Superior Court Of California, County of Glenn

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.

Glenn County Superior Court
Willows Branch – Main Courthouse
526 West Sycamore Street, Willows, CA 95988

Orland Branch
821 E. South Street, Orland, CA 95963

» Glenn 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 Placer

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.

Placer County Superior Court – Central Justice Center (CJC)
101 Maple Street, Auburn, CA 95603

Criminal Division
11532 B Avenue, Auburn, CA 95603

Superior Court – Roseville
300 Taylor Street, Roseville, CA 95678

Superior Court – Tahoe
2501 North Lake Blvd,. Tahoe City, CA 96145

» Placer 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 Tuolumne

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.

Tuolumne County Superior Court
Historic Courthouse
41 West Yaney Street, Sonora, CA 95370

Branch Courthouse
60 North Washington Street, Sonora, CA 95370

» Tuolumne 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 Supplemental Discovery

The process of gaining access to the prosecution’s evidence, known as discovery, is a critical aspect of drunk driving defense. An experienced California DUI lawyer from The Kavinoky Law Firm will seek access to every piece of evidence that may help a motorist accused of driving under the influence fight the charges. This is accomplished by filing a pretrial motion for supplemental discovery.

Motion for supplemental discovery is based on the notion that the defendant is entitled to receive all the information that will be used by prosecutors in their attempt to convict. Discovery has many purposes in a court case – it is designed to promote truth, save the court’s time, and to prevent an ambush at trial.

Certain evidence is turned over to the defense without a motion for supplemental discovery. The evidence that is typically turned over to the defense without a motion might include the names and addresses of prosecution witnesses, any statements made by the defendant, relevant evidence seized or obtained as part of the investigation, exculpatory evidence, results of scientific tests, and any written or recorded statements of witnesses whom the prosecutor intends to call at a prospective trial, including experts.

California DUI lawyers experienced in driving while intoxicated cases will use a request known as a Brady motion to seek any information held by the prosecution that may benefit the defendant. For an example, the California DUI lawyer might ask the prosecution to provide calibration and maintenance records for the breath testing machine used during the driver’s arrest. Additionally, a discovery motion may be made to obtain a portion of blood or urine samples – known as a "split" – in order to have the samples independently tested by a forensic toxicologist.

Other motions might include requests to the court to impose sanctions because the prosecution failed to preserve favorable evidence. This type of request is called a Trombetta / Youngblood motion. Another discovery request, known as a Pitchess motion, is designed to obtain the personnel records of the law enforcement officer involved in the arrest.

Discovery begins informally when both sides present a list of requested materials. If either side fails to comply with the informal discovery process, then opposing counsel can engage in formal discovery.

Formal discovery is overseen by the court. If either side fails to comply with formal discovery, the court can order sanctions and other penalties. Formal discovery is always preceded by informal discovery, except in the case of Pitchess motions.

A motion for supplemental discovery can be an effective tool in the hands of the right California DUI lawyers or attorneys. A California DUI Attorney with a proven track record of fighting and winning DUI / DWI cases can determine where supplemental discovery will advance the client’s drunk driving defense case.

Drivers suspected of DUI / DWI in California often must take a field sobriety test such as the Finger-count Test during the traffic stop. Many drivers hope they’ll avoid arrest by “passing” a field sobriety test, but police don’t use the Finger-count Test to determine whether to make a driving under the influence arrest; that decision is typically made long before the field sobriety test is given. The test results merely create probable cause for an arrest and evidence for a drunk driving court case.

However, regardless of the results of a field sobriety test, it’s still possible to fight drunk driving charges and win. A skilled DUI / DWI attorney from The Kavinoky Law Firm can aggressively challenge the results of the Finger-count Test and demonstrate that the results could just as easily prove a driver was not impaired.

The Finger-count Test isn’t standardized by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), so it carries less evidentiary weight in court than a Standardized Field sobriety Test. It’s extremely subjective – it has no objective scoring system, and depends solely on the officer’s opinion of whether the driver “passed” or the test as performed.

Police officers administer the Finger-count Test, also called the Finger-tap Test by directing the driver to hold out one hand, palm up, and touch the tip of each finger to the tip of the thumb. The driver is told to count out loud after each tap, forward and backward, for three consecutive sets.

While administering the Finger-tap Test, the officer watches for certain signs that the driver is intoxicated, including starting the test too soon, an inability to count as directed, not following instructions, an inability to touch fingers as instructed, an inability to perform the correct number of sets, and stopping the test before told to do so.

The finger-count exercise shouldn’t even be called a test, because it’s nearly impossible to pass. The “symptoms” of intoxication that police look for are extremely subjective, meaning they can be interpreted in a number of ways. Fatigue, illness, injury or even nervousness can make the driver “fail” the Finger-count Test. Sometimes the test isn’t even conducted properly.

Because the Finger-tap Test and other Non-standardized Field Sobriety Tests are so subjective and inherently unfair, they can often be successfully challenged in court. A California DUI / DWI lawyer who is skilled in the art of cross-examination will question the officer skillfully and bring out details that work in the driver’s favor.

Drivers who feel they “failed” a field sobriety test like the Finger-tap Test often are reluctant to fight a drunk driving charge in court because they fear an automatic conviction. However, driving under the influence charges can be fought and won. Anyone arrested for drunk driving should contact a California lawyer skilled at defending suspected DUI / DWI drivers.

The courts have ruled that sobriety checkpoints don’t violate a motorist’s Fourth Amendment rights if they are conducted within certain criteria. California drunk driving sobriety checkpoints must follow specific guidelines set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in order to be constitutional. However, police don’t always follow that protocol. If they don’t, any evidence gathered as a result of an arrest at a sobriety checkpoint may be suppressed at trial.

The skilled DUI / DWI defense attorneys of The Kavinoky Law Firm are extremely knowledgeable about the requirements of California drunk driving Sobriety Checkpoints and can determine whether an arrest was valid. They will request the following information during pre-trial discovery to help determine whether police followed the established guidelines:

• The identity of all involved law enforcement personnel, both sworn and civilian
• The identity of each person arrested at the roadblock. This information is necessary to determine whether proper procedures were actually followed, if defense counsel opts to interview them
• Where field sobriety tests were performed, and who conducted them
• Where chemical tests were given, and who conducted them
• All communication, diagrams, and reports used in designing the roadblock
• How long each driver was stopped at the checkpoint
• Whether a neutral formula was employed in stopping motorists, or whether officers used their own discretion
• Whether the roadblock had an official appearance, including warning signs, lights, and uniformed personnel
• How the location of the roadblock was determined
• How the timing and duration of the roadblock was determined
• Whether the public received advance notice of the checkpoint
• Whether the safety of drivers was of primary concern
• Whether motorists were allowed the opportunity to turn away from the roadblock without being detained

An experienced California defense lawyer will analyze this information to determine whether there were discrepancies between the protocol set by the courts and the operation of the checkpoint. If police did not follow all of the necessary guidelines, and there was no probable cause for a stop, a DUI / DWI defense attorney will move to have all of the evidence that stemmed from the arrest excluded.

If police don’t follow the established guidelines when operating a sobriety checkpoint, probable cause is needed to make an arrest if there is no warrant. Probable cause exists when the facts known to the officer would lead a person of ordinary care and prudence to believe that the person is guilty of a crime. The officer must be able to articulate why the driver was stopped and ordered to exit the vehicle.

Probable cause must exist during each stage of the encounter, including the performance of the field sobriety tests, chemical testing, and the arrest itself. If there was no probable cause, and the search and seizure took place without a warrant, there is a strong likelihood that the court will grant the motion to suppress, thus excluding the evidence gathered during the sobriety checkpoint.

This type of challenge can result in the exclusion of evidence that includes field sobriety tests, statements made by the defendant, and the results of any chemical tests. Roadblock sobriety testing is considered a search under the Fourth Amendment, and chemical tests of breath, blood, or urine are firmly established to be a seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes.

An experienced DUI / DWI defense attorney will argue that without a warrant or probable cause, all of this evidence must be suppressed. The prosecutor then bears the burden of proving that the search of the defendant and the seizure of the sample were the product of a lawful arrest.

Even though sobriety checkpoints have been sanctioned by the courts, not all drunk driving checkpoints are conducted according to established guidelines. Ultimately, evidence obtained at an improperly conducted sobriety checkpoint can be challenged. The first step is to consult with a California lawyer who concentrates on drunk driving defense.

The consequences for a DUI conviction can be grave – many drivers receive substantial fines, jail sentences, and license suspensions. However, many courts have developed alternative sentencing programs that give authorities greater flexibility in meting out punishment. An experienced California attorney from the Kavinoky Law Firm who focuses on drunk driving defense can explain the types of alternative sentencing available in some cases.

Sentencing alternatives are typically designed to help as well as punish the driver. Alternative sentences allow DUI drivers to retain their jobs and seek treatment for alcoholism, if needed – opportunities that are rarely available in county jail.

Some sentencing alternatives will allow good time/work time custody credits. Good time/work time custody credits are hour-for-hour exchanges of alternative sentencing against the hours that would have otherwise been spent in county jail.

Some types of alternative sentencing available include community service, freeway cleanup, electronic monitoring, sober living environments, alcohol and drug rehabilitation, Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and participation in a MADD Victim Impact program.

Other sentencing alternatives include ignition interlock devices – machines attached to vehicles which require drivers to blow into a breath detector before starting the car – and the Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor, or SCRAM, which measures alcohol by way of a device attached to the DUI offender’s ankle.

Another option is work furlough, which allows a DUI offender to go to work during the day and check into a dormitory-style housing facility at night. Some defendants may be eligible for work release, which allows the offender to work at an approved location and return home at night.

Some offenders are allowed to serve jail sentences at “weekend jails” at local police stations rather than county jails. Many local police departments will “rent out” their jail cells to DUI offenders overnight or for a weekend.

Because of the harsh consequences that drunk driving defendants face, alternative sentencing options can be an attractive alternative to incarceration. An experienced California DUI / DWI lawyer will review each case individually to determine whether sentencing alternatives may be available.

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.