by malfunctioning dopamine signaling, as some conventional experts suggest, but rather a psychological phenomenon.

To illustrate his point, Dr. Dodes points out that addicts often “feel better” the moment they make the decision to drink – NOT when the alcohol actually touches their lips. This evidence suggests that psychology is key to the process.

He also points out that, during the 1960s, many U.S. service personnel stationed in Vietnam became addicted to heroin – one of the most physically addicting drugs on Earth. When these soldiers returned from war, most quit heroin easily. Most “domestic” heroin addicts, by contrast, had (and still have) a horrible recidivism rate. Dr. Dodes suggests that this evidence again shows that the problem in alcoholism is fundamentally psychological: soldiers in Vietnam used the heroin to stave off feelings of helplessness caused by the fighting. Once they returned to a normal environment — no more fighting — they felt back in control of their lives and found that they could quit easily. The stimulus causing helplessness was no longer there.

Dr. Dodes’s research and thinking is obviously very stimulating. But if you have been arrested for Los Angeles DUI, you have more serious, practical considerations than understanding the nature of addiction. To that end, consider calling former Senior Deputy District Attorney Michael Kraut of the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers today for a free consultation about your case.
Continue reading

Published on: March 31, 2014

Did LAPD Officer Use Excessive Force in DUI Arrest Against 25-Year-Old Woman?

by Michael Kraut

Twenty five-year-old Aloni Bonilla was arrested for DUI in Los Angeles back in 2012 on the westbound 10 freeway. But did the officer who slammed her head into a wall use excessive force?

Bonilla just filed a federal lawsuit against Officer Jose A. Ramirez for violating her civil rights during the DUI arrest. According to reports, Bonilla had been driving from Baldwin Park to Alhambra to visit a friend. Due to unclear signage, she wound up on a shut down part of the 10 near the Francisquito Avenue onramp. An officer pulled over on suspicion of DUI and gave her a breathalyzer test, which suggested that she had alcohol in her system. He then took her to a local hospital for a DUI blood test.

The Cal State Los Angeles student said that Officer Ramirez became violent at the hospital: “He grabbed me by my arm, lifted me out of my chair, turned me around and slammed — drilling it — my head into the wall. On the wall was a mounted object, and the left side of my face immediately started to bleed and swell.” She claimed that Ramirez then radioed that she was resisting arrest, he used a knee to hold down her back and then cuffed her. She said “I’m 120 pounds, this is a 220 pound, 6-foot male Latino officer … I was never given medical treatment, I never got that blood sample.”

Aloni lost her DUI case, in spite of video evidence that showed the entire handcuffing process unfold. The Los Angeles County Superior Court judge did not allow the footage to be used in her case because prosecutor said that it was prejudiced against Ramirez.

However, the surveillance video went up on YouTube and sparked a wave of sympathy for Aloni, prompting protestors to petition outside a federal court house with signs that read “stop police brutality” and “justice for Aloni.” Bonilla told reporters last week: “This is bigger issue … I want the public to know that resisting arrest can be used as a cover up charge when an officer uses excessive force.”

It’s obviously unclear how Bonilla will fare in her lawsuit, but her story drives home how confounding and complex the DUI defense process can be. If an officer does exert excessive force, how can you prove it? In Bonilla’s case, even though she had video proof of what happened to her, she still couldn’t win her DUI case.

To construct an appropriate defense, talk to Michael Kraut of the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers. For over 14 years, Mr. Kraut served as a senior level prosecutor for the city before switching over to representing defendants in Los Angeles DUI cases. Continue reading