Category: Weapons Offenses

Weapons Offenses | No Cuffs

California Vehicle Code VC 13360 – Violation of License Restrictions

Posted by on May 4, 2012

13360. Upon receiving satisfactory evidence of any violation of the restrictions of a driver’s license, the department may suspend or revoke the same.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

Note: Laws change frequently and thus the information provided should not be relied upon as legal advice. To be certain, contact a criminal defense attorney for a legal assistance.
www.NoCuffs.com is not liable for any misinformation that users obtain from using this site.

California Vehicle Code VC 13373 – Dismissal of Ambulance Driver or Attendant: Grounds

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 13373 – Dismissal of Ambulance Driver or Attendant: Grounds

13373. The receipt of satisfactory evidence of any violation of Article 1 (commencing with Section 1100) of Subchapter 5 of Chapter 2 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, the Vehicle Code, or any other applicable law that would provide grounds for ( ) refusal, suspension, or revocation of an ambulance driver’s certificate or evidence of an act committed involving intentional dishonesty for personal gain or conduct contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals, may be sufficient cause for the dismissal of any ambulance driver or attendant. Dismissal of a driver or attendant under this section shall be reported by the employer to the Department of Motor Vehicles at Sacramento within 10 days.

Amended Sec. 5, Ch. 66, Stats. 2005. Effective January 1, 2006.
The 2005 amendment added the italicized material, and at the point(s) indicated, deleted the following "denial"

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

California Vehicle Code VC 23582 – Speeding: Additional Penalty

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 23582 – Speeding: Additional Penalty

23582. (a) Any person who drives a vehicle 30 or more miles per hour over the maximum, prima facie, or posted speed limit on a freeway, or 20 or more miles per hour over the maximum, prima facie, or posted speed limit on any other street or highway, and in a manner prohibited by Section 23103 during the commission of a violation of Section 23152 or 23153 shall, in addition to the punishment prescribed for that person upon conviction of a violation of Section 23152 or 23153, be punished by an additional and consecutive term of 60 days in the county jail.

(b) If the court grants probation or suspends the execution of sentence, it shall require as a condition of probation or suspension that the defendant serve 60 days in the county jail, in addition and consecutive to any other sentence prescribed by this chapter.

(c) On a first conviction under this section, the court shall order the driver to participate in, and successfully complete, an alcohol or drug education and counseling program, or both an alcohol and a drug education and counseling program. Except in unusual cases where the interests of justice would be served, a finding making this section applicable to a defendant shall not be stricken pursuant to Section 1385 of the Penal Code or any other provision of law. If the court decides not to impose the additional and consecutive term, it shall specify on the court record the reasons for that order.

(d) The additional term provided in this section shall not be imposed unless the facts of driving in a manner prohibited by Section 23103 and driving the vehicle 30 or more miles per hour over the maximum, prima facie, or posted speed limit on a freeway, or 20 or more miles per hour over the maximum, prima facie, or posted speed limit on any other street or highway, are charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted or found to be true by the trier of fact. A finding of driving in that manner shall be based on facts in addition to the fact that the defendant was driving while under the influence of alcohol, any drug, or both, or with a specified percentage of alcohol in the blood.

Added Sec. 84, Ch. 118, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

Chemical Tests: Blood, Breath, Urine

Posted by on May 4, 2012

Chemical Tests: Blood, Breath, Urine

Once a person is placed under arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, they are to be told that they have a choice of chemical tests that they must take. According to California’s “implied consent” law, the person arrested has a choice of taking a blood or breath test if the arrest is alcohol related, or taking a blood or urine test if the arrest is drug related. There is no right to take a urine test for alcohol related DUI, unless it is suspected that the driver has a combination of alcohol and drugs in their system. There is no right to consult with a lawyer prior to taking the test.

Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations sets out the requirements for proper chemical testing in California. Where these standards are violated, the result of the test is unreliable, and should not be the basis for a D.U.I. conviction.

Where the sample is blood or urine, your defense lawyer can and should get the sample tested by an independent laboratory.

Where the accused refuses to take a blood, breath or urine test, this refusal can be used as evidence that the accused was conscious of their guilt. California DMV will also use this refusal to suspend or revoke the suspect’s driver’s license and the refusal can also be used to enhance the punishment in the event of a conviction.

Please, whether your case involves a refusal or a chemical test of your blood, breath, or urine, contact an experienced Los Angeles DUI lawyer for a consultation before you even consider a guilty plea. Many cases that seem hopeless can be successfully defended.

California Vehicle Code VC 23548 – Conditions of Probation: Third Conviction Within Ten Years

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 23548 – Conditions of Probation: Third Conviction Within Ten Years

23548. (a) (1) If the court grants probation to any person punished under Section 23546, in addition to the provisions of Section 23600 and any other terms and conditions imposed by the court, the court shall impose as conditions of probation that the person be confined in the county jail for at least 120 days but not more than one year and pay a fine of at least three hundred ninety dollars ($390) but not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000).

(2) The person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be revoked by the department under paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352. The court shall require the person to surrender the driver’s license to the court in accordance with Section 13550.

(b) In addition to subdivision (a), if the court grants probation to any person punished under Section 23546, the court may order as a condition of probation that the person participate, for at least 30 months subsequent to the underlying conviction and in a manner satisfactory to the court, in a driving-under-the-influence program licensed pursuant to Section 11836 of the Health and Safety Code. In lieu of the minimum term of imprisonment specified in subdivision (a), the court shall impose as a condition of probation under this subdivision that the person be confined in the county jail for at least 30 days but not more than one year. The court shall not order the treatment prescribed by this subdivision unless the person makes a specific request and shows good cause for the order, whether or not the person has previously completed a treatment program pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 23542 or paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 23562. In order to enable all required persons to participate, each person shall pay the program costs commensurate with the person’s ability to pay as determined pursuant to Section 11837.4 of the Health and Safety Code. No condition of probation required pursuant to this subdivision is a basis for reducing any other probation requirement in this section or Section 23600 or for avoiding the mandatory license revocation provisions of paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352.

(c) In addition to the provisions of Section 23600 and subdivision (a), if the court grants probation to any person punished under Section 23546 who has not previously completed a treatment program pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 23542 or paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 23562, and unless the person is ordered to participate in and complete a driving-under-the-influence program under subdivision (b), the court shall impose as a condition of probation that the person, subsequent to the date of the current violation, enroll and participate, for at least 18 months and in a manner satisfactory to the court, in a driving-under-the-influence program licensed pursuant to Section 11836 of the Health and Safety Code, as designated by the court. The person shall complete the entire program subsequent to, and shall not be given any credit for program activities completed prior to, the date of the current violation. Any person who has previously completed a 12-month or 18-month program licensed pursuant to Section 11836 of the Health and Safety Code shall not be eligible for referral pursuant to this subdivision unless a 30-month licensed driving-under-the-influence program is not available for referral in the county of the person’s residence or employment. The program shall provide for persons who cannot afford the program fee pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 11837.4 of the Health and Safety Code in order to enable those persons to participate. No condition of probation required pursuant to this subdivision is a basis for reducing any other probation requirement in this section or Section 23600 or for avoiding the mandatory license revocation provisions of paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352.

(d) The court shall advise the person at the time of sentencing that the driving privilege may not be restored until the person provides proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a driving-under-the-influence program of the length required under this code that is licensed pursuant to Section 11836 of the Health and Safety Code.

(e) This section shall become operative on September 20, 2005.

Added Sec. 84, Ch. 118, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 24, Ch. 545, Stats. 2002. Effective January 1, 2003.
Amended Sec. 19, Ch. 551, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005. Operative September 20, 2005.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

California Vehicle Code VC 23222 – Possession of Marijuana or Open Container While Driving

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 23222 – Possession of Marijuana or Open Container While Driving

23222. (a) No person shall have in his or her possession on his or her person, while driving a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, any bottle, can, or other receptacle, containing any alcoholic beverage which has been opened, or a seal broken, or the contents of which have been partially removed.

(b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses, while driving a motor vehicle upon a highway or on lands, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 23220, not more than one avoirdupois ounce of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis as defined by Section 11006.5 of the Health and Safety Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the person has been previously convicted three or more times of an offense described in this subdivision during the two-year period immediately preceding the date of commission of the violation to be charged, the previous convictions shall also be charged in the accusatory pleading and, if found to be true by the jury upon a jury trial or by the court upon a court trial or if admitted by the person, Sections 1000.1 and 1000.2 of the Penal Code are applicable to the person, and the court shall divert and refer the person for education, treatment, or rehabilitation, without a court hearing or determination or the concurrence of the district attorney, to an appropriate community program which will accept the person. If the person is so diverted and referred, the person is not subject to the fine specified in this subdivision. In any case in which a person is arrested for a violation of this subdivision and does not demand to be taken before a magistrate, the person shall be released by the arresting officer upon presentation of satisfactory evidence of identity and giving his or her written promise to appear in court, as provided in Section 40500, and shall not be subjected to booking.

Amended Sec. 2, Ch. 384, Stats. 1998. Effective August 24, 1998.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

California Vehicle Code VC 23125 – Schoolbus or Transit Vehicle Drivers: Prohibition Against Use of Wireless Telephone

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 23125 – Schoolbus or Transit Vehicle Drivers: Prohibition Against Use of Wireless Telephone

23125. (a) A person may not drive a schoolbus or transit vehicle, as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 99247 of the Public Utilities Code, while using a wireless telephone.

(b) This section does not apply to a driver using a wireless telephone for work-related purposes, or for emergency purposes, including, but not limited to, an emergency call to a law enforcement agency, health care provider, fire department, or other emergency service agency or entity.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a violation of subdivision (a) does not constitute a serious traffic violation within the meaning of subdivision (i) of Section 15210.

Added Sec. 1, Ch. 505, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

California Vehicle Code VC 23100 – Application of Chapter

Posted by on May 4, 2012

California Vehicle Code VC 23100 – Application of Chapter

23100. The provisions of this chapter apply to vehicles upon the highways and elsewhere throughout the State unless expressly provided otherwise.

» Return to California Vehicle Codes

California Law – Miranda Warnings

Posted by Brianna Wilkins on May 4, 2012

California Law – Miranda Warnings

A driver arrested on suspicion of drinking and driving typically is read his or her rights as the arrest is taking place. These rights are known as a Miranda warning, based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic Miranda vs. Arizona decision. If police do not advise a suspected drunk driver of his or her rights prior to questioning, any information gathered during the interview may be suppressed by the efforts of a skilled DUI / DWI defense lawyer from the Kavinoky Law Firm.

The exact wording of the "Miranda Rights" statement is not specified in the Supreme Court’s decision. Instead, law enforcement agencies have created a basic set of simple statements that can be read to accused persons prior to any questioning. Police agencies typically use the following statement to inform people of their Constitutional rights:

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to have an attorney present now and during any future questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you at no cost."

If an arrestee is to be interrogated, he or she must first be informed in clear and unequivocal terms that he has the right to remain silent. The warning of the right to remain silent must be accompanied by the explanation that anything said can and will be used against the individual in court. The right to have a lawyer present during interrogation is indispensable to the protection of the driver’s Fifth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment privilege includes the right to remain silent, and the protection from incriminating statements used against oneself in a criminal prosecution.

Drivers held for interrogation must be clearly informed that they have the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer present during interrogation. In order to fully advise a person of his or her rights under this system, police must warn the driver not only that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney, but also that a lawyer will be appointed at no cost for individuals who cannot afford one.

If the individual voices a desire to consult with an attorney, the interrogation must cease until a lawyer is present. At that time, the individual must have an opportunity to confer with the attorney, and to have him present during any subsequent questioning. If drivers who cannot obtain an attorney indicate that one is wanted before speaking to police, investigators must respect the decision to remain silent.

However, an individual can be arrested without being read a Miranda warning. The purpose of a Miranda warning is only to protect a suspect from making incriminating statements during questioning. All police need to legally arrest a person is probable cause – a reasonable belief that an individual has committed a crime. Police are required to read the Miranda warning only before interrogating a suspect.

While failure to do so may cause any subsequent statements to be thrown out of court, the arrest may still be legal and valid. Also, police are allowed to ask routine questions such as name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number without reading the Miranda warning. Police can also administer alcohol and drug tests without warning, but persons being tested may refuse to answer questions during the tests.

The Miranda warning only governs communications and testimony. A violation of Miranda rights cannot result in the exclusion or real or physical evidence. This means that during a DUI / DWI investigation, an officer will use the way in which a statement is made against the defendant. For example, if the defendant had slurred speech or seemed disoriented, the officer may note these facts on the police report.

Typically, the central Miranda issue in DUI / DWI cases is whether the defendant was under arrest during an interrogation where he or she made incriminating statements. Generally, statements made prior to arrest are not subject to the Miranda decision. Generally, pre-arrest questions are only investigative in nature and normally occur during relatively brief traffic stops. Answers to questions such as "Where have you been?" or "Have you been drinking?" are typically admissible in a DUI / DWI case.

A traffic stop or a field sobriety test does not constitute an arrest, and, therefore, Miranda warnings are not required, regardless of whether the suspect has a right to refuse the tests. The privilege against self-incrimination is only a privilege against giving testimony against oneself, and does not protect the accused from giving real or physical evidence. Field-sobriety tests are physical evidence, not testimonial evidence, and do not violate the privilege against self-incrimination.

Police officers have been trained to ask questions and obtain as much information as they can before an arrest has actually taken place. The police do this to ensure that the statements will be admissible against the defendant. But if police ask questions after arrest, without advising a driver of his or her Miranda rights, any information obtained likely will be inadmissible. A California lawyer who focuses on drunk driving defense will seek to have any such evidence suppressed.

Alpine County Superior Court of California

Posted by Brianna Wilkins on May 4, 2012

Alpine County Superior Court of California

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.

Alpine County Superior Court
14777 State Route 89, Markleeville, CA 961020
Phone: 530-694-2113; Fax: 530-694-2119

» Alpine 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