Arrested for DUI in Los Angeles? I have spent over 40 years crafting creative strategies to defend my clients in court.
These strategies can work very well (many other Los Angeles DUI attorneys access my site to get more info on how to use these for their clients).
Here is a summary of three of my creative strategies that I use keep people charged with DUI in Los Angeles out of jail, or to win at trial, or to convince prosecution to reduce charges.
Exclude P.A.S. Test Results
This motion excludes the Preliminary Alcohol Screening (P.A.S.) test results based on the prosecution not being able to prove that the results are accurate and reliable.
The PAS test was approved by the legislature only as a screening test for the presence of alcohol as a field sobriety test to help the officer determine reasonable cause to arrest, not as an accurate measurement of blood alcohol levels. Appellate courts have allowed the results into evidence if a foundation of accuracy is demonstrated.
In order to admit the results, the proponent must demonstrate by expert testimony that the scientific community opines that the results are accurate and reliable. The proponent must demonstrate by a qualified expert that the particular apparatus was in proper working order, the test was properly administered, and that the operator was competent and qualified. A failure to establish a foundation of all three elements means there is a failure of accuracy and reliability and the test results are inadmissible.
Exclude Trombetta Advisement and Response by Defendant
This motion states that the defendant is under no statutory or other legal duty to take any additional tests beyond the initial breath test that was given to measure blood alcohol content. He/she is only required to take a chemical test as required by V. C. §23612(a).
If the defendant declines additional searches, the DUI attorney representing him/her can request an order instructing the Prosecution and its witnesses to abstain from any reference and/or evidence that relates to these additional searches.
In fact, it would violate Due Process if the defendant were punished by evidence from secondary tests if the officer failed to inform the Defendant that his/her election to not submit to another chemical test would be utilized as evidence against him/her at his/her trial.
Exclude Evidence of Preservative in Blood Vial Due to Right of Confrontation
This motion states that the Court should exclude any testimony regarding the alleged amount of preservative and anti-coagulant in the vial unless the prosecutor presents a witness that can be cross-examined on how the materials were measured and whether proper procedures were followed in making the substances.
This motion also states that the Court should not allow the blood test results into evidence unless the people can lay a proper foundation, i.e., that proper and necessary procedures were followed so that the blood test result is accurate. If there is insufficient proof of the proper amount of preservative and anti-coagulant in the vial, the foundation that the blood test is accurate is missing. If there is insufficient proof of accuracy, the test result is not admissible.
If you’ve been arrested for DUI in Los Angeles and want to discuss your case, give me a call at 310-820-1315. Otherwise, contact me by filling out this form and I will get back to you as soon as possible.