Superior Court Of California, County of Tuolumne

If you have been arrested for Driving Under the Influence of alcohol or drugs in the state of California, it is important to know the location of the courthouse where your arraignment will be held. If there are multiple courthouses in the county, please contact a skilled California DUI / DWI defense attorney for more information.

Tuolumne County Superior Court
Historic Courthouse
41 West Yaney Street, Sonora, CA 95370

Branch Courthouse
60 North Washington Street, Sonora, CA 95370

» Tuolumne County Superior Court of California website.

Getting arrested on suspicion of DUI / DWI can be a frightening experience. Suspected drunk drivers face a legal labyrinth that can seem daunting. A drunk driving case generates two separate cases – in criminal court, and at the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). A California attorney with experience defending drinking and driving cases can help drivers navigate through both the DMV hearing and the court case.

» Return to California Superior Courts, general information

Motion for Supplemental Discovery

The process of gaining access to the prosecution’s evidence, known as discovery, is a critical aspect of drunk driving defense. An experienced California DUI lawyer from The Kavinoky Law Firm will seek access to every piece of evidence that may help a motorist accused of driving under the influence fight the charges. This is accomplished by filing a pretrial motion for supplemental discovery.

Motion for supplemental discovery is based on the notion that the defendant is entitled to receive all the information that will be used by prosecutors in their attempt to convict. Discovery has many purposes in a court case – it is designed to promote truth, save the court’s time, and to prevent an ambush at trial.

Certain evidence is turned over to the defense without a motion for supplemental discovery. The evidence that is typically turned over to the defense without a motion might include the names and addresses of prosecution witnesses, any statements made by the defendant, relevant evidence seized or obtained as part of the investigation, exculpatory evidence, results of scientific tests, and any written or recorded statements of witnesses whom the prosecutor intends to call at a prospective trial, including experts.

California DUI lawyers experienced in driving while intoxicated cases will use a request known as a Brady motion to seek any information held by the prosecution that may benefit the defendant. For an example, the California DUI lawyer might ask the prosecution to provide calibration and maintenance records for the breath testing machine used during the driver’s arrest. Additionally, a discovery motion may be made to obtain a portion of blood or urine samples – known as a "split" – in order to have the samples independently tested by a forensic toxicologist.

Other motions might include requests to the court to impose sanctions because the prosecution failed to preserve favorable evidence. This type of request is called a Trombetta / Youngblood motion. Another discovery request, known as a Pitchess motion, is designed to obtain the personnel records of the law enforcement officer involved in the arrest.

Discovery begins informally when both sides present a list of requested materials. If either side fails to comply with the informal discovery process, then opposing counsel can engage in formal discovery.

Formal discovery is overseen by the court. If either side fails to comply with formal discovery, the court can order sanctions and other penalties. Formal discovery is always preceded by informal discovery, except in the case of Pitchess motions.

A motion for supplemental discovery can be an effective tool in the hands of the right California DUI lawyers or attorneys. A California DUI Attorney with a proven track record of fighting and winning DUI / DWI cases can determine where supplemental discovery will advance the client’s drunk driving defense case.

Drivers suspected of DUI / DWI in California often must take a field sobriety test such as the Finger-count Test during the traffic stop. Many drivers hope they’ll avoid arrest by “passing” a field sobriety test, but police don’t use the Finger-count Test to determine whether to make a driving under the influence arrest; that decision is typically made long before the field sobriety test is given. The test results merely create probable cause for an arrest and evidence for a drunk driving court case.

However, regardless of the results of a field sobriety test, it’s still possible to fight drunk driving charges and win. A skilled DUI / DWI attorney from The Kavinoky Law Firm can aggressively challenge the results of the Finger-count Test and demonstrate that the results could just as easily prove a driver was not impaired.

The Finger-count Test isn’t standardized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), so it carries less evidentiary weight in court than a Standardized Field sobriety Test. It’s extremely subjective – it has no objective scoring system, and depends solely on the officer’s opinion of whether the driver “passed” or the test as performed.

Police officers administer the Finger-count Test, also called the Finger-tap Test by directing the driver to hold out one hand, palm up, and touch the tip of each finger to the tip of the thumb. The driver is told to count out loud after each tap, forward and backward, for three consecutive sets.

While administering the Finger-tap Test, the officer watches for certain signs that the driver is intoxicated, including starting the test too soon, an inability to count as directed, not following instructions, an inability to touch fingers as instructed, an inability to perform the correct number of sets, and stopping the test before told to do so.

The finger-count exercise shouldn’t even be called a test, because it’s nearly impossible to pass. The “symptoms” of intoxication that police look for are extremely subjective, meaning they can be interpreted in a number of ways. Fatigue, illness, injury or even nervousness can make the driver “fail” the Finger-count Test. Sometimes the test isn’t even conducted properly.

Because the Finger-tap Test and other Non-standardized Field Sobriety Tests are so subjective and inherently unfair, they can often be successfully challenged in court. A California DUI / DWI lawyer who is skilled in the art of cross-examination will question the officer skillfully and bring out details that work in the driver’s favor.

Drivers who feel they “failed” a field sobriety test like the Finger-tap Test often are reluctant to fight a drunk driving charge in court because they fear an automatic conviction. However, driving under the influence charges can be fought and won. Anyone arrested for drunk driving should contact a California lawyer skilled at defending suspected DUI / DWI drivers.

The courts have ruled that sobriety checkpoints don’t violate a motorist’s Fourth Amendment rights if they are conducted within certain criteria. California drunk driving sobriety checkpoints must follow specific guidelines set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in order to be constitutional. However, police don’t always follow that protocol. If they don’t, any evidence gathered as a result of an arrest at a sobriety checkpoint may be suppressed at trial.

The skilled DUI / DWI defense attorneys of The Kavinoky Law Firm are extremely knowledgeable about the requirements of California drunk driving Sobriety Checkpoints and can determine whether an arrest was valid. They will request the following information during pre-trial discovery to help determine whether police followed the established guidelines:

• The identity of all involved law enforcement personnel, both sworn and civilian
• The identity of each person arrested at the roadblock. This information is necessary to determine whether proper procedures were actually followed, if defense counsel opts to interview them
• Where field sobriety tests were performed, and who conducted them
• Where chemical tests were given, and who conducted them
• All communication, diagrams, and reports used in designing the roadblock
• How long each driver was stopped at the checkpoint
• Whether a neutral formula was employed in stopping motorists, or whether officers used their own discretion
• Whether the roadblock had an official appearance, including warning signs, lights, and uniformed personnel
• How the location of the roadblock was determined
• How the timing and duration of the roadblock was determined
• Whether the public received advance notice of the checkpoint
• Whether the safety of drivers was of primary concern
• Whether motorists were allowed the opportunity to turn away from the roadblock without being detained

An experienced California defense lawyer will analyze this information to determine whether there were discrepancies between the protocol set by the courts and the operation of the checkpoint. If police did not follow all of the necessary guidelines, and there was no probable cause for a stop, a DUI / DWI defense attorney will move to have all of the evidence that stemmed from the arrest excluded.

If police don’t follow the established guidelines when operating a sobriety checkpoint, probable cause is needed to make an arrest if there is no warrant. Probable cause exists when the facts known to the officer would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to believe that the person is guilty of a crime. The officer must be able to articulate why the driver was stopped and ordered to exit the vehicle.

Probable cause must exist during each stage of the encounter, including the performance of the field sobriety tests, chemical testing, and the arrest itself. If there was no probable cause, and the search and seizure took place without a warrant, there is a strong likelihood that the court will grant the motion to suppress, thus excluding the evidence gathered during the sobriety checkpoint.

This type of challenge can result in the exclusion of evidence that includes field sobriety tests, statements made by the defendant, and the results of any chemical tests. Roadblock sobriety testing is considered a search under the Fourth Amendment, and chemical tests of breath, blood, or urine are firmly established to be a seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes.

An experienced DUI / DWI defense attorney will argue that without a warrant or probable cause, all of this evidence must be suppressed. The prosecutor then bears the burden of proving that the search of the defendant and the seizure of the sample were the product of a lawful arrest.

Even though sobriety checkpoints have been sanctioned by the courts, not all drunk driving checkpoints are conducted according to established guidelines. Ultimately, evidence obtained at an improperly conducted sobriety checkpoint can be challenged. The first step is to consult with a California lawyer who concentrates on drunk driving defense.

The consequences for a DUI conviction can be grave – many drivers receive substantial fines, jail sentences, and license suspensions. However, many courts have developed alternative sentencing programs that give authorities greater flexibility in meting out punishment. An experienced California attorney from the Kavinoky Law Firm who focuses on drunk driving defense can explain the types of alternative sentencing available in some cases.

Sentencing alternatives are typically designed to help as well as punish the driver. Alternative sentences allow DUI drivers to retain their jobs and seek treatment for alcoholism, if needed – opportunities that are rarely available in county jail.

Some sentencing alternatives will allow good time/work time custody credits. Good time/work time custody credits are hour-for-hour exchanges of alternative sentencing against the hours that would have otherwise been spent in county jail.

Some types of alternative sentencing available include community service, freeway cleanup, electronic monitoring, sober living environments, alcohol and drug rehabilitation, Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and participation in a MADD Victim Impact program.

Other sentencing alternatives include ignition interlock devices – machines attached to vehicles which require drivers to blow into a breath detector before starting the car – and the Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor, or SCRAM, which measures alcohol by way of a device attached to the DUI offender’s ankle.

Another option is work furlough, which allows a DUI offender to go to work during the day and check into a dormitory-style housing facility at night. Some defendants may be eligible for work release, which allows the offender to work at an approved location and return home at night.

Some offenders are allowed to serve jail sentences at “weekend jails” at local police stations rather than county jails. Many local police departments will “rent out” their jail cells to DUI offenders overnight or for a weekend.

Because of the harsh consequences that drunk driving defendants face, alternative sentencing options can be an attractive alternative to incarceration. An experienced California DUI / DWI lawyer will review each case individually to determine whether sentencing alternatives may be available.

Experienced Los Angeles DUI Attorneys

It is important to hire a Los Angeles criminal defense lawyer when faced with a Los Angeles criminal charge. Not all criminal lawyers are the same. You want to make sure that you are given all the resources possible to resolve your criminal case with minimal repercussions. At the Kavinoky Law Firm, you not only get the knowledge and experience to win, you get an entire team working around the clock on your behalf.  Our main objective is to remove all the burdens off your shoulders. Let us handle the case, so you can sleep well at night.
There are many aspects and procedures that can be challenged to help get you off your criminal charge. We spare no expense to make sure we have uncovered all avenues of your Los Angeles criminal case.  We understand the impact of a criminal charge on your life and livelihood.

We focus on a plethora of Los Angeles criminal charges including:
Assault
Appeals
Battery
Bench Warrants
Crimes Against Children
Domestic Violence
DUI
DUI Drugs
Drug Crimes
Drug Possession
Embezzlement
Expungement
Federal Cases
Fraud
Gang Offense
Grand Theft
Investigatory
Manslaughter
Murder
Robbery
Sex Crimes
Violent Crimes
Weapons Crimes
White Collar Crimes

Big-Firm Resources, Small-Firm Feel

• The Kavinoky Law Firm has more than a dozen lawyers and a support staff of 25.

• We employ a team approach: Your defense strategy will be engineered by founding lawyer Darren Kavinoky, Senior Supervising Attorney Joel Koury, Northern California Managing Attorney Michael Meehan, and their handpicked team. The Kavinoky Law Firm has more than a century of combined legal experience, and over 500 completed jury trials.

• We are one of the largest law firms in California that concentrates on defending cases involving alcohol and drugs. This translates into greater resources for your defense.

• We employ a specialized Intranet Toolkit to ensure all of our attorneys effectively collaborate, share information, and work in concert.

• All of our attorneys use Blackberries or Droids. This means that you’ll receive an immediate response to your emails and phone calls and outstanding customer service.

• We have a network of attorneys throughout the United States for cases that involve issues that cross state lines, such as foreign prior convictions, or those involving out-of-state driver’s licenses that could be impacted by an action in California.

• We conduct frequent comprehensive case-evaluation roundtables, where a “mastermind” group of lawyers each review your case, and come up with the best approach that is designed to achieve the best possible result in your criminal case.

• We have an-house appellate department to address writs and appeals. We are willing and equipped to fight (and have successfully fought), significant legal issues all the way to the Supreme Court.

• We employ a team approach, which translates into more resources to come up with the winning strategy in your case.

Our Los Angeles Offices:
• Encino
• Los Angeles

 

We proudly cover these areas of Greater Los Angeles:
Acton, Agoura, Agoura Hills , Alhambra, Antelope Valley, Arcadia, Artesia, Avalon, Azusa, Baldwin Park, Bell, Bell Gardens, Bellflower, Bradbury, Brentwood, Burbank, Calabasas, Camarillo, Carson, Claremont, Commerce, Canoga Park, Century City, Chatsworth, Commerce, Compton, Covina, Cudahy, Culver City, Diamond Bar, Downey, East Los Angeles, El Monte, El Segundo, Encino, Gardena, Glendale, Glendora, Granada Hills, Hawaiian Gardens, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Hidden Hills, Hollywood, Huntington Park, Industry, Irwindale, La Canada-Flintridge, Lake Balboa, Lakewood, La Mirada, Lancaster, La Puente, La Verne, Lawndale, Lomita, Los Angeles , Lynwood, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Maywood, Monrovia, Montebello, Monterey Park, Newhall, North Hollywood, Northridge, Norwalk, Oxnard, Palmdale, Palos Verdes Estates, Paramount, Pasadena, Pico Rivera, Pomona, Quartz Hill, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach , Reseda, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Rosemead, San Dimas, San Fernando, San Gabriel, San Marino, San Pedro, Santa Fe Springs, Santa Monica, Sherman Oaks, Sierra Madre, Signal Hill, Simi Valley, South El Monte, South Gate, South Pasadena, Studio City, Sylmar, Temple City, Thousand Oaks, Three Points, Torrance, Valencia, Van Nuys, Ventura, Vernon, Walnut, West Covina, West Hollywood, Westwood, West Los Angeles, Westlake Village, Whittier, Woodland Hills.

California Supreme Court Allows Traffic Stops Based on Uncorroborated Tips

In a setback for privacy and civil rights, the California Supreme Court has ruled that police can use anonymous tips to stop suspected drunk drivers even if the officer doesn’t spot any illegal activity. An attorney plans to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled that a California Highway Patrol officer acted properly when he pulled over a San Joaquin Valley woman after an anonymous caller said her van was weaving, even though the officer witnessed no signs of impairment. The woman later failed a field sobriety test and was arrested for heroin possession.

The ruling gives police in California the broadest powers in the nation to pull over suspected drunk drivers and other motorists based only on anonymous tips. In recent months, the state has posted signs urging motorists to report suspected DUI / DWI drivers to the CHP. Those signs, coupled with the high court’s decision, open the door for abuse by drivers involved in road rage or grudges unrelated to criminal activity.

Three justices opposed the ruling, saying police should not be allowed to stop motorists without witnessing illegal activity. “One of the hallmarks of the liberty guaranteed to persons in this country is that agents of the government cannot arrest, seize or detain them without a good reason,” Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar wrote for the minority.

The panel’s ruling comes on the heels of a string of high court decisions that erode the rights of criminal suspects across California and the nation. The California Supreme Court recently ruled that police can enter some DUI / DWI suspects’ homes without a warrant to administer chemical tests.

In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that police can enter suspects’ homes without knocking if they have a valid search warrant. However, the justices also recently ruled that police cannot pat down a suspect for weapons based on an uncorroborated tip.

Defense attorneys decried the California Supreme Court’s ruling on anonymous tips as a setback for privacy and civil rights that may resonate for decades.

“Anyone can call in an anonymous tip for any reason,” said Darren T. Kavinoky, one of California’s top criminal defense attorneys. “This ruling essentially allows police to go on fishing expeditions in the vehicle of any driver unfortunate enough to be the target of an anonymous tipster.”

Despite the setback, motorists arrested for drunk driving or any other criminal offense involving an anonymous tip still have numerous options to launch an effective defense. An experienced California criminal defense attorney can challenge evidence on a number of fronts and dismantle a prosecutor’s case.

The top attorneys of the Kavinoky Law Firm are experienced in defending DUI / DWI cases and other criminal charges throughout California. The firm’s expert attorneys will develop an aggressive defense strategy to challenge charges of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, drug possession, or any other criminal offense.