Articles Posted in News, Prevention, & Studies

The COVID-19 pandemic has, to varying degrees, affected the entire world. All but the most essential businesses and government services were ordered to shut down. And while things started to re-open a few months ago, the recent surge in cases in California and across the country has resulted in many businesses and government organizations shutting back down.

Of course, while these closures impact everyone, few people are more unfairly affected by these closures than those facing criminal charges.  People, who remain innocent until proven guilty, have cases hanging over their heads or, worse yet, remain incarcerated as they wait for their cases to be heard.

In terms of the San Diego Superior Court, the court was closed on March 17, 2020, and remained closed for all but a very select few matters until May 26, 2020, when the court began its reopening process. The court then heard a few trials; however, the court shut back down in the fall due to a surge in cases. Currently, the San Diego Superior Court is conducting most types of hearings, especially for those facing serious criminal charges. However, most business is being conducted remotely, and the court will continue to rely on virtual hearings for the foreseeable future.

As you are aware, the nation is struggling with the corona virus pandemic, and our state courts and other institutions are also reeling. The information I’m about to provide is literally changing by the minute, so I will continue to post updates as needed.

As of today, many counties in California have totally closed the courts with the exception of essential services. The San Diego Court procedures are changing by the minute. Most out of custody criminal matters will either be rescheduled for a date certain or a new procedure will be posted on how to reschedule.

If you are scheduled for a DUI program, MADD class, Public Service Program, or are attending AA’s, or are currently wearing or using an alcohol monitoring device, please call the appropriate places to inquire about the current state of their program. Many are closed or have limited service. If this makes you out of compliance with a court order, I recommend you document your attempts to do what was ordered. As of now, there is no way to address the non-compliance; however, in the future you will have to appear in court to explain this to the judge. Therefore, your documentation will be necessary. Continue reading ›

Uber, a rideshare program that has been in operation for over 6 years, gives riders an option to get around town without using the bus, a taxi, a bike or walking. Over the past couple of years, their program has greatly cut fares and in many cities they now also offer UberPool, where a rider can share a car with others to save even more.

Uber often argues that their app helps combat drunk driving incidents because riders are choosing to use their rideshare program over driving their own cars during times when they expect to consume alcohol. However, a recent study in the American Journal of Epidemiology found no noticeable impact on the number of drunk driving fatalities in cities where Uber operates. “We found that the deployment of Uber services in a given metropolitan county had no association with the number of subsequent traffic fatalities, whether measured in aggregate or specific to drunk-driving fatalities or fatalities during weekends and holidays.”

It is estimated that there are 121 million drunk driving incident s in the United States, resulting in 10,000 fatalities yearly. However, this study is limited to fatalities, not the number of potential DUI drivers who are using Uber as a transportation alternative, thus avoiding a drunk driving citation, or worst, a traffic accident with potential injuries and deaths. Continue reading ›

In San Diego County, or anywhere in California, if you are arrested for drunk driving, two processes automatically begin.  One is the court process which is handled through the criminal court system and involves criminal charges and penalties.  The other is the administrative process that is handled through the Department of Motor Vehicles, DMV, and involves the suspension of your driving privileges.  [Note: Although the DMV has a separate action regarding your driving privilege, the court may also suspend your privilege to drive if you plead guilty or you are found guilty after a trial of driving under the influence or alcohol, drugs, or a combination of alcohol and drugs.]

For many people, the worst and most inconvenient penalty in a DUI case is the inability to drive.  And, if you do not challenge the suspension by requesting a hearing with the DMV within 10 of the arrest date, the DMV will  automatically suspend your driver’s license for four months, or for one month with an additional five months with a restricted driver’s license, allowing you to drive to/from and during the course of your employment and to/from any DUI programs.

The DMV APS Hearings, as they are called, are not held to the court standard of beyond a reasonable doubt.  The standard applied in administrative proceedings is by the preponderance of the evidence.  Because of this low burden on the DMV, and the fact that the hearing officer is in essence the prosecutor and the judge, and they do not even have to be lawyers, it is rare to get the DMV to set aside the suspension.

I was very sad to see recently a San Diego Hearing Officer, Alva Benavidez, plead guilty in federal court to conspiracy to accept brides.  From what was reported, some criminal defense attorneys decided since they have an uphill battle to win these cases, they would resort to bribing the hearing officer.  Continue reading ›

Out on the town and you had a couple of drinks. Knowing San Diego’s drunk driving laws, you decide it’s best not to drive home and chance getting a DUI.  You ask yourself, “How am I going to get home?”  You can take the trolley or the bus; however, while these options are economical, their schedules are limited and they only travel to certain parts of the county.  And, it can take 1 1/2 hours to get somewhere by bus when it would only take 10-20 minutes by car.

So the next option is a taxi, but they are very expensive, making it unaffordable for many. In addition, money is exchanged between the driver and rider making it a less safe option.  And, if you are not in an area where taxis are driving by, you are forced to call for a cab and often they do not show up.

The best third party transportation option San Diego has is the rideshare companies, including Lyft, Uber, and Sidecar.  They are easy, safe, efficient, and economical for riders and they employ many people in our community.

In order to use one of the services, just download their app onto your smartphone, enter your credit card number for billing purposes, and then in their app hit request a car.  The driver uses their personal car to pick you up and transport you to your destination.  Your credit card is automatically billed and the rates are up to 40% less than a taxi fare. Continue reading ›

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) announced its decision in both Riley v. California, a San Diego case, and United States v. Wurie, a Massachusetts case, that addressed the issue of whether law enforcement can search a person’s smart phone after a lawful arrest. [The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman previously wrote a blog article about the Riley case, see background case information in “Can Cops Search Your Cell Phone Without A Warrant?“]
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution specifically states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Unless one of the exceptions to the warrant requirement is met, law enforcement must obtain a search warrant for any search to be legal. One such exception is a search incident to a lawful arrest. But, does this exception extend to cell phones, which are now basically pocket computers that store a lot of information including a person’s contacts, photos, videos, internet searches and history, and other personal information?

The court cited three precedent cases that addressed the warrant requirement for searches incident to a lawful arrest, Chimel v. California, United States v. Robinson, and United States v. Chadwick.

Continue reading ›