ca dui laws??

Question

okay lets say you get pulled over for a possible dui and you ask to go to the hospital to get a blood test then you get a ticket (never go to jail) then the dmv calls you and tells you your licence is going to be suspended but you havnt been convicted of anything by any court. does the right to a quick and speedy trial apply? so basically if you dont get a trial set in 45 days does that mean that your chances of a dismissal are good... thanks ohh and i dont drink (thank God) so save the dont drink and drive comments

Answer 1

Agree with Mikeysco. In California, and in most states, DMV can (and does) take action against you regardless of any criminal proceedings. It's considered a civil matter between you and the DMV. You can request a hearing with the DMV (you usually only have about 10 calendar NOT business days to do so, so definitely get on it!), though they may charge a fee for that (depending on the state - in CA it's about $125). In that hearing, they'll review the evidence against you and you get to try and defend yourself. If you weren't convicted / no charges have been filed, and the blood test comes back low, there's a good chance you could get off, but it's not easy. There are two reasons why:

1. The DMV hearing is a teleconference conducted by a DMV rep who acts as the "judge" and also as the prosecuter. They admit their own agency's evidence against you into the proceeding and then decide if it's good evidence, which is just insane but it is what it is.

2. Civil matters are determine by a "proponderence of the evidence" instead of the more rigorous "by a reasonable doubt" (the criminal version). That means that they just have to decide that you were more likely to have been driving drunk than not (i.e. 51% chance you did it) which is really easy to do. If a blood test came back with any decent amount of alcohol in your system, there's almost nothing you can do - blood tests are the most reliable test to determine alcohol concentration so there's no room for questions about reliability (unlike breath tests which are known to be somewhat unreliable). And DMV can take your license for less than whatever the "legal limit" is (typically .08%). Meaning, if you had .05% or so, they can still take your license. Of course, a criminal court can do the same thing - they usually will try to charge you with a "wet reckless" instead of a DUI if it's below .08% but they will often try to charge you with a crime regardless, so the whole legal limit thing is a misnomer at best.

One thing is for sure, if you get pulled over with any measurable amount of alcohol in your system, you run the risk of both a civil / DMV legal case and a criminal case against you. It's the only situation where you get effectively prosecuted twice and the two cases (civil and criminal) have nothing to do with each other, so if one finds you innocent, it does not mean that the other will.

If you're really in this situation, I wish you luck because it's very messy.
Cheers!

Answer 2

Mikeysco and Avalon are both correct, and I post only to urge you NOT to delay in requesting the DMV hearing, and, if possible, to hire an attorney experienced in DMV hearings. I don't do them, but I have read questions and comments from those who do, and it is a complicated process. Unfortunately, you are not entitled to have appointed counsel before the DMV. If you really don't drink, and the blood test will show it, you do not want your license to be suspended unnecessarily.

Answer 3

Verifying criminal record database can really helps to find your required data online. It wont takes more than a few seconds to show any record you need. Moreover its an easy way to find out if someone has a criminal record.

Reports key features includes :
Arrest & convictions
Felonies & misdemeanor
Sex offenders
Mug shots
Criminal driving infractions
Court and probation records
And lot more.

Visit Here : http://CriminalRecords.InfoSearchDetective.com

100% Confidential & Super Fast Results!

Answer 4

definite.Judges could be greater durable on repeat offenders.i think of there could be greater durable effects for FIRST time offenders.in step with risk then one might think of two times and annoying approximately committing a 2nd or third offense.i'm no longer proud in any respect to admit that i've got racked up six D.U.I.s interior the thirty six years i've got been utilising.My first one replaced into in '87.My final in '05.In all,it relatively is value me greater advantageous than $seventy 5,000.00 in fines and restitution,a marriage,2 properties and in basic terms approximately 4 years of freedom in six diverse jurusdictions. i understand that if i might have won a harsher penalty for my first one and greater practise i might have seen replace potential of transportation. I even have yet to get in the back of the wheel on the grounds that my final offense.usually using fact DMV says i can't(till I complete an 18 month tutorial direction) and partly using fact I,ve grown up and found out that i do in contrast to prison.and that i additionally understand that it relatively is in basic terms incorrect to drink and force.i'm relatively happy that I in no way brought about anybody any harm. definite! Judges could be greater durable on repeat D.U.I. offenders!

Answer 5

if you like to clear your DUI record look here .. http://sratim.duiprocess.hop.clickbank.net/ your story sound like you had bad lack body.