Once the police have pulled you over on suspicion of driving while impaired, you face
several possible outcomes, and most of them are bad. To ensure that you have a proper
defense, you should give strong consideration to retaining an experienced Santa Barbara DUI
defense lawyer.
A DUI stop can negatively impact you in several ways. Obviously, there’s the possibility of a
criminal conviction. Aside from a criminal conviction, you also could have your driver’s license
suspended. One way a suspension can result is if you refuse to submit to a chemical test (either
a blood draw or breath test.)
Even if police determine that you failed to consent, you still have legal rights and options for
challenging the suspension of your driver’s license.
Take, for example, K.R., a man arrested for DUI in Bakersfield. The police alleged that the driver
refused to consent, so the Department of Motor Vehicles began the process of suspending his
license
The driver promptly retained legal counsel and the driver’s lawyer promptly wrote to the DMV to
request an administrative hearing. This had the effect of both placing K.R.’s case on the hearing
schedule and also staying the license suspension pending the outcome of the hearing.
The hearing took place in September 2019. Although the DMV had subpoenaed the police
officer who initially stopped the driver, the officer had a conflict and could not appear in person.
The hearing officer chose to go forward with the hearing and allow the officer to testify remotely.
The driver’s attorney recognized this as a problem and objected. The lawyer argued that the
crux of the driver’s case came down to documents about which he needed to question the
officer and that the officer needed to see the documents in person to have his memory
refreshed and to be questioned fully. The hearing officer disagreed, proceeded, and ultimately
ruled for the DMV.
After the DMV Hearing: You Still Have More Options
If you are a driver in this scenario, you have still more avenues you can pursue. The next
step is to seek relief from a trial court, which K.R.’s lawyer promptly did one month after the
hearing. This is called filing a “petition for a writ of mandate.” California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1085 explains that any court may issue a writ of mandate to any “inferior
tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act.” This includes
reversing a decision made in an administrative tribunal such as a DMV hearing.
The trial judge in K.R.’s case granted his petition, agreeing that the police officer’s failure to
appear in person impaired the driver’s ability to cross-examine him. The Court of Appeal agreed
with that ruling. The relevant statutory section — Government Code Section 11440.30 (b) — said
(at that time) that an administrative hearing officer “may not conduct all or part of a hearing by
telephone, television, or other electronic means if a party objects.” The appeals court also
agreed that allowing the police officer to testify remotely — despite the driver’s objection —
caused the driver to suffer prejudice, which meant K.R. was entitled to a new hearing.
What you can take away from this complicated case is that you potentially have many options to
protect your rights — and your driving privileges — if you know how to engage with the
administrative and court systems effectively. Whether it’s a criminal action or a DMV
administrative process, the Law Offices of Tristan Verburgt is here to defend our clients zealously to ensure a just outcome. To get in touch with one of our knowledgeable and diligent
Santa Barbara DUI defense attorneys, contact us online or call (805) 220-3923.
by Ohava