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.

Electronic monitoring

Marijuana related offenses, in California, typically carry severe penalties that include probation, heavy fines and jail or prison sentences. When the charged offense was a non-violent one, the accused has more options with respect to sentencing that may allow him or her to avoid incarceration. A savvy criminal defense lawyer knows that alternative sentencing may be available and knows, under what circumstances, a judge is likely to grant a request for this type of sentencing, the most compelling arguments to use, to whom this type of sentencing applies and to what offenses is it applicable. This is simply one of the reasons why it is so important to contact the skilled attorneys at The Kavinoky Law Firm, as they are well-versed in alternative sentencing options and are dedicated to helping their clients avoid a jail or prison sentence.

Electronic monitoring (also commonly referred to as “house arrest”) is an example of a type of alternative sentence. When ordered, it allows a convicted defendant to serve his or her jail or prison sentence from the comfort of his or her home. Certain non-violent offenders who have been charged with marijuana crimes may request this type of relief, but only a truly experienced attorney knows the most convincing arguments that will persuade a judge that this type of sentencing is more appropriate than incarceration.

Electronic monitoring is closely supervised, since it has the potential for abuse. The individual who has been granted this type of relief is fitted with an electronic sensor (usually an ankle-bracelet) that is linked by telephone lines to a central computer that puts out a continuous signal. Depending on the facts of the individual case, the accused may be permitted to work, attend school, shop for groceries, do laundry and perform other personal errands and will generally be permitted to attend court-ordered programs (such as Narcotics Anonymous or another type of outpatient drug rehabilitation program) and his or her court appearances, so long as it is pre-approved by the court and/or the probation department. He or she must, however, return during the set “curfew” hours. If the signal is interrupted because the accused has gone beyond his or her authorized boundaries, the central computer records the date and time of the signal’s disappearance and reappearance. If the signal interruption occurred during a time when the individual wearing the bracelet should have been at home, the violation will be checked by the probation department and the individual may be subject to arrest, a probation violation and incarceration.

Electronic monitoring is actually a request that is granted by the probation department, not the judge, but the judge does play an important role in its implementation. The judge is the one who refers the case to the probation department, so it is he or she who must first be convinced that the defendant is a good candidate for this type of alternative sentencing before he or she will even make that referral. This is why it is imperative that the accused hires an experienced criminal attorney who knows how to persuade the judge to at least submit the case to the probation department.

The exceptional attorneys at The Kavinoky Law Firm have an in-depth knowledge about all of the alternative sentencing options that are available to their clients, which allows them to present the most gripping arguments to the judge that reveal why electronic monitoring is not only appropriate for their client, but for the court system and society as well. Because of this vast knowledge, they are also available to discuss the advantages and costs of this type of sentencing with their clients, to make sure that electronic monitoring, if requested, is right for each individual client. To learn more, contact these outstanding attorneys today for a free consultation.

Alcohol Education Programs in Fresno 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 Fresno County, California:

D.A.T.E.
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
1444 Fulton Street,
Fresno, California 93721
Phone: 559-268-6475; Fax: 559-268-6967

D.A.T.E.
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
2640 Jensen Avenue,
Sanger, California 93657
Phone: 559-875-0249; Fax: 559-875-0276

Kings View Community Services
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
4111 N. Golden State Boulevard,
Fresno, California 93722
Phone: 559-277-9880; Fax: 559-277-8998

Special Services Community Center
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
855 West Ashlan Avenue,
Suite 101,
Clovis, California 93612
Phone: 559-348-0129; Fax: 559-348-1367

Special Services Community Center
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
661 South Madera Avenue,
Kerman, California 93730
Phone: 559-846-8444; Fax: 559-348-1367

Special Services Community Center
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
749 G Street,
Reedley, California 93654
Phone: 559-637-1036; Fax: 559-637-1036

» 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 Napa 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 Napa County, California:

Napa County DDP
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
900 Coombs Street,
Room M16,
Napa, California 94559
Phone: 707-253-4264; Fax: 707-259-8039

» 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 Cruz 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 Cruz County, California:

Alto DDP
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
10 Alexander Street,
Watsonville, California 95076
Phone: 831-728-2233; Fax: 831-728-0870

Alto DDP
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
271 Water Street,
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Phone: 831-423-2003; Fax: 831-459-6504

Janus DDP
(Service Provided: First Offender, 18 Month)
200 7th Avenue,
Suite 150,
Santa Cruz, California 95062
Phone: 831-462-5267; Fax: 831-462-4970

Triad Community Services
(Service Provided: First Offender)
1000 A Emeline Avenue,
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Phone: 831-425-0112; Fax: 831-425-1847

» 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.

California Criminal Law – Flying Under the Influence (FUI / FWI) Punishment

Flying an aircraft under the influence of alcohol or drugs (FUI / FWI) is a serious crime. This applies to both commercial and private airplanes. Flying under the influence of alcohol or drugs can be charged as a federal and/or state crime. Pilots who fly under the influence can be charged under federal and/or state law at the discretion of the prosecuting agencies.

Crew members of civil aircraft are governed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA rules state that no one may serve as a crew member if he or she has consumed alcohol within eight hours of a flight. Furthermore, anyone with a BAC of .04 or greater or is under the influence of drugs or alcohol may not serve as a crew member. These over-inclusive rules indicate the seriousness with which the FAA looks upon flying under the influence. A person found violating these strict rules faces imprisonment, fines, and revocation of his or her pilot’s license.

Pilots of civil aircraft are subject to an Implied Consent Law. This means that any pilot who has been arrested on suspicion of flying under the influence of alcohol or drugs must submit to a chemical test or face large fines and license suspension or revocation.

Pilots arrested for driving under the influence face reporting requirements with the FAA. Pilots must report driving under the influence convictions or DMV driver’s license suspensions to the FAA within 60 days. Anyone who fails to report a conviction or driver’s license suspension faces revocation of his or her pilot’s license.

In most cases, a pilot who reports a DUI / DWI conviction or driver’s license suspension to the FAA does not lose his or her pilot’s license. The pilot generally is required to undergo a substance abuse or psychiatric evaluation. Depending on the results, the pilot may be required to enroll in a substance abuse treatment program, submit to close monitoring by the FAA, or undergo random drug or alcohol testing.

The laws surrounding FUI / FWI are complex and challenging because pilots must follow both state law and the Federal Aviation Regulations, or FARS, governed by the Federal Aviation Administration. It is important for criminal defense attorneys who practice in FUI defense in California to be completely up-to-date with all the laws and regulations.

Because of the strict penalties imposed against pilots for flying under the influence and DUI / DWI, it’s critical to have excellent legal representation. A lawyer with experience defending flying under the influence cases can mount an aggressive defense and keep consequences to a minimum.