Category: Weapons Offenses

Weapons Offenses | No Cuffs

New California Laws

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that criminal suspects’ statements can be used against them if they fail to invoke their rights.

The court ruled 5-4 that criminal suspects have a duty to invoke the rights outlined in the historic Miranda vs. Arizona decision, including the right to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning. In the past, the court held that the government had the burden of demonstrating that a suspect had knowingly and intelligently waived his rights.

Tuesday’s ruling addressed a Michigan case where a man was convicted of murder based largely on his one-word response to a question after nearly three hours of interrogation.  His conviction was overturned by an appeals court that ruled that using his answer to convict him violated his right against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court’s ruling overturned that decision.
Our constitutional rights have eroded considerably in recent years, so it’s more important than ever to have a skilled defense lawyer on your side if you’re under investigation for a criminal charge.  The top California defense attorneys of The Kavinoky Law Firm are well-known for standing up for the rights of their clients, and will do everything possible to protect you during a criminal investigation. Contact a skilled California defense lawyer today at 1-800-NO-CUFFS for a free consultation.

A new year brings new laws in California, and 2010 is no exception.  There are a number of new laws on the books that impact convicted DUI drivers and certain individuals charged with California theft or other property crimes. Another new law increases the amount of time credit earned by certain inmates in California county jails and prisons.  Yet another new law prevents authorities from sending low-level, non-violent offenders back to prison for parole violations. As in every year, the list of new California laws is lengthy, so we’ve summarized the most noteworthy ones here. If you have any questions about any of these new laws and how they will affect your case, you can always contact The Kavinoky Law Firm at 1-800-NO-CUFFS.

Two new laws will impact many individuals convicted of DUI. AB 91 creates a pilot program that requires every driver convicted of DUI in Los Angeles, Alameda, Sacramento and Tulare counties – even first offenders – to install and use an ignition interlock device.  The law will remain in effect until 2016, when the pilot program may be extended and expanded to include other counties.

SB 598 is a bill that will allow DUI offenders to obtain restricted driver’s licenses sooner than they would otherwise if they install and use an ignition interlock device.  Convicted DUI drivers will still have a certain period of “hard” suspension when they are not allowed to drive at all, but that hard suspension will be shortened by installing an ignition interlock device.

A new law that takes effect January 25, 2010 increases the dollar amount that determines whether more than 30 theft and property crime offenses can be charged as felonies rather than misdemeanors.  For example, the threshold for a felony charge of writing a check with non-sufficient funds increased from $200 to $400. The limits for some offenses, such as theft of currency or jewelry, remain unchanged.

Certain individuals serving time in California county jails will earn more time credits than before under another new law that takes effect on January 25, 2010. In the past, inmates in county jails earned two days of credit for every four days spent in custody. Under the new law, they will earn two days of credit for every two days served.  Some defendants are excluded from earning the additional credit for time served. They include individuals convicted of violent felonies who are limited to a 15-percent reduction credit under California Penal Code section 2933.1; those required to register as sex offenders; and individuals convicted of serious felonies or with prior convictions for serious felonies. Up to six weeks of additional credit can also be earned by many state prison inmates who complete certain prison programs.

Another new law that takes effect January 25, 2010 prevents certain individuals from being returned to prison for parole violations. The individual cannot be returned to prison for a parole violation if all of the following are true: he or she is not required to register as a sex offender, wasn’t convicted of a serious felony, doesn’t have a prior conviction for a serious felony, wasn’t convicted of a sex crime, wasn’t found guilty of a serious disciplinary offense, isn’t a validated gang member or associate, didn’t refuse to sign a notification of parole conditions, and wasn’t determined in an evaluation to have a high risk of reoffending.

Understanding California’s complex criminal statutes and the many new laws that are passed each year is difficult. Fortunately, the knowledgeable California defense attorneys of The Kavinoky Law Firm ensure that they’re up on the latest developments in the law, so that you don’t have to.  If you have any questions about any aspect of your California criminal case, please don’t hesitate to call us today at 1-800-NO-CUFFS.

New California Driving Laws for 2009

As of January 1, 2009, a host of new driving laws went on the books in California, and being aware of these statutes will help you avoid trouble with the law in the New Year. As always, if you have any questions about any California Vehicle Code, feel free to contact an attorney from The Kavinoky Law Firm at 1.877.466.2833 for more information.

Perhaps the most talked-about new law is California’s ban on texting. As of January 1, it’s against the law to type, send, and read electronic messages while behind the wheel. Like California’s law requiring the use of hands-free cell phones while driving, the new text-messaging ban carries a $20 fine for a first offense and a $50 fine for a second offense, but the state’s “penalty assessment” means the fine will be significantly higher.

Even more importantly, violating either of these laws gives police probable cause to pull you over, which can lead to more serious charges. These types of relatively minor violations can result in an arrest for DUI or another serious offense.

Another new law impacts drivers who are on probation for a California DUI conviction. Under the new zero-tolerance law, drivers on probation for a prior DUI conviction who have any measurable amount of alcohol in their systems will have their driver’s licenses suspended.

California has also lowered the threshold for ignition interlock devices, or IIDs, in DUI cases. In the past, California law required that judges give “heightened consideration” to ordering DUI drivers with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of .20 percent or greater to use an ignition interlock device. The new law lowers the threshold for an IID, which prevents a car from starting if the driver cannot provide an alcohol-free breath sample, to .15 percent.

Beginning in July 2009, drivers who are caught driving after having their licenses suspended for a prior DUI conviction will also be required to use an ignition interlock device. This new law also transfers authority over the use of ignition interlock devices from the courts to the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

New California legislation also requires drivers convicted of DUI or alcohol-related reckless driving – also known as “wet-reckless” – to attend a nine-month alcohol-education program if they’ve been convicted of another DUI or wet-reckless offense within the past decade.

Other changes to the law include new criminal penalties for forging Clean Air stickers, harsher penalties for those who make frivolous 911 calls, and changes to the law that governs where GPS units can be mounted. In the past, mounting the unit on the windshield was against the law. Now drivers can mount the devices in a 7-inch square on the lower passenger side of the windshield or a 5-inch square on the lower corner of the driver’s side.

By keeping yourself informed about California’s ever-evolving vehicle and criminal codes, you can better prepare yourself to stay out of trouble in 2009. And should you ever need us, the experienced California defense lawyers of The Kavinoky Law Firm are here to help. You can contact us at 1.877.466.2833 for answers to all of your questions about California vehicle and criminal codes.

 

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CHARGES FOR ATV DRIVERS

Friday, June 30, 2006

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CHARGES FOR ATV DRIVERS

WOODLAND HILLS, Calif. — Fans of sun and sand are gearing up for fun summer weekends full of riding ATVs and drinking with friends.  However, those who enjoy a few beers before driving an all-terrain vehicle may be in for an unfortunate surprise:  DUI charges can be brought against them, and those charges can be devastating.

In recent years the dangers and illegality of boating under the influence have been emphasized, and many people now know that they can be arrested for drinking and boating. However, many people do not realize that driving an all-terrain vehicle while impaired is just as dangerous and just as illegal.

“The punishments for driving an ATV while intoxicated are identical to those for driving a car under the influence of alcohol,” said California criminal defense attorney Wendy Wittenberg.  “I’ve dealt with many defendants who were arrested and charged with DUI while driving ATVs.  They were all shocked.  They had no idea that it was illegal, or that they could lose their driving privileges and serve jail time.”

According to California law, a person driving any vehicle on a public highway can be arrested for driving under the influence if his or her blood alcohol content measures .08 percent or more.  If convicted, this person may have to serve jail time, participate in a DUI school and pay fines.  The Department of Motor Vehicles can suspend the defendant’s Class C driver license even without a conviction.

“Of course, when people are arrested for DUI while driving an ATV, many times they argue that they weren’t on a public roadway.  Unfortunately for these defendants, sand dunes are considered public roadways for the purpose of California driving under the influence laws,” said Wittenberg.  “This means that anyone driving in a sand dune while intoxicated can be arrested for DUI.”

Wittenberg has handled many ATV DUI arrests, and she is beginning to see a trend.  “More and more clients are calling me to help defend DUI charges while driving ATVs.  It probably is not due to more people drinking and driving, but more intense surveillance.”

These arrests can happen in a number of ways.  Many times, ATV drivers are turned in by rangers at the dunes.  These rangers will investigate the situation, and then contact the California Highway Patrol or local police department to report a suspicious driver.  In other instances, citizens can call the arresting officers with information about a suspected drunken driver.  The officers will then drive to the scene to investigate the situation and to possibly arrest the offender.

In addition to being illegal, driving an ATV while intoxicated is dangerous.  In the last 20 years, there have been more than 300 ATV-related deaths in California.  It is assumed that at least some of these accidents were due to intoxication of the driver.

“It’s important to use common sense about safety while driving in the dunes,” said Wittenberg.  “Drinking and driving is never a good idea, no matter what vehicle is driven.”

Wendy Wittenberg is an attorney at California-based criminal defense firm The Kavinoky Law Firm.  The attorneys of The Kavinoky Law Firm focus on customer service, and they take pride in their one-on-one approach with clients. They work tirelessly to have the best reputation of all criminal defense firms in the state.  www.NoCuffs.com

###

For more information, contact Angie Rupert at (818) 346-4646 or [email protected].
Prepared by Angie Rupert.

Physical signs and symptoms of marijuana use

Physical signs and symptoms of marijuana use

Driving under the influence of marijuana is not as easily detectable as driving under the influence of alcohol. Alcohol consumption, in quantities large enough to cause impairment, produces obvious physical signs and symptoms in an individual, whereas marijuana use isn’t quite as recognizable. There are, however, certain physical characteristics that are associated with marijuana use that a trained officer may look for when conducting this type of investigation. Hiring a skilled California DUI attorney who knows how to effectively challenge this type of physical evidence is the best defense that the accused can employ.

Red eyes, the odor of marijuana on one’s person or emanating from one’s breath, an increased appetite and dry mouth are among the most common physical symptoms of marijuana use. Anyone familiar with the effects of marijuana may recognize these signs when trying to determine if another has been smoking or otherwise using this drug. In addition to these, there are other physical signs and symptoms that an officer will look for if he or she suspects that a driver may be under the influence of marijuana. If the officer has been qualified as a drug recognition expert (a.k.a. a DRE), he or she will look for more specific signs that may go unnoticed by an individual who hasn’t received training on the effects that marijuana has on one’s body.

In addition to those symptoms noted above, an individual who has used marijuana may also noticeably display debris of marijuana in his or her mouth, body tremors and eyelid tremors. He or she may appear to be relaxed (or in some cases just the opposite – paranoid and/or anxious), less inhibited, disoriented and/or may suffer from a lapse in short term memory and have difficulty judging time and distance.

If called to the scene, a DRE will ask a series of questions (designed to elicit incriminating statements) conduct a series of tests (some will be field sobriety tests – FSTs- that the investigating officer already conducted) and will make certain observations about the driver’s body. The DRE officer will observe the suspect’s eyes, checking for pupil size (use usually produces dilation) and horizontal gaze nystagmus and vertical nystagmus, neither of which should be present if marijuana was used. He or she will measure the suspect’s blood pressure and pulse, both of which would likely be elevated if the accused used marijuana. The officer will also look at the driver’s muscle tone, which would appear normal even if marijuana had been used.

Balance and coordination are also analyzed by the officer while the accused performs the field sobriety tests. When evaluating these “tests,” the officer is looking for anything indicative of use, which might be slower reaction time and a difficulty following directions. The attitude of the suspect is also closely examined.

Physical signs and symptoms of marijuana use are plentiful, but not always accurate. An experienced criminal defense lawyer who specializes in driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) knows that there are always conditions unrelated to drugs or alcohol that can legitimately explain the signs and symptoms that an officer may observe and link to impairment. Illness, fatigue, allergies and nerves can all affect one’s physical appearance and one’s balance and coordination. A good defense attorney will try to convince the judge and jury that the officer conducted a biased investigation, only gathering evidence that pointed to the driver’s guilt, dismissing any evidence that pointed to his or her innocence. In addition, a practiced attorney knows that the issue isn’t whether the accused used marijuana, but whether he or she was under its influence. It is the in-depth knowledge about these types of defenses and strategies that necessitates an attorney who focuses on California D.U.I. defense. The outstanding attorneys at The Kavinoky Law Firm do just that and have the results to prove it. They are dedicated to protecting their clients from the devastating penalties that are often imposed in connection with driving under the influence. Contact them today for a free consultation and for unsurpassed representation.

California Vehicle Code VC 13351 – Additional Required Revocations

California Vehicle Code VC 13351 – Additional Required Revocations

13351. (a) The department immediately shall revoke the privilege of any person to drive a motor vehicle upon receipt of a duly certified abstract of the record of any court showing that the person has been convicted of any of the following crimes or offenses:

  1. Manslaughter resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle, except when convicted under paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 192 of the Penal Code.
  2. Conviction of three or more violations of Section 20001, 20002, 23103, or 23104 within a period of 12 months from the time of the first offense to the third or subsequent offense, ora combination of three or more convictions of violations within the same period.
  3. Violation of Section 191.5 of the Penal Code or of Section 2800.3 causing serious bodily injury resulting in a serious impairment of physical condition, including, but not limited to, loss of consciousness, concussion, serious bone fracture, protracted loss or impairment of function of any bodily member or organ, and serious disfigurement.

(b) The department shall not reinstate the privilege revoked under subdivision (a) until the expiration of three years after the date of revocation and until the person whose privilege was revoked gives proof of financial responsibility, as defined in Section 16430.

Amended Ch. 656, Stats. 1991. Effective January 1, 1992.
Amended Ch. 974, Stats. 1992. Effective September 28, 1992.

» 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 13353.5 – Restoration of Driving Privilege: Nonresidents

California Vehicle Code VC 13353.5 – Restoration of Driving Privilege: Nonresidents

13353.5. (a) If a person whose driving privilege is suspended or revoked under Section 13352, former Section 13352.4, Section 13352.4, 13352.6, paragraph (1) of subdivision (g) of Section 23247, or paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 23575 is a resident of another state at the time the mandatory period of suspension or revocation expires, the department may terminate the suspension or revocation, upon written application of the person, for the purpose of allowing the person to apply for a license in his or her state of residence. The application shall include, but need not be limited to, evidence satisfactory to the department that the applicant now resides in another state.

(b) If the person submits an application for a California driver’s license within three years after the date of the action to terminate suspension or revocation pursuant to subdivision (a), a license shall not be issued until evidence satisfactory to the department establishes that the person is qualified for reinstatement and no grounds exist including, but not limited to, one or more subsequent convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs that would support a refusal to issue a license. The department may waive the three-year requirement if the person provides the department with proof of financial responsibility, as defined in Section 16430, and proof satisfactory to the department of successful completion of a driving-under-the-influence program described in Section 13352, and the driving-under-the-influence program is of the length required under paragraphs (1) to (7), inclusive, of subdivision (a) of Section 13352.

(c) For the purposes of this section, "state" includes a foreign province or country.

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

Amended Sec. 14, Ch. 545, Stats. 2002. Effective January 1, 2003.
Amended Sec. 9, Ch. 551, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005. Operative September 20, 2005.

» 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 13366 – Effective Date of Suspension or Revocation

California Vehicle Code VC 13366 – Effective Date of Suspension or Revocation

13366. Whenever in this code the department is required to suspend or revoke the privilege of a person to operate a motor vehicle upon the conviction of such person of violating this code, such suspension or revocation shall begin upon a plea, finding or verdict of guilty.

» 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 23566 – Penalty: Third or Subsequent Conviction Within Ten Years

California Vehicle Code VC 23566 – Penalty: Third or Subsequent Conviction Within Ten Years

23566. (a) If a person is convicted of a violation of Section 23153 and the offense occurred within 10 years of two or more separate violations of Section 23103, as specified in Section 23103.5, or Section 23152 or 23153, or any combination of these violations, that resulted in convictions, that person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of two, three, or four years and by a fine of not less than one thousand fifteen dollars ($1,015) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000). The person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be revoked by the Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to paragraph (6) 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) If a person is convicted of a violation of Section 23153, and the act or neglect proximately causes great bodily injury, as defined in Section 12022.7 of the Penal Code, to any person other than the driver, and the offense occurred within 10 years of two or more separate violations of Section 23103, as specified in Section 23103.5, or Section 23152 or 23153, or any combination of these violations, that resulted in convictions, that person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of two, three, or four years and by a fine of not less than one thousand fifteen dollars ($1,015) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000). The person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be revoked by the Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to paragraph (6) 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.

(c) If a person is convicted under subdivision (b), and the offense for which the person is convicted occurred within 10 years of four or more separate violations of Section 23103, as specified in Section 23103.5, or Section 23152 or 23153, or any combination of these violations, that resulted in convictions, that person shall, in addition and consecutive to the sentences imposed under subdivision (b), be punished by an additional term of imprisonment in the state prison for three years.

The enhancement allegation provided in this subdivision shall be pleaded and proved as provided by law.

(d) A person convicted of Section 23153 punishable under this section shall be designated as a habitual traffic offender for a period of three years, subsequent to the conviction. The person shall be advised of this designation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 13350.

(e) A person confined in state prison under this section shall be ordered by the court to participate in an alcohol or drug program, or both, that is available at the prison during the person’s confinement. Completion of an alcohol or drug program under this section does not meet the program completion requirement of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 13352, unless the drug or alcohol program is licensed under Section 11836 of the Health and Safety Code, or is a program specified in Section 8001 of the Penal Code.

Added Sec. 84, Ch. 118, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 36, Ch. 22, Stats. 1999. Effective May 26, 1999. Operative July 1 1999.
Amended Sec. 32, Ch. 545, Stats. 2002. Effective January 1, 2003.
Amended Sec. 17, Ch. 550, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005.

» 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 23610 – Blood-Alcohol Level: Presumptions Affecting Burden of Proof

California Vehicle Code VC 23610 – Blood-Alcohol Level: Presumptions Affecting Burden of Proof

23610. (a) Upon the trial of any criminal action, or preliminary proceeding in a criminal action, arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by any person while driving a vehicle while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage in violation of subdivision (a) of Section 23152 or subdivision (a) of Section 23153, the amount of alcohol in the person’s blood at the time of the test as shown by chemical analysis of that person’s blood, breath, or urine shall give rise to the following presumptions affecting the burden of proof:

  1. If there was at that time less than 0.05 percent, by weight, of alcohol in the person’s blood, it shall be presumed that the person was not under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time of the alleged offense.
  2. If there was at that time 0.05 percent or more but less than 0.08 percent, by weight, of alcohol in the person’s blood, that fact shall not give rise to any presumption that the person was or was not under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, but the fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether the person was under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time of the alleged offense.
  3. If there was at that time 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in the person’s blood, it shall be presumed that the person was under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time of the alleged offense.

(b) Percent, by weight, of alcohol in the person’s blood shall be based upon grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood or grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.

(c) This section shall not be construed as limiting the introduction of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question of whether the person ingested any alcoholic beverage or was under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time of the alleged offense.

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

» 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 23562 – Conditions of Probation: Second Offense Within Ten Years

California Vehicle Code VC 23562 – Conditions of Probation: Second Offense Within Ten Years

23562. If the court grants probation to a person punished under Section 23560, 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 subject to either subdivision (a) or (b), as follows:

  1. Be confined in the county jail for at least 120 days and pay a fine of at least three hundred ninety dollars ($390), but not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000). The person’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be revoked by the department under paragraph (4) 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.
  2. All of the following apply:
    1. Be confined in the county jail for at least 30 days, but not more than one year.
    2. Pay a fine of at least three hundred ninety dollars ($390), but not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000)
    3. The privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be revoked by the department under paragraph (4) 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
    4. Either of the following:
      1. Enroll and participate, for at least 18 months subsequent to the date of the underlying violation 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, if available in the county of the person’s residence or employment, 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. 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.
      2. Enroll and participate, for at least 30 months subsequent to the date of the underlying violation 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, if available in the county of the person’s residence or employment. 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.
  3. The court shall advise the person at the time of sentencing that the driving privilege shall not be restored until the person has provided 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.
  4. This section shall become operative on September 20, 2005.

Amended Sec. 4, Ch. 493, Stats. 1997. Effective January 1, 1998.
Amended Sec. 15, Ch. 756, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999. Supersedes Ch. 118.
Amended and renumbered from 23186 Sec. 22, Ch. 22, Stats. 1999. Effective May 26, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 31, Ch. 545, Stats. 2002. Effective January 1, 2003.
Amended Sec. 22, Ch. 551, Stats. 2004. Effective January 1, 2005. Operative September 20, 2005.

» 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 23249 – Study and Report to the Legislature

California Vehicle Code VC 23249 – Study and Report to the Legislature

23249. The Department of Motor Vehicles shall conduct two studies to evaluate the effectiveness of ignition interlock in California and shall report the findings to the Legislature, as specified in subdivisions (a) and (b).

(a) The department shall conduct a process study of ignition interlock in California and report the findings to the Legislature on or before July 1, 2002. This study shall examine the implementation of ignition interlock by the courts, the department and ignition interlock installers, and report the rate at which courts assign interlock to persons convicted of a violation of Section 14601.2 and the rate at which these persons install these devices.

(b) The department shall conduct an outcome study of ignition interlock in California and report the findings to the Legislature on or before July 1, 2004. This study shall examine the effectiveness of California’s ignition interlock laws in reducing recidivism, moving violation convictions and crashes among drivers ordered by the court to install interlock devices, and among drivers applying to the department, and receiving from it, an ignition interlock restricted license.

(c) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2005, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2005, deletes or extends that date.

Added Sec. 24, Ch. 756, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Operative July 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 22, Ch. 473, Stats. 2001. Effective January 1, 2002.
Amended Sec. 17, Ch. 545, Stats. 2002. Effective January 1, 2003.
Amended Sec. 28, Ch. 468, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.

NOTE: The preceding section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2005, and as of that date is repealed.

» 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.