Superior Court Of California, County of Orange

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.

Orange County Superior Court – Central Justice Center (CJC)
700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701

Central Justice Center Annex
909 N. Main, Santa Ana, CA 92701

Complex Civil Center (CXC)
751 West Santa Ana Blvd., Santa Ana, CA 92701

Lamoreaux Justice Center (LJC)
341 The City Drive, Orange, CA 92868-3209

Harbor Justice Center (HJC/LH)
Laguna Hills Facility
4601 Jamboree Road, Newport Beach, CA 92660-2595

North Justice Center (NJC)
1275 North Berkeley Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92832-1258

West Justice Center (WJC)
8141 13th Street, Westminster, CA 92683-4593

» Orange 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

Superior Court Of California, County of Tulare

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.

Tulare County Superior Court
425 East Kern, Tulare, CA 93274

Visalia Courthouse
County Civic Center
221 Mooney Blvd., Visalia, CA 93291

Porterville Courthouse
87 East Morton, Porterville, CA 93257

Dinuba Courthouse
640 S. Alta Avenue, Dinuba, CA 93618

» Tulare 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

Motion for Blood/Urine Sample to be Split

The experienced California DUI lawyers at The Kavinoky Law Firm perform a great deal of work before a drunk driving defense case ever goes to trial. A skilled California DUI lawyer typically makes one or more pretrial motions at the driver’s arraignment or at a later date. One motion common in a driving while intoxicated case is a request to have a pretrial motion for a blood or urine sample split so that it can be tested by an independent forensic expert.

Individuals arrested for drunk driving or driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) must be told of their right to have a blood or urine sample preserved for independent testing. This is especially important when a driver submits to a breath test to determine blood alcohol content (BAC), because when a breath test is taken, there is no independent sample retained for later retesting.

A chemical test is a significant piece of evidence used against the defendant. The prosecution will attempt to use a chemical test result of .08 percent BAC or greater – the legal limit for driving in all 50 states – to prove a defendant is guilty of driving while intoxicated. However, many chemical tests are administered hours after the driver was last behind the wheel. Remember, it’s not illegal to have a BAC of .08 percent at the police station, only while driving a vehicle. An independent defense expert may be able to establish that the driver’s BAC at the time of driving was below the legal limit.

When the split is obtained, it will be sent to a private, independent forensic lab for testing. Law-enforcement agencies are required to collect a sufficient amount in order to allow future tests. Testing will analyze not only the blood alcohol content of the sample, but will also determine whether proper testing protocol was followed.

Police must follow strict guidelines when conducting chemical tests. Blood samples should be drawn using sterile, dry hypodermic needles and syringes, or using clean, dry vacuum type containers with sterile needles. No alcohol can be used to clean the skin or the equipment used in the collection. The blood must be mixed with a precise mixture of anticoagulant and preservative. If the levels of the anticoagulant and preservative are not correct, the test results can be skewed. For example, if the blood sample becomes fermented, it will produce falsely high BAC readings.

In some cases during a DUI investigation, the driver’s blood or urine sample is lost or destroyed. While the prosecution has no legal duty to collect evidence that might be beneficial to the defense, they do have an obligation to preserve this possibly exculpatory evidence – evidence that may point to the defendant’s innocence. If the prosecution neglected to preserve such evidence, a savvy California DUI lawyer will ask the court to issue sanctions that may result in suppression of the evidence or the dismissal of the case.

If the prosecution doesn’t comply with a court order to split a blood or urine sample for independent analysis, the defense can ask for sanctions against the prosecutor, and the evidence the prosecutor would have used to convict the defendant may be excluded. If police have failed to preserve a sample, then this will be the basis not only for exclusion, but possible dismissal of the charges.

However, in order for sanctions to be levied, the defense must prove that the prosecutor or police acted in bad faith. If bad faith cannot be established, then the defendant is entitled to relief only on a showing that the evidence was material and exculpatory.

Drivers accused of DUI / DWI often believe that a chemical test result that places them over the legal limit for driving means an automatic conviction, but that’s not necessarily true. A California DUI Lawyer who focuses on driving under the influence cases will file a motion to have any sample split and sent to an independent laboratory to determine whether the driver’s BAC result can be challenged.

The point of the field sobriety test is to test for a person’s physical and mental impairment. This is known as a Divided Attention Test. Essentially, the test is set up to test whether one is mentally capable of following the directions that are given by the police officer and whether the individual is capable of physically carrying out those instructions.

For example, if the officer instructs the motorist to take ten steps forward and then do a 180-degree turn to the right, the officer is not simply testing whether a person can walk and turn without tripping, but whether the person also has the presence of mind to walk exactly ten steps, and whether that person turns to the right as they were told. A person who forgets the directions given by the officer may be considered mentally impaired by the officer on the basis that they can’t follow simple directions.

The prosecution will try to make any failure to listen to directions or any failure to carry out the directions without stumbling, tripping, or falling as signs that a person was under the influence. A skilled DUI / DWI defense attorney will be able to make sense of those failures and paint them as normal actions having nothing to do with being intoxicated. Perhaps a person has poor hearing or inherently bad balance which can account for any problems during a field sobriety test.

Once again, in California there is the per se law that says that anyone with a blood alcohol content of .08 percent or greater is considered, by law, too drunk to drive, and there is the second law which states that it is illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol. It is in this case that the prosecution will seek to use the field sobriety test as circumstantial evidence of a person’s intoxication.

One should bear in mind that although police use the field sobriety tests to gather evidence against a motorist suspected of drunk driving, in California, the field sobriety tests are optional even though most police officers won’t tell that to a suspect.

While the field sobriety test is used to determine both the motorist’s physical and mental impairment, it should be remembered that experts on both sides of the law agree that mental impairment will always precede physical impairment. Physical impairments are not necessarily rooted in mental impairments. Fragile bones or an old soccer injury can cause just as much, if not more, physical impairment than alcohol.

Other factors that may result in physical impairment can be drowsiness, nervousness, or perhaps the threat of going to jail for the night. It is the job of a qualified DUI / DWI Defense lawyer to do a thorough investigation into clients’ histories to determine if any of the above factors may have been the cause of physical impairment instead of alcohol.

Furthermore, a person with a high tolerance for alcohol, though they might be mentally impaired, may be able to disguise that impairment by carrying out the physical part of the field sobriety tests without any problems. Disguising mental symptoms of impairment is not as simple, or even possible.

In performing field sobriety tests for DUI / DWI cases, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has “validated” three tests in particular. These tests are the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test, the Walk-and-Turn Test, and the One-Leg-Stand Test. These tests have standard instructions for the motorist to follow and they have standard scoring for the police officer to use in the evaluation of the motorist’s performance.

There are other non-standardized tests that may also be used by the police. They are, the finger-to-nose test, reciting the alphabet, the finger tap test, the hand pat test, and the Rhomberg balance test, among other things a police officer may use to determine a motorist’s impairment.

At the end of the day, no matter how a driver being prosecuted for a DUI / DWI feels he or she performed on a field sobriety test, a drunk-driving defense attorney with years of experience can use the results of the tests to demonstrate that any physical impairment came from sources other than alcohol.

Police in California sometimes use sobriety checkpoints – temporary roadblocks on public streets or roadways designed to snare drunk drivers. Over the years, courts have established strict protocol to govern the operation of sobriety checkpoints – guidelines that police don’t always follow. The experienced DUI / DWI defense lawyers at The Kavinoky Law Firm are well-versed in the requirements of sobriety checkpoints and can determine whether a drunk driving arrest made at a Sobriety Checkpoint was valid.

Many of the requirements governing sobriety checkpoints were created by the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Michigan Department of State Police vs. Sitz. The Court’s ruling attempts to balance the rights of drivers against the interests of society in keeping impaired drivers off the road.

Police must select vehicles using a neutral mathematical formula, and the checkpoints must be maintained safely for both police and motorists, have high visibility, and minimize the average time each motorist is detained.

Each driver should be stopped only long enough for an officer to ask a few brief questions and to look for signs of intoxication, such as alcohol on the breath, slurred speech, and glassy or bloodshot eyes. If the driver shows no signs of impairment, he or she should be permitted to drive away without delay. If the officer does spot signs of intoxication, the driver can be sent to a separate area for a field sobriety test. At that point, further investigation must be based on probable cause, and general principles of detention and arrest would apply.

The sobriety roadblock should be part of an ongoing safe-driving program, and must conform to an established departmental policy. A supervising judge and a representative of the district attorney’s office should participate in the planning. The checkpoint’s supervising officers must be well-versed in the safety and civil rights issues surrounding such an operation. The roadblock should be announced to the public in advance through the media.

The Supreme Court deemed that the main purpose of a sobriety checkpoint is not to discover evidence, crimes or to arrest drunk drivers, but to promote public safety by deterring drunk drivers from endangering the public. Thus, a sobriety checkpoint roadblock serves a regulatory purpose and is not considered a criminal investigation roadblock, and no warrant is required.

The Supreme Court has held that stopping a vehicle at a sobriety checkpoint constitutes a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. A Fourth Amendment seizure occurs “when there is a governmental termination of freedom of movement through means intentionally applied.”

The key question when considering a Fourth Amendment seizure is reasonableness. The courts have ruled that not all roadblocks violate a motorist’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizures. In order to determine whether there has been a Fourth Amendment violation, courts apply a balancing test which weighs the government’s interests against the intrusiveness of the detention on the individual.

An experienced California DUI / DWI lawyer will evaluate every aspect of the checkpoint to determine whether it meets the guidelines established by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the checkpoint was not operated according to that protocol, a skilled attorney such as those at The Kavinoky Law Firm will argue that any evidence gathered during the stop was improperly obtained, and should be suppressed.

Drivers convicted of DUI / DWI face serious consequences, including fines, jail, and license suspensions. However, courts have begun to acknowledge that it is useless to punish drunk drivers without addressing underlying problems with alcohol, and sentencing alternatives have become available. An experienced California DUI / DWI attorney from the Kavinoky Law Firm can determine whether a particular case meets the requirements for alternative sentencing.

These alternatives are offered with the goal of helping, not punishing, the DUI driver. One such alternative is mandatory attendance at Alcoholics Anonymous, or AA meetings.

Attendance at AA meetings is usually required as a condition of probation. The court determines how many meetings a driver must attend during a certain period of time, and the meetings are recorded on a “court card” that must be signed by the meeting secretary. If the driver fails to attend the prescribed number of meetings, the terms of probation are violated, and the driver likely will go to jail.

AA meetings take place in nearly every community during weekdays, evenings, and on weekends. To locate a meeting, look up the “AA Central Office” in any phone directory, or log on to www.aa.org. There is no cost to attend meetings, and DUI offenders likely will meet other individuals who understand and relate to the problems they are experiencing.

Alcoholics Anonymous describes itself as a fellowship of men and women who share their experience, strength and hope with each other that they may solve their common problem and help others to recover from alcoholism.

To help individuals discover whether they have a problem with alcohol, AA has produced the following questionnaire. Anyone who answers yes to four or more questions may have a problem with alcohol.

1. Have you ever decided to stop drinking for a week or so, but only lasted for a couple of days?
2. Do you wish people would mind their own business about your drinking– stop telling you what to do?
3. Have you ever switched from one kind of drink to another in the hope that this would keep you from getting drunk?
4. Have you had to have an eye-opener upon awakening during the past year?
5. Do you envy people who can drink without getting into trouble?
6. Have you had problems connected with drinking during the past year?
7. Has your drinking caused trouble at home?
8. Do you ever try to get “extra” drinks at a party because you do not get enough?
9. Do you tell yourself you can stop drinking any time you want to, even though you keep getting drunk when you don’t mean to?
10. Have you missed days of work or school because of drinking?
11. Do you have “blackouts”?
12. Have you ever felt that your life would be better if you did not drink?

An estimated 13 million Americans suffer from substance abuse problems, but help is available to those who seek it. Alcoholics Anonymous has helped more than 2 million problem drinkers live sober lives.

California Marijuana Laws – Driving patterns associated with marijuana impairment

Driving under the influence of marijuana is illegal – period. However, it is often difficult for an officer to specifically detect marijuana as being the reason why one is driving in a particular manner. Unlike alcohol, marijuana use, by itself, rarely invites specific driving patterns that are noticeable and, as a result, committing any traffic violation could ultimately lead to a driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) investigation. When charged with driving under the influence of drugs, it is vital that the accused hires an experienced criminal defense lawyer who understands exactly how marijuana affects the body and driving so that he or she can successfully defend the accused.

Marijuana, quite frankly, isn’t believed to be nearly as harmful as alcohol when it comes to its effects on driving. If mixed with other drugs or alcohol, or consumed in very high quantities, the risks to oneself and other drivers increase. However, most studies that have been conducted reveal that marijuana doesn’t truly impair driving and that drivers who have used marijuana are no more likely to be at fault in fatal or non-fatal accidents than drug-free drivers. In fact, it has been reported that some drivers may be able to improve their driving performance by overcompensating for self-perceived impairment.

Nonetheless, there is also a belief that marijuana impairs balance and coordination, both of which are believed to be necessary in order to safely drive a car. Law enforcement studies reveal that marijuana use may lead to impaired performance on driving simulator tasks, both on open and closed driving courses, a decrease in one’s ability to handle his or her car, slower reaction times and a possible inability to correctly estimate time and distance. As a result, individuals who are unable to maintain a consistent distance between their car and other cars or who appear to be falling asleep may raise suspicions of driving under the influence – but to say that those symptoms are necessarily marijuana related would simply be a guess, as they could also be the result of impairment due to any drug or could be the result of fatigue, illness, distraction or any number of other legitimate conditions.

If ultimately arrested for driving under the influence of “drugs” (an officer is not required to state what drug he or she is arresting the driver for using, unless the officer is a DRE – a drug recognition expert) and marijuana is detected by a chemical test after the fact, it is very likely that the officer’s testimony at trial will include information about how the driver displayed slower reaction times, impairment in his or her motor coordination and a lack of vigilance, all things that would have had an effect on his or her driving.

Driving under the influence of marijuana will more often than not only be suspected once alcohol is ruled out as an impairing factor. Physical signs and symptoms will be observed, field sobriety tests (FSTs) will be administered and, in an effort to justify the stop, the officer will determine that the individual had been driving drunk. Once a preliminary alcohol screening (PAS) device – an on-site breath test –reveals that alcohol is not an issue, the officer may call upon a DRE to do a drug investigation or may simply choose to arrest the driver for D.U.I.D. Either way, “driving patterns consistent with marijuana use” will only be addressed when the officer looks back on why he or she stopped the driver and tries to convince the judge and jury that it was because the driver displayed driving that displayed signs of impairment. The savvy criminal attorney knows, however, that he or she can challenge this testimony, as there truly are no driving patterns associated with this particular drug.

The unsurpassed attorneys at The Kavinoky Law Firm specialize in driving under the influence of marijuana cases and have mastered the defenses that are most successful in helping their clients charged with this offense receive favorable results. To learn more, contact these outstanding lawyers today for a free consultation.

Alcohol Education Programs in El Dorado County, California

In California, there are several levels of Alcohol Education Programs that are offered. In order to enroll in one of the programs, one must be referred, either by the court or the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

BEWARE: Completing an alcohol program may not satisfy the DMV. That is just one reason why it is critical that you consult with a California criminal defense lawyer that concentrates on DUI defense.

Driving Under the Influence programs in El Dorado County, California:

Sierra Recovery Center
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
972 B Tallac Avenue,
S. Lake Tahoe, California 96150
Phone: 530-541-5190; Fax: 530-541-6031

EDCA Lifeskills
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
893 Spring Street,
Placerville, California 95667
Phone: 530-622-8193; Fax: 530-622-4017

EDCA Lifeskills
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
6065 Highway 193,
Georgetown, California 95634
Phone: 530-622-8193

» Return to Driving Under the Influence program in California, directory of service providers

Note: This list is provided for convenience and informational purposes only. We do not recommend or endorse any specific Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program.

Alcohol Education Programs in Monterey County, California

In California, there are several levels of Alcohol Education Programs that are offered. In order to enroll in one of the programs, one must be referred, either by the court or the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

BEWARE: Completing an alcohol program may not satisfy the DMV. That is just one reason why it is critical that you consult with a California criminal defense lawyer that concentrates on DUI defense.

Driving Under the Influence programs in Monterey County, California:

Sun Street Centers
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
11 Peach Drive,
Salinas, California 93901
Phone: 831-753-5140; Fax: 831-753-5163

» Return to Driving Under the Influence program in California, directory of service providers

Note: This list is provided for convenience and informational purposes only. We do not recommend or endorse any specific Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program.

Alcohol Education Programs in Santa Clara County, California

In California, there are several levels of Alcohol Education Programs that are offered. In order to enroll in one of the programs, one must be referred, either by the court or the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

BEWARE: Completing an alcohol program may not satisfy the DMV. That is just one reason why it is critical that you consult with a California criminal defense lawyer that concentrates on DUI defense.

Driving Under the Influence programs in Santa Clara County, California:

Alert Driving, Inc.
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
1900 Camden Avenue,
Suite 205,
San Jose, California 95124
Phone: 408-879-7581; Fax: 408-879-7587

National Traffic Safety Institute
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
275 North 4th Street,
2nd Floor,
San Jose, California 95112
Phone: 408-297-8566; Fax: 408-297-3541

Asian Americans for Community Involvement
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
2400 Moorpark Avenue,
Suite 300,
San Jose, California 95128
Phone: 408-975-2730; Fax: 408-975-2745

Community Solutions
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
6980 Chestnut Street,
Gilroy, California 95020
Phone: 408-842-7138; Fax: 408-842-0757

Proyecto Primavera DDP
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
160 East Virginia Street,
Suite 266,
San Jose, California 95112
Phone: 408-977-1594

Occupational Health Services, Inc.
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
465 Fairchild Drive,
Building B, Suite 210,
Mountain View, California 94043
Phone: 650-988-4825; Fax: 650-988-0175

» Return to Driving Under the Influence program in California, directory of service providers

Note: This list is provided for convenience and informational purposes only. We do not recommend or endorse any specific Alcohol or Drug Risk Reduction Program.