Under a new program being made public slowly across the state, the way drivers get smog tests for their cars or trucks will depend largely on where they live. The amount and types of pollutants cars are allowed to spew will change. Getting waivers for problem cars will be more costly — and more difficult.

Smog certificates will be sent by computer from smog check stations straight to the Department of Motor Vehicles. And in another high-tech twist, mobile smog sensors on the roadside will test cars as they roll by and immediately report them to the state.

The program, dubbed “Smog Check II,” is state officials’ answer to changes mandated by the 1990 federal Clean Air Act. The new laws are appearing in bits and pieces — some parts of the program require expensive new smog check stations and equipment — but should be fully in place by 1998.

The aim is to clear California’s notoriously hazy air, especially in smog-choked areas such as Sacramento and Los Angeles. The number of cars failing smog tests, about 18 percent of all vehicles tested in 1994-95, is expected to go up because of more sensitive testing equipment.

The big target is the smog- belching cars the state deems “gross polluters.” About 10 to 15 percent of cars and trucks cause about half the state’s smog problem. The state wants those off the road, so much so that officials may start offering to buy cars that cannot pass a smog test.

“This program is serious about getting high-polluting vehicles repaired,” said Maria Chacon Kniestedt, spokeswoman for Smog Check II. “Cars that used to be out on the road year after year causing big pollution problems will not be able to do that anymore.”

The new smog laws are nothing if not complicated. Some of the new laws are in effect, while others are just around the corner:

— As of last month, all California smog certificates are issued electronically. Cars and trucks to be tested are first identified by the DMV computer, and if the vehicle passes, the results are sent straight to the DMV. The procedure has required garages that conduct smog checks to spend about $2,500 to update each smog machine and adds about 10 minutes to the length of the test.

— Smog tests will vary widely by area. Drivers in many rural regions and most parts of the Bay Area, where air pollution is less severe, will still have their cars tested at any garage offering the service. The test still measures tailpipe gases while the car is standing still, although some emission limits have changed for some cars. The new test also checks for oxides of nitrogen, a pollutant the state has never screened for before.

In very smoggy areas, such as Vacaville, Fresno and San Diego, 15 percent of vehicles will have to be checked at special new “test-only” smog centers. And all cars, whether checked at a garage or a test-only center, will have to be tested on a treadmill-like machine called a dynamometer. Sacramento already has the new system, and the rest of the Central Valley is next, scheduled for next spring.

— Waivers for problem cars will be much harder to get, and drivers will have to go to special test or referee centers to get them. Owners will have to spend a minimum of $450 to bring their cars into compliance before applying for a waiver, and waivers will be issued only once every four years. Drivers who cannot afford the repair bill can apply for a one-time, one-year extension.

SLOW CHANGES, BIG REACTIONS

The changes are being phased in gradually, but they already have some drivers up in arms.

Owners of older cars worry that the new tests are too restrictive for classic roadsters, and they are especially concerned about a new part of the smog test that requires revving the engines of cars manufactured before 1981 to test emissions. State officials counter that the new laws are not part of any campaign to force someone’s classic Ford Mustang off the road.

Cars manufactured before 1966 do not have to have smog checks, and older cars that must be tested do not have to meet the same standards as newer vehicles. Many mechanics say good maintenance, not age, is the key to passing the test.

Still, similar programs in other states have sparked grassroots campaigns to repeal the laws.

“I’m sorry to hear California will have something like this,” said Greg Bell, spokesman for the Coalition to Repeal Ohio E-Check, a group fighting a similar program and picketing smog check stations in Ohio. “It is too restrictive, and it just doesn’t work.”

Even if California’s new program is only half in place, some drivers are already noticing — and sometimes fuming about — parts of Smog Check II already in effect.

At Stauder Chevron in Oakland, a garage that does about 10 to 15 smog checks a day, co-owner Mike Stauder has already seen some irate customers.

“People who fail the test by a big margin can have their car fixed here, but then they have to go get retested at the referee center, and there can be a big backlog,” Stauder said. “Some customers are not too happy about it.”

Just trying to get in touch with the referee centers indicated that customers may indeed have to wait for tests — 15 phone calls over three days yielded only a busy signal each time.

At San Francisco Auto Repair Center, owner Jerry Lewis said the new laws have just about everyone confused. “I get calls from customers wondering about the law. I get calls from other garages,” he said. “To many people, the rules seem very vague right now.”

In the middle of all the crossed signals, however, the drivers who seem the most unhappy are those who don’t want to spend the money to fix their smoky road machines, Lewis said.

“We get a certain number of people who are very upset,” said Lewis. “I tell them to go live in L.A. and see what it’s like.”

Some watching the new tests in action say most drivers have nothing to worry about. At the California State Automobile Association office in Sacramento, senior auto service specialist Bob Kelleher has been checking with garages that administer the new tests.

MOSTLY POSITIVE BUZZ

“There are customers who don’t like it, but overall what I’ve heard has been pretty positive,” said Kelleher. “About 90 percent of the vehicles that failed the test the first time passed it after being repaired.”

The way to pass the new smog check, state officials and mechanics say, is to keep your car well- maintained. Tampering with any part of a vehicle’s emission system is asking for trouble, because such changes will mean a trip to a special test or referee center when smog check time rolls around.

“We get people who come in here who drive around with their engines two to three quarts low on oil,” said Mike Stauder at Stauder Chevron. “Cars are just not kept up like they used to be.”

———————————————————————-

NEW SMOG RULES FOR CALIFORNIA

Under California’s complicated new Smog Check II program. how your car or truck will be testred depends a lot on where you live. Parts of the state with the dirtiest air — mostly the Sacramento, Central Valley, Los Angeles and San Diego areas — will face the toughest tests on new equipment. For other parts of the state, including most of the Bay Area, there are also strict new rules and standards.

HOW REMOTE SMOG SENSING WORKS

Remote smog sensors are appearing along California roadsides to measure emissions from cars as they drive by. The entire process takes about three seconds.

(1) An infrared beam shot across the highway picks up the contents of a car’s exhaust. A calibrator and computer on the other side of the road screen and measure the emissions.

(2) At the same time, a camera snaps a pictire of the vehicle’s license plate. The state uses that in information to find and notify the vehicle’s owner if emissions are too high.

SMOG TESTS DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU LIVE

HOW OFTEN VEHICLES ARE TESTED

Toughest testing (a) Once every two years, unless vehicle is a high polluter, and when vehicle change owners.

Less strict Once every two years, unless vehicle is a high polluter, and when vehicle changes owners.

Least strict Only when vehicle changes owners.

HOW VEHICLE IS TESTED

Toughest testing (a) 15 percent of all vehicles tested at new smog centers, others tested at private garages. All tested on treadmills. Test results sent by computer to DMV.

Less strict All tested at private garages, no treadmill. Test result sent by computer to DMV.

Least strict All tested at private garages, no treadmill. Test results sent by computer to DMV.

IF VEHICLE FAILS

Toughest testing (a) High polluters must be repaired and retested at new smog centers. Less severe polluters must be repaired and retested at either private garages or smog centers.

Less strict High polluters must be repaired and retested at special referee centers. Less severe polluters must be repaired and retested at private garages.

Least strict Allvehicles must be repaired and retested at private garages.

REPAIR COST WAIVERS (b)

Toughest testing (a) Vehicle owner must spend at least $450 on smog-relatred repairs before getting a waiver if vehicle fails test.

Less strict Vehicle owner must spend at least $450 on smog-related repairs before getting a waiver if vehicle fails test.

Least strict N/A

Toughest testing (a) If you cannot afford needed smog repairs, you may apply for a one-time, one-year extension.

Less strict If you cannot afford needed smog repairs, you may apply for a one-time, one-year extension.

Least strict N/A

(a) The new program for more polluted areas will only take effect as Smog Check II becomes fully operational in those areas. Currently, Sacramento is the only area where the program is completely in place. The Central Valley will follow next spring. (b) Waivers are not avaiable for vehicles that are changing ownership or are being registered in California for the first time.

PAGE ONE — Stricter Smog Rules For Cars
State Zeroes in on Most-Polluted Areas

April Lynch, Chronicle Staff Writer

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

State and local authorities served arrest warrants on four UC Davis
students Thursday morning in connection with a fatal crash in Sacramento
that recently sent another student to state prison for six years.

Sergei Andres, 19; Conor Tekautz, 19; and Brian Soest, 20; all were
taken into custody at their apartments at 625 Cantrill Drive. Timothy
Gereg, 21, who lives at the same apartment complex, had already left for
a crew team practice but turned himself in later Thursday at the Davis
Police Department.

All four are accused of furnishing alcohol to 19-year-old Eric James
Holmes, who on Feb. 7 caused a head-on collision on Interstate 5 in
Sacramento that killed Amanda LeGrand, 34, of Washington.

Authorities said Holmes, a UCD student who lives in Auburn, was
driving home from a keg party at a Davis apartment. Holmes reportedly had
a blood-alcohol level of .15 – nearly twice the legal limit of .08 – when
he entered I-5 going the wrong direction, colliding with LeGrand’s car in
a crash that also injured the woman’s aunt.

Holmes was sentenced last Friday to six years in state prison after
pleading guilty to a charge of gross vehicular manslaughter while
intoxicated.

Thursday’s arrests were made by officers from the California
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, with assistance from Davis
police officers, as part of the state’s recently launched TRACE (Target
Responsibility for Alcohol Connected Emergencies) program. The program
seeks to determine the sources of alcohol provided to minors who are
involved in serious or fatal traffic collisions.

Joe Galvan, a supervising investigator for ABC, said the TRACE
investigations target bars, restaurants, liquor stores and individuals
who sell or furnish alcohol to people under 21 years of age.

ABC officials took similar action in 2001, when they suspended the
liquor license of The Paragon following the death of David Thornton, a
UCD student who died after consuming 21 alcoholic beverages at the
downtown bar to celebrate his 21st birthday. Authorities said a minor
also was served alcohol during the celebration.

In a settlement with the ABC, The Paragon’s then-owner also agreed to
transfer ownership of the liquor license, change the bar’s name and
dismantle the outdoor patio where Thornton reportedly had consumed his
drinks. Criminal charges also were filed against a Paragon bartender and
waitress, though a jury later acquitted both.

"We’ve always done these types of investigations, but this really
formalized it," Galvan said of the TRACE program. "This is one of the
most important things that we do. Our core enforcement objective is
keeping alcohol away from kids."

Authorities said Gereg purchased the beer keg for the February party,
which was to celebrate Soest’s 20th birthday. Andres, Tekautz and Soest
are accused of furnishing the alcohol to Holmes and several other
underage people.

"They’re not thinking about what’s going to happen when all these
people leave their house," Galvan said. "There needs to be some
accountability there."

The arrested students live at the Sterling Apartments, which
coincidentally was the scene of a huge pre-Picnic Day party last Friday
night that required about 30 law-enforcement officers to bring it under
control. The complex is around the corner from the Davis Police
Department.

Authorities say the gathering involved between 500 and 800 partygoers,
some of whom reportedly pelted officers with glass bottles, food and
other items.

Andres, Gereg, Tekautz and Soest were lodged at the Yolo County Jail
following their arrests on warrants charging them with furnishing alcohol
to a minor and serving an obviously intoxicated individual, both of which
are misdemeanors.

None remained in jail custody as of this morning, but they are
expected to be arraigned next month in Yolo County court. If convicted,
they face up to a year in jail, $1,000 fines and loss of their driving
privileges, Galvan said. They also face discipline by the university.

The protocol for the TRACE program was developed by a coalition of
California law-enforcement and other agencies, including ABC, the
Attorney General’s Office, the California Highway Patrol, Office of
Traffic Safety, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the California Police
Chiefs and Sheriffs associations.

Friday, April 23, 2004
By Lauren Keene
Enterprise staff writer
Reach Lauren Keene at [email protected]

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

New legislation aims to teach a lesson – and to keep drunks from
getting behind the wheel. Beginning Sunday, authorities can seize
vehicles of motorists arrested for drunken driving if they have a
previous conviction.
By Kevin Yamamura — Bee Capitol Bureau

Published 2:15 am PST Saturday, December 31, 2005 Story appeared on
Page A3 of The Bee Motorists who commit a repeat drunken driving offense
in California have their vehicles seized under existing state law – but
it doesn’t happen until after they are convicted.

Under a new law that takes effect Sunday, drivers in California can
lose their cars when they’re arrested – and before they’re convicted – if
they have committed a drunken driving offense in the past decade.

Another new law sets the stage for a pilot project in Sacramento
County that would impose a longer pre-conviction impoundment and require
an intervention for motorists suspected of drunken driving.

The new rules are intended to teach drunken drivers a dramatic lesson
when the offense occurs and to deter impaired motorists from getting
behind the wheel.

"The usual issue in alcohol problems is that nobody confronts the
individual," said Leon Owens, medical director of the trauma program at
Mercy San Juan Medical Center. "We’re being confrontational once you’re
arrested.

We’re taking the vehicle away and making it a big deal in your
life."

Owens sees victims of drunken driving on a nightly basis in his trauma
ward – he estimates they constitute one-third of all trauma patients –
and spearheaded the effort to pass Senate Bill 547 by Sen. Dave Cox,
R-Fair Oaks.

The bill, signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, will create
the Sacramento County pilot project to impound vehicles for up to 30 days
if their motorists are arrested for a repeat offense of driving under the
influence. Owens is trying to secure at least $1.5 million in funding
before the Board of Supervisors implements the program.

Another new law, Senate Bill 207 by Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena, will
allow officers to impound a vehicle for five days after arresting a
previously convicted driver with a blood-alcohol level of 0.10 or higher.
On a third or subsequent arrest within 10 years, a driver would face a
15-day impoundment.

In California, alcohol-related traffic deaths rose by 2 percent and
arrests increased by 3.7 percent in 2003, according to a 2005 state
report. In 2002, repeat offenders constituted 24 percent of drunken
driving convictions.

Under existing law, repeat drunken driving offenders face a mandatory
30-day impoundment after conviction unless courts find such a penalty
would impose an undue hardship.

Courts also can order a vehicle impounded for up to six months when
its owner is convicted of a first drunken driving offense. A repeat
offense can result in post-conviction impoundment of up to one year.

One Assembly analysis, however, says that courts have been reluctant
to impose such impoundments because it is difficult to seize vehicles
weeks after an incident and doing so often imposes a financial burden on
other family members.

The new laws have drawn opposition from defense lawyers who say
pre-conviction impoundment infringes upon the constitutional rights of
individuals by taking their personal property before they face trial.

"People need to recognize that the government is streamlining the
process of taking people’s liberty and property interests without giving
them the due process upon which our system has been based for hundreds of
years," said K. Randolph Moore, a San Jose attorney and president of the
300-member California DUI Lawyers Association.

But Scott said taking a drunken driver’s vehicle is akin to seizing a
loaded weapon upon arrest, which officers already do. And Cox defended
his plan by saying, "We’re not taking a car, we’re impounding it for a
specific period of time."

Moore said he thinks drunken driving is wrong, but he believes the new
laws won’t have much impact. "This serves no purpose but to allow someone
to pound on his chest and say he passed another drunk-driving law," Moore
said. "The people who are going to drive drunk are not going to be
affected by impoundment."

Scott’s bill sets the threshold at a 0.10 blood-alcohol level,
slightly higher than the state’s 0.08 DUI standard. Current law allows
for the suspension of a drunken motorist’s license upon arrest, but Scott
said he doesn’t see that as enough of a penalty.

"I know of at least two men who have continued to drive after their
licenses were taken away," Scott said. "I think some people really value
their car, and when you threaten them with the loss of an automobile,
there will be tremendous family pressure placed on them." Owens knows
firsthand how drunken driving affects families. His 21-year-old son,
Jake, died when he crashed his car in Carmichael while driving drunk in
2002.

He said he does not know whether SB 547 would have saved his son. But
he believes that drunken drivers can learn from a "teachable moment" that
occurs right after an accident. Under the Cox law, a drunken driver would
face an intervention and receive a referral to an alcohol treatment
program.

After successfully lobbying legislators to pass SB 547, Owens is
pursuing at least $1.5 million in federal, state and private funding to
enable Sacramento County to run the program. He aims to have the pilot
project running by July.

Cox said the "teachable moment" is the most significant aspect of his
new law. "There is a point of time where you have someone’s attention and
that’s when you can make a difference," Cox said. "When you have lost
your vehicle, that gets your attention."

NEW LAWS AT A GLANCE Senate Bill 547 creates a pilot project in
Sacramento County to impound vehicles for up to 30 days if their
motorists are arrested for a repeat offense of driving under the
influence. Senate Bill 207 will allow officers statewide to impound a
vehicle for five days after arresting a previously convicted driver with
a blood-alcohol level of 0.10 or higher.

About the writer: The Bee’s Kevin Yamamura can be reached at (916)
326-5548 or [email protected].

California Bill Number: SB 547 Enacted This bill would establish a
pilot program in Sacramento County that would authorize, until January 1,
2009, the impoundment of a person’s vehicle by a peace officer for a DUI
offense that is undertaken in combination with an intervention and a
referral of the person to a driving-under-the-influence program, as
specified, if the person has one or more prior DUI convictions within the
past 10 years. The bill would implement the program only to the extent
that funds from private or federal sources are available to fund the
program and only if the Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County enacts
an ordinance or resolution authorizing the implementation of the pilot
program in the county. The bill would require the county to report to the
Legislature regarding the effectiveness of the pilot program, as
specified.

SOURCE: SACBEE

If this has happened to, you are in need of a California DUI Lawyer.

“Sir, turn your vehicle off!” Anthony Panzica hollers into the open driver’s-side window.

A man wearing a scraggly beard and a green St. Patrick’s Day necklace has passed out at the wheel of his white Econoline van. Encircled by a telltale cloud of beer stench, his head rises and falls with unconscious breathing.

“I can’t let you drive!” Panzica continues.

The bearded man awakens, but only enough to slightly cock his head, then pin his accelerator. The engine roar stops all conversation in a long line waiting to enter the packed Seal Beach bar around the corner.

Luckily, the van is in park.

Panzica, 39, is the founder of Scooter Patrol, a nonprofit Long Beach group saving lives (as well as DUI arrests) by ferrying inebriated bar patrons home in their own cars. Folding electric scooters are placed in trunks or truck beds; volunteers ride them to their next inebriated client.

Normally, Panzica demands car keys from any obviously impaired drivers he encounters along the way. If they resist, he grabs the keys and forcibly drives them home.

“When somebody can’t stand or walk, they can hardly drive a vehicle,” Panzica said earlier. “Now they’re putting me and my friends and family at risk, and I’m not gonna have that.”

But fate has hurled Panzica a curveball with the bearded man: His van has no key. It’s configured for a paraplegic. A joystick substitutes for the steering wheel, a series of unrecognizable buttons for all the familiar pedals and knobs.

Not only could Panzica never drive this vehicle, he can’t cut the engine.

“You’ve got to shut this thing off!” Panzica shouts. “I’m going to call the police!”

After five minutes, the bearded man obeys and hydraulically lowers himself to the sidewalk. Panzica introduces himself, in a surprisingly polite tone, then wheels him to a nearby coffee shop.

“I’ll wait here for three hours,” the man slurs. “I won’t drive, I promise.”

During the week, Scooter Patrol — which posts fliers in popular bars around Long Beach, Sunset Beach, Huntington Beach and Seal Beach — responds to three to six calls per night, either from worried drivers or bartenders.

On weekends, the frequency is eight to 20, and on this night that number doubles.

St. Patrick’s Day is the second drunkest night after New Year’s Eve.

“The beauty of the whole thing is you have your vehicle in your front yard tomorrow morning,” says tonight’s first official client, who asks to be referred to only as Mike.

He is not visibly impaired but says he downed nine drinks over the previous three hours at a Seal Beach pub called Dave’s Other Place.

“If I were to call a cab, I’d have to figure out a way to get down here tomorrow morning, get my truck and then be at work on time,” he continues, as his Chevy Silverado is driven the 25 minutes back to Huntington Beach for him.

“I’ve got Anthony on my speed dial,” Mike says. (This is his fifth time using Scooter Patrol.)

Normally, Panzica plops his Goped into the back of Mike’s pickup.

But Panzica and a journalist can’t fit on a one-person scooter. So tonight we’re tailed by our ride back, a van driven by a former client and current Scooter Patrol volunteer. (His van features passenger amenities such as water, breath mints and air-sickness bags.)

Panzica is a Chicago-born Army brat whose last steady job was working corporate events as a James Dean impersonator in the ’90s.

The resemblance is still uncanny, which begs the question: Have people ever awakened to freak out at the sight of James Dean driving their car?

Panzica laughs. “He wasn’t too good of a driver, was he?” he responds.

Scooter Patrol employs Panzica and four other trained drivers. They’re all volunteers, but do OK on tips. (Mike will hand Panzica $40 tonight, more than cab fare plus gratuity.)

“I plan on making a good living doing this eventually,” Panzica says. “But it has to be built up and proven first.”

Panzica interrupts to field a request from a new client on his never-silent cell phone.

“Hang tight for another half hour,” he tells Stacy, who says she’s waiting in front of O’Malley’s in Seal Beach, wearing a tall green hat. The next call is a woman requesting transportation from one bar to another.

“We’re really not solving any problems that way,” Panzica explains to the caller. “We only want to get you home, so that you don’t hurt yourself or someone else.”

In 1989 Panzica received his own DUI conviction, courtesy of the Santa Monica Police Department.

“I was out partying one night and I didn’t realize how much I imbibed,” he says. “It was one of the worst experiences of my life.”

He estimates the cost in fines and insurance at about $6,000. (Since then, it’s doubled — and that’s not counting any criminal charges, civil judgments and lifelong guilt for possibly killing or maiming others.)

Panzica dreamed up Scooter Patrol three years ago to help others avoid his fate — or a worse one. The idea came during a conversation with a friend on Main Street in Seal Beach, Southern California’s Times Square of alcohol consumption. (A one-mile stretch contains 21 always-busy drinking establishments.)

“We tried to come up with a solution to how you get the guy’s car home with him,” Panzica says. “We talked about a tow truck or a skateboard, folding bicycles. And we finally hit on scooters that fold up.”

It was an original idea — until Panzica discovered that one UK anti-drunk-driving organization had invented it two years earlier.

“But they charge for their service,” he says.

Another similar service, the Designated Drivers Association, operated briefly around Santa Monica last year. Drunk motorists were driven home from bars by two volunteers — one in the driver’s car, the second tailing in another.

“But we suspended operations indefinitely,” DDA founder Nick Yaya said during a separate interview. He blamed lack of support from the community during New Year’s Eve.

“We just couldn’t get the message out like we needed to,” he said. (Yaya has since gotten in touch with Panzica, and the two have scheduled a meeting to try and combine forces.)

“This is the bridge where I nearly got killed,” Panzica says as he nears his first client’s house. The memory is only one-month old.

“There was a drunk driver going the wrong way in this lane,” Panzica says. “He missed me by about four inches and plowed into the person behind me.” (The drunk driver died, Panzica reports; his victim survived with minor injuries.)

You won’t find many people to argue how wrong drunk driving is. Yet you also won’t find many people who won’t take the wheel after only two beers on a Saturday night. Like it or not, that’s our culture.

A case such as Mike’s or the bearded man’s is clear-cut. But what about the drinker who’s had significantly less and insists on driving?

“That’s a hard one,” Panzica says.

Drinkers are never a reliable gauge of how intoxicated they are. Neither are the DMV charts mailed out with registration renewals, which account only for differences in weight.

Accurately predicting blood-alcohol content (BAC) based on number of drinks over time also requires knowledge of when and how much food was last consumed. Knowing a person’s individual metabolic rate and body-fat content also is vital. And gender is a factor, with alcohol rushing faster into the bloodstream of females.

Personal breath tests aren’t accurate either — at least as of five years ago, when this reporter tested the Alcolimit DriveSafe model against a police machine.

After two 8-ounce glasses of champagne and a 15-minute wait, the test subject blew a .015 with the personal Alcolimit, but a whopping .07 at the police station.

Besides, drivers can legally be charged with DUI at any BAC level — if field-sobriety tests suggest they are impaired.

“Nobody can know for sure,” says Panzica, whose personal answer is never to drive with a trace of alcohol in him. However, this is not realistic for most party-going Americans.

“After you get popped, you know when you’re impaired,” says Mike. “I know based upon the education I was forced to receive, issued by the courts.”

Scooter Patrol currently operates from Huntington Beach up to Belmont Shore, but Panzica says he hopes to expand as far north as Manhattan Beach.

“There’s no set plan yet, but I’ve received some phone calls and e-mails from South Bay business people and residents who are very interested in having Scooter Patrol in their community.”

However, even a Scooter Patrol in every American city wouldn’t scratch the surface of the drunk-driving scourge.

Every 33 minutes in the U.S., someone is killed in a drunk-driving crash, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

“There’s a serious problem there,” Panzica says, “and it’s not getting adequately addressed by drunk-driving laws.”

As if to illustrate the point, the bearded man wheels himself unsteadily out of the coffee shop and back into his van only 15 minutes after promising Panzica he’d take his time sobering up.

Panzica again threatens to summon the cops. This time, he is ignored. As the man starts up his van, Panzica whips out his cell phone. The bearded man isn’t even looking. He pulls away, astonishing onlookers.

In two years of performing this service, seven nights a week, Panzica says he’s “never dealt with anything like this.”

Panzica opts not to place the call to the police.

“When you’re trying to help the community, getting people incarcerated can hurt your reputation as somebody known for caring for people,” he says. “But, let me tell you, that was a very, very hard decision to make.”

Down the street, two unsuspecting boys dart their bicycles out in front of the van. Luckily, they are not hit.

“It’s gonna be a long night,” Panzica says

By Corey Levitan – Long Beach, CA

Daily Breeze

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO – The California Supreme Court is reviewing lower court
opinions that conflict over when it’s OK to suspend the driver’s license
of a suspected drunken driver who refuses to submit to a breath or blood
test.

At issue is a law allowing the one-year suspension of driver’s
licenses for suspected drunken drivers who decline to take a breath test
or allow their blood to be drawn.

Some lower courts have said the license can automatically be suspended
for refusing either of the tests. Other California courts have said the
police must have evidence that the person refusing the test was actually
driving the car while intoxicated.

The justices agreed in private Wednesday to hear the dispute, but set
no hearing date.

The case concerns a woman who says she was an alcoholic when a Belmont
police officer found her sleeping in her parked car on Jan. 2, 2003.
Police questioned her and said she was mumbling incoherently. She
declined to take a breath or blood test after failing a field sobriety
test.

At a Department of Motor Vehicles administrative hearing, the woman
said she was not driving drunk but had several glasses of wine after she
parked the car. She said she had an uncontrollable urge to drink that
day.

A San Mateo County judge overturned the DMV’s suspension of her
license because the police did not show the woman was actually driving
while drunk. An appeals court reinstated the suspension, saying that
requirement was not necessary.

The case is Troppman v. Gourley, S132496.

California Case

Troppman v. Gourley, 2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 196 Date: 2005

The arresting officer found the driver, who appeared to be
intoxicated, in the driver’s seat of a parked van with a wine bottle on
the floor. After the driver failed several field sobriety tests, she was
placed under arrest. She refused to submit to chemical testing. At the
license revocation hearing, the driver testified that she drank the wine
after parking the van and that she had consumed no alcohol before
driving. The administrative hearing officer suspended her license because
she had refused to submit to testing after an arrest for which there was
reasonable cause. The superior court granted driver ‘s writ because there
had been no finding by the hearing officer that she was actually driving.
However, the court of appeal held that a driver’s license could be
suspended for failing to submit to a chemical test without a finding of
actual driving. Because there was no requirement under Cal. Veh. Code ‘ ‘
13353, 23612 to prove that the driver was actually driving at or near the
time of her arrest, and because there was no dispute that the driver was
lawfully arrested and that the arresting officer had reasonable cause to
believe she had been driving. Thus, the appellate court ruled that the
superior court judge made a mistake in granting the driver = s petition
for writ, and agreed with the DMV hearing officer.

Court of Appeals(PDF Download)

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

Motorists who run red lights in San Francisco are, by and large, highly educated, stressed-out men in a hurry who have a dozen excuses for running the light but almost never own up to making a mistake, a new behavioral survey shows.

The most interesting finding of the survey, which was conducted by a division of the San Francisco Department of Public Health, is the suggestion that the person being interviewed understands the problem of barreling through a red light but says it’s never his fault, says a city psychologist.

“The study suggests that people accurately see why others run red lights — they’re `in a hurry’ or `not paying attention,’ “said psychologist Stan Lipsitz, “But in terms of their own behavior, they make excuses, they deny responsibility.”

The informal random survey was conducted in the summer of people waiting in line at the San Francisco office of the state Department of Motor Vehicles. The San Francisco Emergency Medical Services Agency said yesterday that while its survey was more casual than scientific, it still found enough material from the 460 people interviewed to suggest that maybe the city should put officers on every intersection in town, 24 hours a day, or at least keep college-educated men out of cars.

Here’s what the survey found:

• Twice as many men run red lights as women, although there are nearly as many female drivers as male drivers in San Francisco. But twice as many men “can accurately define running a red light.” (Entering an intersection on the yellow light is OK, police say. Entering it on a red is not.)
• Most people think they won’t get caught running red lights, and so they keep on doing it.
• Few drivers will actually admit they tried to beat the light. Most say they couldn’t stop or tried too late to stop.
• More than half of the people who confessed to being chronic red-light runners had a college degree. (Less than 36 percent of San Francisco’s population has graduated from college.)

The survey by the medical services agency, the ambulance-running arm of the city health department, is part of a Federal Highway Administration campaign to warn drivers across the country of the seriousness of running red lights. The ambulance agency got a $30,000 federal grant to help with the survey.

In 1995, more than 41,000 people were killed in the United States because of traffic accidents, according to the city health department. More than 20 percent of those crashes were caused by drivers who ignored traffic signals.

For its part in the nationwide campaign, San Francisco is already cracking down on red-light running with the installation last year of three cameras at bad intersections around town.

The cameras — at Fifth and Howard streets, 19th and Holloway avenues, and Seventh and Mission streets — automatically take pictures of any car traveling faster than 15 mph that enters an intersection after the light has turned red. The private companies that operate the cameras develop the film and “zoom in on each frame,” said city traffic engineer Bond Yee, and then give the Police Department the car’s license plate number.

The picture also identifies the driver through the windshield. The police mail the car owner a ticket, Yee said, and if the registered owner wants to challenge the citation, he or she “has to come down to court and tell the judge, `It wasn’t me.'”

Yee said there are some loopholes in the system — “If the picture is not conclusive, or there’s glare, or if the front license plate is out of focus, then those are not mailed out.” And motorcycles go free — they have no front plates, and it is nearly impossible for a camera to accurately identify the face of a motorcyclist wearing a full-face helmet.

So far, there don’t seem to be any major complaints by those who have been ticketed — 442 citations were issued in November and 508 in December.

Deputy City Attorney Katharine Albright said her office consulted with the state Legislature to see if “it was possible that somebody would allege an invasion of privacy. It’s clear, however, that the privacy concern is balanced overwhelmingly by the compelling need to enforce red-light laws. Any time you have a law and hope to enforce it, you hope they’ll obey the law.”

Hope is one thing, getting people to obey is another.

“We say other people should live better lives, but we don’t necessarily do it ourselves,” Lipsitz, the psychologist, said.

“Then there’s the whole psychology of driving behavior and the meaning of cars. People see cars as extensions of themselves — their private selves, rather than their public selves. So they’re more likely to act out on the basis of aggressive impulses or fantasies than they would ordinarily do in their public behavior.”

And a San Francisco traffic cop with nearly three decades’ experience, a man who has the unique perspective of dealing with those impulses and fantasies at street level day after day, says the problem can be summed up this way:

“If they see the yellow, they step on the gas. What they should do is step on the brake. But they don’t.”

The San Francisco Chronicle

By Michael Taylor, Chronicle Staff Writer

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

From Cradle to Grave: Government Records and Your Privacy

November 1993; Rev’d. November 1994
Copyright 1993, 1994 Center for Public Interest Law

This copyrighted document may be copied and distributed for nonprofit,
educational purposes only. The text of this document may not be altered
without express authorization of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

This fact sheet should be used as an information source and not as
legal advice. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse materials are designed
primarily for California residents. Laws in other states may vary.

The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
The Center for Public Interest Law
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
(619)260-4806
(619) 260-4753 (fax)
e-mail [email protected]

Hotline: +1 800-773-7748 (Calif. only)
+1 619-298-3396

**From Cradle to Grave: Government Records and Your Privacy**

Government records are public in order to ensure the free flow of
information in a democratic society. The challenge to policymakers is to
balance the public’s right to information with the individual’s right to
privacy.

Virtually every major change in life is recorded somewhere in a
government document. Shortly after you are born, a birth certificate is
issued; if you obtain a driver’s license, get married, buy a house, file
a lawsuit—all of these events are recorded in public documents
easily available to you and to others.

This fact sheet covers:

• Public records page 1
• Confidential records page 5
• Federal privacy laws page 7
• State privacy laws page 8
• Policy considerations page 9
• For more information page 9

*Public Records*

Public records are just that—public. There are few, if any,
restrictions on the release of this information. For example, information
from public records is frequently obtained by direct marketers. (See
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse fact sheet number 4 on “junk mail.”) Public
records may also be used by private investigators, law enforcement
officials and other government agencies. In fact, as more public records
are computerized, anyone with a computer and a modem can easily compile
detailed profiles on individuals.

The most common government records containing personal information are
listed below:

Your California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) driver’s license
file contains:

• your name;
• birth date;
• home and mailing addresses;
• license number;
• physical description;
• Social Security number;
• failures to appear in court;
• failures to pay traffic fines;
• license status (valid, revoked, suspended, expired);
• major traffic convictions for the past seven years;
• minor traffic convictions for the past three years.

The DMV also keeps files of vehicle registrations which include:

• the name of the person who owns the vehicle;
• residential and mailing addresses of the registered owner;
• vehicle year, make and body style;
• year the vehicle was bought by the current owner and previous
  owners’ names and addresses going back three years;
• license plate number; vehicle identification number;
• name of the lienholder if the loan for the vehicle has not yet been
  paid in full.

DMV files are routinely consulted by employers, insurance companies,
attorneys and private investigators. They used to be sold to marketers,
but access has been restricted since 1990.

DMV files are routinely consulted by employers, insurance companies,
attorneys and private investigators. They used to be sold to marketers,
but access has been restricted since 1990.

Confidential portions of your file include medical information, home
address and Social Security number. Even though it is considered
confidential, in some specific instances your home address can be
released to insurance companies, banks, attorneys and process servers.
The DMV also releases information to “casual requesters.” However, the
requester must apply to the main DMV office in Sacramento and explain the
purpose of the request and potential uses of the information. Then, the
person who is the subject of the inquiry is notified and can object to
the release of the information. In the case of a dispute, the DMV decides
whether to release the information.

There have recently been changes in the information you must provide
to receive a license. Your Social Security number is now required to
receive or renew your driver’s license, but this information is
considered confidential. The law allows SSNs to be used for tax
administration purposes, collecting government fines, and helping track
down parents who have not made court-ordered child support payments.

Another change is in the appearance of the license. It now looks very
similar to a plastic credit card with a magnetic “stripe” on the back.
The “stripe” holds information which can be read by special scanners.
Currently the information on the stripe is the same as the front of the
license. It can be used by law enforcement officers to print traffic
tickets and by retailers to record information when a customer pays by
check. Some privacy advocates are concerned that the magnetic stripe
makes it easier for merchants to establish computerized data banks about
their customers, and thereby poses a threat to personal privacy. Voter
registration records are kept at the County Clerk’s or Registrar of
Voters office. As of January, 1995, only limited amounts of voter
registration information are public record: your name, city, zip code,
post office box (if applicable) and party affiliation. Other data,
including your home address, telephone number, occupation, precinct
number, and prior registration information will be confidential. The
sealed information will be released if your vote is challenged. On
election days, state law requires the index of precinct voters, including
name, address, phone number and party affiliation, to be posted in each
polling place.

Complete voter registration information may be sold to candidates, and
organizations which will use the information for a political, scholarly,
journalistic, election or governmental purpose. Requestors must apply to
the Secretary of State or the county elections office for the records and
certify the purpose of their request.

Birth certificates are on file in the county in which the birth
occurred and at the State Registrar’s office in Sacramento. Birth records
usually contain the name of the child, date and time of birth, the city
and the hospital in which the child was born, the parents’ names, the
attending physician’s name and various signatures. Birth records housed
in the State Registrar’s Office are public and can be ordered by anyone
with sufficient identifying information (for address see page 8). County
records may be confidential and available only to the subject of the
record or by court order. Confidentiality policies differ by county.

Marriage certificates are usually filed in the County Clerk’s office
where the marriage application was filed and in the State Registrar’s
office in Sacramento. An index is available to the public. It contains
the bride and groom’s names, the county where the application was filed
and the date of the marriage. In California a couple may file for a
confidential marriage certificate which is not placed in the index and is
not a public record. A confidential marriage license is open only to the
bride and groom or by court order. Death certificates are also public
documents. They are usually kept on file in the county in which the death
occurred at the County Clerk’s office. The State Registrar’s office in
Sacramento also maintains these files. An index of death certificates is
available to the public. It contains the name of the person who died,
where the death occurred, the date and the person’s Social Security
number. Property records are open for public inspection. When you
purchase a home or other real estate, a record of the transaction is made
by the County Assessor’s office and the County Recorder’s office. The
files maintained by the Assessor, Tax Collector and/or Recorder contain
the location of the property, current owner’s name, address and previous
owners’ names, dates of sale, description of the property and the
approximate value of the real estate holding.

Court records, unless they involve a juvenile, are usually public.
Superior, municipal and small claims court records are kept in the court
clerk’s office. The court clerk maintains an index of civil and criminal
cases which is filed in alphabetical order by the names of the parties
involved. Case files can be retrieved under the name of either the
plaintiff or the defendant. They contain the initial complaint, the
defendant’s answer and motions filed in the case. Case files may also
contain evidence or exhibits which were used in court.

A person involved in a lawsuit can ask the judge to have parts of a
case file “sealed.” If the judge consents to seal parts of the record,
that portion is no longer open to public viewing. In criminal cases,
probation reports, medical information and psychiatric information are
removed from the file before it is made available to the public.

Divorce records are public documents and are usually considered part
of court files. They are filed at the Superior Court clerk’s office of
the county in which the divorce was granted.

Arrest records are public records. They may include detailed
information about the person arrested, the incident leading to the arrest
and the victim. These records can be closed if their release would
endanger an ongoing investigation or public safety. If the person
arrested is found innocent of the charges, he or she may ask to have the
record sealed and claim they have never been arrested.

Postal address information is not a matter of public record through
the U.S. Post Office. However, the information from postal Change of
Address forms is available to many people. The Change of Address form
carries a notice that the information you provide may be used by others.
By filling out the form, the Post Office assumes you have read this
warning and consent to the release of your information.

If you move and fill out a Change of Address form (USPS Form 3575),
the information is sold to mailing list, direct mail and credit bureau
companies by the National Change of Address system to help mailers update
their lists.

Local post offices will release Change of Address forms to someone
presenting a subpoena or court order, to a law enforcement or government
official for authorized purposes, or to someone who is certified to serve
legal documents. (Note: These are interim rules by the U.S. Postal
Service. Final rules are expected early 1995.)

If you file a change of address form, the Postal Service will release
your new address to people who send you mail at your old address, for up
to 18 months, if the sender specifies “address correction requested.”
Victims of a threatening or potentially violent situation can prevent the
release of his or her new address by obtaining a temporary restraining
order or court order and presenting it to the Postal Service.

*Confidential Records* Some records kept by government agencies are
considered confidential. For example, your tax records are private. You
may have access to your Internal Revenue Service file but others do not.
The following are some common government records which are
confidential.

Social welfare information such as Medicare records and Social
Security information is generally confidential. However, social service
agencies must supply a list of benefit recipients and their Social
Security numbers to tax authorities.

In addition, the federal government has a computer matching program
which allows agencies to compare computerized records to verify
eligibility or compliance with benefit programs. This program is also
used to collect debts owed to the government or unpaid child support. If
you apply for benefits, you must be told that the matching program is
being used. No one can be denied benefits based solely on the results of
information obtained through matching.

Tax information, both federal and state, is not a public record. It is
not disclosed unless:

• the taxpayer is part of a court proceeding where tax issues are
  relevant;
• a government agency is trying to locate a parent who owes child
  support payments;
• state financial aid programs have been requested;
• it is for statistical use;
• agencies request tax information for the purpose of tax
  administration.

People who file joint returns have equal access to tax records.
Federal law allows the Social Security Administration and the Department
of Education access to tax records to withhold tax refunds if money is
owed to the government.

School records are usually confidential. Persons over age 18 must
authorize the release of their school records before they can be viewed
by others (including parents). The records of children under 18 years of
age are under the control of their parents and/or guardians. The records
can be released without consent only to:

• the current school district;
• a school district to which the student is transferring;
• state or federal education authorities;
• state or federal financial aid programs;
• law enforcement officials for “child welfare” protection;
• or upon a judge’s order for release.

Parents have the right to inspect all records a school has about their
child if the child is under 18, and to request that any errors be
corrected. In California, noncustodial parents and foster parents have
the right to view a child’s records. However, only custodial parents may
challenge its content or consent to its release. Adult students have the
same rights as parents of minor students.

Schools must keep a log, open only to parents and school officials,
which lists those who have received information from a student’s record
and how the information was used.

The school may release directory information about students only after
the parents (or the student if over 18) have been notified as to the type
of information to be released. Parents have the right to block the
release of the information by notifying the school of their objection.
Usually a notice dealing with this issue is sent home at the beginning of
the school year.

Public library records are confidential under the California Public
Records Act. All registration and circulation records of any library
which receives public funds may only be disclosed for library employees
to do their job, by order of a superior court, or if the person
authorizes the release.

Confidential data includes information provided to receive a library
card and a list of the materials that have been borrowed. Records of
fines and statistical reports are not confidential. Privately-funded
libraries may not have the same privacy protection as those which receive
public funds. You may want to request a copy of the facility’s
policies.

Criminal history information compiled by local and state criminal
justice departments is not public. “Rap” sheets (records of arrests and
prosecutions) can only be accessed by:

• law enforcement agencies;
• attorneys working on a case involving the individual;
• the subject of the information;
• probation or parole officers;
• a state agency which needs the information to license an
  individual;
• employers, under limited circumstances authorized by law.

With the increasing computerization of records, however, some private
firms are able to compile what amounts to a “rap sheet” by searching
arrest records and court files which are public records. The information
compiled by such firms is sometimes used by employers to run background
checks on prospective employees.

*Federal Privacy Laws*

The two main federal privacy laws are the Privacy Act of 1974 and the
Freedom of Informa-tion Act. They apply only to federal government
agencies. At first glance, the two laws seem diametrically opposed. The
Privacy Act deals with keeping government records about individuals
confidential, and the Freedom of Information Act is commonly used to pry
open government files. However, these laws are attempts to balance the
public’s right to know about the actions of government with the rights of
an individual to retain his or her privacy.

The Privacy Act gives an individual the right to:

• see and copy files that the federal government maintains on him or
  her;
• find out who else has had access to the information;
• and request a change in any information that is not accurate or
  relevant.

A government agency is required to:

• respond to a request for information within 10 days;
• notify the public about the types of files they maintain via the
  Federal Register;
• inform the public how they use the information;
• make sure the information in files is relevant;
• not use the information for any purpose other than the one for
  which it was initially collected.

Government files on an individual may be opened to others in a few
cases including:

• a purpose similar to the original reason for collecting the
  information;
• for statistical research;
• for law enforcement purposes;
• when ordered by a court;
• if it is medically necessary for the requester to have access to
  the information.

There is no central index of federal government records about
individuals. If you want to look at your records, you must first identify
which agency has them. Then use the Privacy Act to ask to see your files.
The agency must respond to your request within 10 days. You may be
charged a “reasonable” fee for copying the file.

You may be denied access to government records about you if they
involve:

• law enforcement activities;
• the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA);
• litigation;
• civil service exams (to the extent access would affect the fairness
  of the tests);
• and confidential government sources.

If you are denied access to your records, you can appeal in court. You
may also take a government agency to court if you believe it has
improperly disclosed information about you or if you want to block
impending disclosures.

The Freedom of Information Act was designed to help individuals obtain
information about the actions of government. It requires that citizens be
given access to government records unless disclosure involves:

• litigation;
• the CIA;
• internal agency memos;
• personnel matters;
• trade secrets;
• classified documents;
• law enforcement activities;
• confidential government sources;
• violating an individual’s privacy interests;
• civil service exams (to the extent it would affect the fairness of
  the tests).

If an agency denies your request for information, it must tell you why
within 10 days. You may appeal the denial either within the agency itself
or in court.

*State Privacy Laws*

California has two state laws which are similar to federal privacy
legislation: the Information Practices Act and the Public Records
Act.

The California Information Practices Act applies only to state
agencies. It is similar to the federal Privacy Act and gives individuals
access to information about them held by state agencies. However, the
Information Practices Act does not require the state to publish a list of
the type of records agencies create.

If you request information, the state agency must respond within 30 to
60 days. You can be denied access to your records for the same reasons as
under the Privacy Act. If a request is denied, you must be told the
reason for the denial. You can appeal the decision in court.

If you find incorrect information in a record the state keeps about
you, you have the right to amend your file. The agency must note in the
record that you dispute its accuracy.

The Information Practices Act does not cover city or county government
records. Local governments are free to make their own laws in this
area.

The California Public Records Act is similar to the federal Freedom of
Information Act and covers state, city and county boards, special
districts, commissions, agencies and school districts. With public
documents. The major exemptions from public disclosure include:

• personnel matters;
• medical records;
• tax records;
• litigation;
• public library records;
• preliminary drafts, notes, or memos;
• complaints or investigations by law enforcement authorities unless
  the person requesting the information is involved in the crime or
  suspected crime;
• information which would compromise civil service exams.

If you request information under the California Public Records Act,
the agency must let you know within 10 days that it has received your
request. If your request is denied, you must be notified within 10 days
and given the reason the information is not being released. You have the
right to appeal such decisions in court.

*Policy Considerations*

Currently most public records are obtained by visiting the appropriate
government agency and inspecting or copying

A former Alameda County senior deputy district attorney who has been convicted four times for drunken driving was arrested again early yesterday in Berkeley after police found him inside his car on top of a street median, authorities said.

Attorney Darryl Billups, 48, who has a private practice in San Pablo, was taken into custody about 2:50 a.m. after failing a field sobriety test in the 1300 block of San Pablo Avenue, said Captain Bill Cooper of the University of California at Berkeley police.

Billups was booked at Berkeley City Jail on $31,000 bail on suspicion of felony drunken driving and driving with a revoked license.

Campus police officer Tina Johnson was patrolling a nearby UC housing complex when she spotted Billups’ green 1996 Toyota Avalon lying at an angle on top of the median on San Pablo Avenue near Gilman Street, Cooper said.

Billups “appeared to be incoherent and didn’t seem to be paying attention” to the officer, Cooper said.

A subsequent breath test put Billups’ blood-alcohol level at .22 percent, nearly three times the legal limit of .08 percent, police said.

According to Department of Motor Vehicle records, Billups has been convicted of drunken driving four times since 1991. His license was revoked in February 1995.

Drunken driving, usually charged as a misdemeanor, becomes a felony on the fourth conviction. Billups was placed on court-ordered probation for his three most recent convictions.

Billups joined the Alameda County district attorney’s office in 1976, serving in municipal court, juvenile, trial and career criminal court positions before being promoted to senior deputy district attorney in 1989.

He resigned in 1995, said Rich Michaels, chief assistant in the district attorney’s office. Michaels said he could not discuss the details of Billups’ resignation.

Billups could not be reached for comment.

Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer

Do you need a California DUI Attorney?

By Maura Dolan, Times Staff Writer June 27, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO — Law enforcement may stop and detain drivers based
on anonymous and uncorroborated tips that they were driving while
intoxicated, the California Supreme Court decided 4-3 Monday.

The state high court ruled that the California Highway Patrol acted
legally when it pulled over a woman outside Bakersfield, even though its
officer did not personally note any evidence of impaired driving. The
officer was responding to a telephone tip that the van was weaving.

A lawyer for Wells said California’s high court went further than any
court in the country in giving law enforcement the ability to pull over
motorists based on anonymous tipsters.

Elizabeth Campbell, a lawyer with the Central California Appellate
Program, noted that the state has signs urging motorists to report
suspected drunk drivers to the Highway Patrol. Because the ruling permits
anonymous tips, people motivated by road rage or personal vendettas may
now make such reports, Campbell said.

"They have just given a great tool to angry drivers," she said.

She said Wells will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has ruled
that police cannot pat down someone to search for a weapon based on an
anonymous tip.

Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, said the court
"properly balanced" the competing interests of public safety and the
right to be free of government intrusion.

"It doesn’t make a lot of sense from a public safety standpoint to
require a law enforcement officer to wait until a dangerous situation
arises before doing something to stop it," Dresslar said.

Monday’s decision was the latest in a string of rulings that give
police broader powers in searches. Earlier this month, the state high
court ruled that police may enter a person’s home without a warrant in
some situations to administer a blood-alcohol test when a caller reports
the person had been driving while intoxicated.

The U.S. Supreme Court also decided this month that the government may
use evidence seized during a search in which officers with a warrant
failed to knock before entering a suspect’s home.

In Monday’s ruling, Justice Ming W. Chin, writing for the majority,
conceded that the court knew nothing about the person who reported the
van weaving.

"But we may reasonably infer that the tip came from a passing
motorist," Chin wrote. "Where else would it have come from?"

Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, writing for the dissenters, said the
officer acted "without confirming any illegal or even suspicious conduct
at all."

"One of the hallmarks of the liberty guaranteed to persons in this
country is that agents of the government cannot arrest, seize or detain
them without a good reason," wrote Werdegar, who was joined by Justices
Joyce L. Kennard and Carlos R. Moreno.

The ruling in People vs. Susan Wells, S128640, stemmed from a stop by
CHP Officer Julian Irigoyen on California 99 north of Bakersfield three
years ago. The officer received a dispatch of a possibly intoxicated
driver "weaving all over the roadway."

The dispatcher said the vehicle was described as an ’80s model blue
van traveling north on California 99 near a certain exit. Irigoyen, who
was nearby, parked on the shoulder of the highway and waited.

Two or three minutes later, he saw a blue van traveling at about 50
mph. "The officer did not observe the van weaving, speeding or otherwise
violating any traffic laws, perhaps because he stopped the van so soon
after spotting it," Chin wrote.

The officer said Wells had constricted pupils and a dry mouth and
appeared nervous when asked to step out. He did a field sobriety test and
arrested her.

Later, a search of the car found a black suitcase containing several
syringes and heroin. Wells’ urine also tested positive for THC, an
ingredient in marijuana; cocaine; and opiates.

In ruling against Wells, the majority noted that police are permitted
to set up roadblocks to investigate drunk driving despite any specific
evidence.

Source: http://www.latimes.com/

Are you in need of a California DUI Lawyer?

343.10 DRIVING-UNDER-THE- INFLUENCE ARRESTS. An arrest for driving
under the influence shall be made when:

• An officer witnesses a person commit the elements of driving while
  under the influence; or,
• The under-the-influence driver was lawfully detained by an officer
  of this or another law enforcement agency; or,
• The under-the-influence driver was lawfully arrested or detained by
  a private person who witnessed the driving element of the offense.
• An arrest may be made for 23152(a) VC per authority of 40300.5 VC
  when a traffic collision has occurred but the arresting officer did not
  witness driving, when:
• The arresting officer has reasonable cause to believe that a person
  involved in the traffic collision was driving a vehicle while under the
  influence of intoxicating liquor, or the combined influence of
  intoxicating liquor and any drug; and,
• The arrest is effected as a continuous uninterrupted portion of the
  investigation.

Note: The arrest shall be limited to the location of the traffic
collision or the location of any timely follow-up investigation.

The element of being under-the-influence shall be based on the
objective symptoms observed by the arresting officer. Results of other
examinations shall be corroborative evidence only.

343.20 SOBRIETY EXAMINATION. The physical phases of the sobriety
examination shall be given when an under-the-influence driver is able and
willing to perform them and, when practicable, shall be conducted at the
scene of the incident in the presence of witnesses.

A sobriety examination, as per Form 5.2.5, shall be completed when an
officer:

• Arrests a person whom he/she witnesses commit the elements of
  driving while under the influence; or,
• Arrests a driver suspected of being intoxicated who was lawfully
  arrested or detained by another peace officer or a private person
  (Manual Section 4/343.10); or,
• Is investigating a suspect for driving-under-the-influence;
  or,
• Is investigating a traffic collision and an involved driver
  displays any objective symptoms of being under-the-influence,
  regardless of whether the driver is arrested.
• When a suspected under-the-influence driver refuses to submit to a
  field sobriety test, the investigating officer shall, read the Field
  Sobriety Test Admonition to the driver.

343.25 DRIVING-UNDER-THE-INFLUENCE (DUI) DRUG ARREST PROCEDURES. Arresting Officer’s Responsibility. When an arrest is made for driving
under-the-influence of drugs or combination of drugs and alcohol, the
arresting officer shall:

• Admonish the arrestee regarding a chemical test as per the Chemical
  Test Admonition on the DUI
• Arrest Report, Form 5.2.5.
• Administer a chemical test to the arrestee.

Note: Whenever possible, a breath test should be administered to
determine alcohol intoxication.

If the breath test is obtained and the results are .08% or higher,
book the arrestee for Section 23152(a) (DUI) V.C. When the results are
below .08%, complete the following:

• Read to the arrestee verbatim the Drug Admonition from the DUI
  Arrest Report.
• Obtain a urine or blood sample from the arrestee.

Note: If urine is the only chemical examination administered, officers
shall obtain the first void for possible detection of drugs, and the
second void for the possible detection of alcohol. Both samples shall be
marked accordingly and booked as evidence.

If the breath test is obtained and the results are .30% or higher, the
arrestee shall be examined by medical personnel pursuant to Manual
Section 4/648.17.

Request a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) or, if none available, a
Narcotics Expert.

If an on-duty DRE or Narcotics Expert is not available within the
concerned bureau, the arresting officer shall obtain an MT for the
arrestee and request the examining physician to include an opinion
regarding objective symptoms and possible drug ingestion.

Exception: If a traffic death or traffic felony arrest is involved and
a DRE or Narcotics Expert is not available within the concerned bureau,
the arresting officer shall contact Communications Division and request
an on-duty DRE or Narcotics Expert from anywhere in the City. If no
on-duty DRE or Narcotics Expert is available, the officer shall contact
the Administrative Unit, Detective Support Division, and request that an
off-duty DRE be dispatched.

When applicable, include the Drug Influence Evaluation Form (completed
by an expert) as a page of the arrest report. Drug Recognition Expert
(DRE)/Narcotics Expert’s Responsibility. A DRE or
Narcotics Expert is responsible for evaluating and rendering an opinion
of the drug influence of DUI Drug arrestees. As part of that examination,
the expert shall:

• Advise the arresting officer of any additional tests required.
• Determine if an MT is needed.
• Complete the Drug Influence Evaluation Form.
• Enter a brief description of the findings and the examining
  officer’s name and serial number in the Remarks Section of the Booking
  Approval, Form 12.31.

Note: If during a drug evaluation, the expert determines that he/she
is not qualified to render an opinion, the watch commander approving the
booking shall determine if another expert should be called.

343.28 ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE ORDER OF SUSPENSION. 343.30 ARRESTING
OFFICER’S RESPONSIBILITY. An officer making an arrest for
driving-under-the-influence (DUI) shall complete a DUI arrest report in
the usual manner and confiscate the California driver’s license of the
arrestee when the arrestee:

• Refuses to submit to and complete a chemical test; or Note: The
  Chemical Test Admonition portion must be read to the arrestee in its
  entirety, even when the arrestee refuses to submit to or complete a
  chemical test.
• Takes a breath test which shows a blood alcohol concentration (BAC)
  level of .08 percent or more; or,
• Takes a urine or blood test and the officer believes that
  subsequent test results will show that the driver is at or above a
  blood alcohol concentration of .08 percent. Note: Out-of-state/foreign
  licenses are not included under California law and cannot be
  confiscated.

Upon completion of the DUI arrest report and confiscation of the
arrestee’s California driver’s license, the arresting officer shall
complete:

• A Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Officer’s Statement, Form
  DS367, and write the arrestee’s booking number in the upper right
  corner; and,
• A DMV Administrative Per Se Order Of Suspension/Revocation
  Temporary License Endorsement, Form DS360.

Upon approval of the DUI arrest report and Administrative Per Se
documentation, officers shall:

• Attach page two of the DMV Form DS360 to the DUI arrest
  report;
• Issue page three of the DMV Form DS360 to the arrestee; and,
• Mail the original Form DS367; page one of the Form DS360; the
  arrestee’s original California Driver License; and Intoxicator EC/IR
  Operator Checklist, Form 5.20.7, to the DMV location which corresponds
  with the geographic bureau of arrest. Note: The law requires that all
  reports and forms be received by DMV within five working days of the
  date of arrest.

Page two of the DMV Form DS360, issued to the arrestee, will serve as
a temporary driver’s license for 45 days from the date of arrest for an
arrestee with a valid California Driver License in his or her possession.
Once the arrestee’s driver’s license has been confiscated, the arrestee
will have 10 days to request a DMV hearing. Failure by the arrestee to
request a hearing will result in an automatic suspension of the
arrestee’s California Driver License.

Exception: The arresting officer shall check the "No Temporary License
Issued" box on the DMV Form DS360, and complete the explanation why no
temporary license was issued, if:

• The arrestee has an out-of-state/foreign driver license; or,
• The arrestee has not been issued a valid California Driver License;
  or,
• The arrestee’s California Driver License is suspended, revoked, or
  not in possession.

Packaging Blood or Urine Samples. If an arrestee chooses a blood or
urine test, the arresting officer shall follow procedures described in
Manual Sections 4/343.40 or 4/343.42. Additionally, the arresting officer
shall complete the top half of the DMV Form, DS367A, and mail all three
copies of the form to Scientific Investigation Division.

Supervisor’s Responsibility. Supervisors approving DUI arrest reports
shall ensure that arresting officers have complied with Administrative
Per Se procedures (23158.5 VC), when applicable.

343.33 INDEPENDENT TEST BY QUALIFIED PERSON. When qualified persons
appear at the place of confinement by requests of the prisoner (Manual
Sections 4/658.12 and 4/658.17) or other person, for the purpose of
obtaining a breath, blood, or urine sample, they shall be permitted to do
so upon consent of the prisoner.

Only a duly licensed doctor, laboratory technologist, bio-analyst, or
registered nurse shall be permitted to withdraw a sample of the
arrestee’s blood. This limitation shall not apply to the taking of breath
or urine specimens;

The doctor must be a physician or surgeon (M.D. or osteopath) licensed
to practice in the State of California. If there is a question as to the
identification of the doctor, Detective Support Division shall be called
to see if the doctor is listed in the Directory of the State Board of
Osteopathic Examiners;

The laboratory technologists or bio-analysts must be licensed to
practice in the State of California. If there is a question as to their
identification, Detective Support Division shall be called to see if they
are listed in the Department of Public Health directory for licensed
laboratory technologists and bioanalysts; and, The registered nurse must
be licensed to practice in the State of California and must perform the
blood extraction under the supervision or at the immediate direction, of
a doctor.

A Follow Up Report, Form 3.14, shall be used, by the officer having
custody of the prisoner, to record:

• The time the telephone call was made by or for the prisoner;
• The time the person arrived at the place of confinement and
  requested to see the prisoner;
• The person’s name, address, and telephone number, including
  business office address and telephone number;
• The time the sample was taken;
• The amount of blood taken as stated by the person;
• The names and serial numbers of the officers witnessing the
  telephone call and the taking of the breath,
• blood, or urine sample;
• The name of the doctor employing or supervising the registered
  nurse; and,
• Any other appropriate information.

343.36 CHEMICAL TEST ADMONITIONS. Prior to administering a chemical
test to a driving-under-the-influence arrestee, the Chemical Test
Admonition (23157 VC) section of the Driving-Under- The-Influence Arrest
Report, Form 5.2.5, shall be read to the arrestee. The name and serial
number of the admonishing officer shall be entered in the space provided
in this section.

Note: The Chemical Test Admonition (23157VC) (Spanish) contained in
the Los Angeles Police Department Citation Guide, Form 16.65.0, shall be
read to Spanish speaking driving-under-the-influence arrestees, by an
officer fluent in, and capable of, testifying in Spanish.

After a breath test, if the arrestee is suspected of driving under the
influence of alcohol, the Additional Chemical Test Admonition (23157.5
VC) section of the Driving-Under-The-Influence Arrest Report shall be
read to the arrestee. The name and serial number of the admonishing
officer shall be entered in the space provided in this section. If drug
use is suspected, the Drug Admonition of the Driving-Under-The-Influence
Arrest Report shall be read to the arrestee instead of the Additional
Chemical Test Admonition. The name and serial number of the admonishing
officer shall be entered in the space provided in this section.

343.38 BREATH TEST. Use of Equipment. Breath-testing equipment is
located at Metropolitan Jail Section (Parker Center), Valley Headquarters
Building, 77th Street Jail Section, and all geographic Areas except
Central, Newton Street, Hollenbeck, and Rampart Areas. Operation of the
breath-testing equipment shall be restricted to personnel who have been
trained in its use. Arresting officers not trained in the use of the
breath-testing equipment shall ensure that the examination is
administered by an officer trained in its use.

An Intoximeter EC/IR Operator Check List, Form 5.20.7, shall be
completed each time the Intoximeter EC/IR is set up for a test and for
each subject to whom a test is administered.

Note: Breath-testing equipment may be used as an investigative aid in
driving-under- the-influence arrests involving narcotics, non-narcotic
drugs, or dangerous drugs, or for other purposes at the discretion of the
concerned watch commander.

Watch commanders shall ensure that breath-testing equipment receives
timely calibration by qualified personnel.

Administering Test. Prior to administering the test, the testing
officer shall observe the subject for a 15-minute period, during which
the subject shall not have eaten, drunk, smoked, regurgitated, or
vomited.

Note: If the subject regurgitates, vomits, eats, drinks, or smokes
between samplings, the pre-testing observation shall be repeated.

At least two breath samples shall be collected. (No waiting period is
required between samples.) If the readings of the two samples vary more
than .02 percentage points, additional samples shall be collected until
the results of any two samples are within .02 percentage points. If five
samples have been collected and the test is not complete (two samples,
within .02 percentage points), the officer shall direct the subject to
submit to either a blood or urine test. Failure to complete a test shall
be deemed a "refusal."

Note: Arrestees who obtain a EC/IR reading of .30 percent or higher
shall be examined by medical personnel pursuant to Manual Section
4/648.17

Recording Results. The EC/IR test tape shall be separated from the
machine only when:

• The test is completed (two samples, within .02 percentage points);
  or,
• Five samples have been collected and the test is not
  completed.
• The date/time stamp shall be applied on the front of the test tape
  with each sample, and the time of each sampling shall be recorded.
  Note: The date/time stamp and the required entries shall not cover any
  portion of the test results.
• The EC/IR test tape shall be stapled to the EC/IR Check List on the
  space provided. The staple shall be positioned in a manner that will
  not interfere with reading the test results. When the test tape is
  longer than the Check List, the tape shall be folded in a manner that
  will not interfere with reading the test results.

The Intoximeter EC/IR Operator Check List shall be completed by the
administering officer and:

• Attached to the Arrest Report; or,
• Submitted with the officer’s DFAR and a DUI Arrest Report, Form
  5.2.5, when no arrest report is completed.

343.40 BLOOD TEST.

Criteria for Requesting. A blood sample may be requested in the
following situations:

• The arrestee indicates a willingness to submit to a blood test
  incidental to the arrest; or,
• The arrestee is in custody for a felony and the level of
  intoxication would be an essential element in the alleged violation;
  or,
• The arrestee is unconscious or is so impaired and is unable to
  consent to a chemical test. When such a condition exists, the
  following steps shall be taken in order to determine if the arrestee
  is a hemophiliac or a heart patient possibly using anticoagulant
  medication:
  • Check for medical information on the arrestee’s person such as
    a "Medic Alert" bracelet or necklace, or any other item indicative
    of the arrestee’s medical background;
  • If a relative or a friend of the arrestee is present who can
    provide information about the arrestee’s medical condition, record
    the name, the relationship to the arrestee, and the statements of
    that person in the arrest report; and,
  • Inform the attending physician of all information in the
    officer’s possession which may have a bearing on the arrestee’s
    physical condition.

Requesting Forced Blood Sample Withdrawal. A forced blood sample may
be obtained from an arrestee only when all of the following conditions
have been met:

• The arrestee is in custody for a felony traffic offense where the
  injury occurred to a person other than the arrestee; and,
• Intoxication is an essential element of the alleged violation;
  and,
• The arrestee refuses to voluntarily submit to any of the available
  chemical tests; and,
• Prior approval from a traffic supervisor has been obtained;
  and,
• A traffic or patrol supervisor is present at the medical facility
  (e.g., jail dispensary, contract hospital, etc.) to witness the
  withdrawal of blood from the suspect.

Note: The name and serial number of the approving supervisor and the
supervisor present during the forced blood withdrawal, if different from
the approving supervisor, shall be written in the arrest report.

Exception: An arrestee whose medical condition prohibits a blood
sample from being taken shall not be forced to submit to a blood
test.

Traffic Division Supervisor’s Responsibility. Upon
being advised of a request for a forced blood withdrawal, the concerned
traffic division supervisor shall determine if the criteria for forced
blood withdrawal is met. The approving supervisor, if readily available,
should be the supervisor present during the procedure.

The supervisor who is present at the scene of a forced blood
withdrawal where the use of force becomes necessary shall ensure that the
use-of-force investigation is conducted by a non-involved supervisor.

Requesting Withdrawal. Whenever a blood sample is to be obtained from
an arrestee, the arresting officer shall direct a Request for Withdrawal
of Blood, Form 4.35, to any of the following hospital personnel:

• Physician.
• Registered nurse.
• Licensed clinical laboratory technologist.
• Licensed clinical bio-analyst.
• Physician or Hospital Employee Refusal. When a physician or hospital
  employee authorized by Vehicle Code Section 23158 VC refuses to
  withdraw a blood sample, the officers having custody of the arrestee
  shall request a supervisor to respond to their location. Upon
  arrival, the responding supervisor shall:
  • Become familiarized with the situation including a
    determination that the arrest and officer’s actions conformed with
    Department policy;
  • Verify the refusal by the hospital employee to withdraw blood;
    and,
  • Attempt to contact an administrator of the hospital who may
    advise the refusing employee as to responsibilities according to
    the contract provisions of the hospital, to the City.

When the employee still refuses to withdraw a blood sample, the
supervisor shall then request the arrestee to submit to one of the other
two remaining chemical tests. When the arrestee refuses the other tests,
the supervisor shall advise the officers to complete the appropriate
arrest report, including a notation regarding the absence of a chemical
test.

Note: If a hospital employee refuses to withdraw a blood sample and
the arrestee declines the remaining tests, the arrestee may be
transported to a Jail Division Dispensary to obtain the blood sample.
After the arrestee is booked and all appropriate reports are completed,
the concerned supervisor and officers shall each complete an Employee’s
Report, Form 15.7, recording all pertinent information regarding the
refusal to withdraw blood. The completed Employee’s Reports shall be
forwarded through channels to Detective Support Division-Attention
Medical Evaluation Unit.

Obtaining and Packaging. The withdrawal of all blood samples shall be
witnessed by the requesting officer. Officers obtaining blood samples for
alcohol or drug analysis shall, in addition to following the procedures
outlined on the Analyzed Evidence To Be Refrigerated Envelope, Form
12.51.1, place the defendant’s booking number above the officer’s serial
number when completing the Sealed Evidence Label. If there is no
arrestee, the DR number shall be placed in the space above the booking
officer’s serial number. When there is more than one suspect and a DR
number is used, both the DR number and the last name of the suspect shall
be used.

Officers obtaining whole blood samples from hospital employees for
other than alcohol or drug analysis shall:

• Tilt the vial slowly and gently for approximately twenty seconds to
  ensure the preservative in the vial mixes with the blood;
• Complete the label on the vial with the suspect’s name, the DR
  number, and the booking officer’s initials;
• Check the "Blood Grouping" box on the Analyzed Evidence To Be
  Refrigerated Envelope, and complete all other applicable reports;
• Place the vial in the Analyzed Evidence Envelope and seal the
  envelope with a Sealed Evidence Label bearing the date and DR number
  and the officer’s payroll signature and serial number signed in ink;
  and,
• Affix the Biohazard Label to the upper left corner of the front of
  the Analyzed Evidence To Be Refrigerated Envelope.

Supervisor Approving. The supervisor approving the booking of the
sample shall inspect the sample vial or container label to ensure that
the required identifying information is included.

Booking. Whole blood samples shall be booked in the SID courier
refrigerated temporary storage locker most convenient for the booking
employee. The SID courier shall be responsible for transporting items to
be analyzed to SID.

343.42 URINE TEST. Location Obtained. A urine sample shall be obtained
from a male arrestee at the booking location, and from a female at:

• Female Jail Unit, Valley Section, when arrested in West Los
  Angeles, Pacific, or the Valley Areas; and,
• The Area of arrest, when arrested in the metropolitan area.
• Administering Test. An officer or station officer of the same sex
  as the arrestee shall:
• Escort the arrestee to an appropriate restroom facility;
• Instruct the arrestee that he/she must empty his/her bladder;
• Remain present while the arrestee empties his/her bladder;
• Wait twenty minutes, or as soon as possible thereafter, before
  attempting to collect a urine sample;
• Provide the arrestee with a pretreated urine sample container;
• Ensure that the container is not rinsed prior to sample
  collection;
• Remain present while the arrestee provides a urine sample;
  and,
• Ensure that the label identifying the chemist responsible for
  preparation of the container is not removed.

Note: A protective glove shall be worn when handling a urine
sample.

The Driving-Under-the-Influence Arrest Report (Continuation), Form
5.2.5, shall indicate:

• The time the bladder of the arrestee was first emptied,
• The time the urine sample was collected, and,
• The name of the employee who administered the urine test.

Note: When an arresting officer becomes aware that an arrestee has
emptied his/her bladder after coming into the custody of the officer, the
twenty-minute waiting period shall begin at the time the bladder was
first emptied. The time and circumstances of the emptying shall be
recorded on the Driving-Under-the-Influence Arrest Report (Continuation),
Form 5.2.5.

Booking Sample. The officer booking a urine sample shall:

• Ensure that the lid is placed tightly on the container;
• Place a completed Sealed-Evidence Label on the side of the
  container, and place the defendant’s booking number above the officer’s
  serial number when completing the Sealed-Evidence Label. If there is no
  arrestee, the DR number shall be placed in the space above the booking
  officer’s serial number.When there is more than one suspect and a DR
  number is used, both the DR number and the last name of the suspect
  shall be used;
• Complete the Analyzed Evidence To Be Refrigerated Envelope, Form
  12.51.1, and check the appropriate box, "Alcohol Analysis" or "Drug
  Analysis;"
• Place the container in the Analyzed Evidence Envelope;
• Seal the flap of the envelope with a completed Sealed Evidence
  Label; and,
• Affix the Biohazard Label to the upper left corner of the front of
  the Analyzed Evidence Envelope.

Alcohol and/or opiate urine samples shall be booked in the SID courier
refrigerated temporary storage locker most convenient for the booking
employee. The SID courier shall be responsible for transporting items to
be analyzed to SID.

Supervisor Approving. The supervisor approving the booking of the
sample shall inspect the sample vial or container label to ensure that
the required identifying information is included.

343.57 REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO OR COMPLETE CHEMICAL TEST-NOTIFICATION TO
DMV. When a person who has been arrested for operating a motor vehicle
while under the influence of intoxicating liquor and/or drugs refuses to
submit to or complete a chemical test, the arresting officer shall mark
the left margin of the related Driving-Under-The-Influence Arrest Report,
"Copy to Bureau Traffic Division Auditor."

343.60 DRIVING-UNDER-THE- INFLUENCE ARREST-OFFICER REPORTING. When an
arrest is made for any offense committed while driving a vehicle under
the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, one officer shall normally
complete the report and be prepared to testify regarding all phases of
the arrest.

That officer’s name shall be placed in the upper portion of the
"Reporting Officer’s" box on page 1 of the Arrest Report and in the
appropriate boxes of Form 5.2.5.

343.65 MISDEMEANOR TRAFFIC COLLISION RELATED
DRIVING-UNDER-THE-INFLUENCE

BOOKINGS. When an arrestee involved in a traffic collision is booked
for driving under the influence (23152(a) VC) the officer responsible for
completing the arrest and traffic collision reports shall cause the
arrest report and a copy of the traffic collision report to be submitted
together at the location of booking for processing and distribution.

Exception: When the arrestee is booked into the Los Angeles County-USC
Medical Center jail ward or Los Angeles County Jail, the reports shall be
submitted to the approving supervisor at the Communications Division
Telephonic Report Counter, Parker Center.

Note: Records unit personnel shall ensure that one copy of the Traffic
Collision Report is forwarded, with the copies of the DUI arrest report,
to the appropriate custodial detention officer. The original reports and
subsequent copies shall be processed and distributed according to current
procedures.

343.70 DRIVING-UNDER-THE-INFLUENCE BOOKINGS. A teletype request shall
be sent to DMV concerning each arrestee booked for 23152(a) VC. This
request shall be teletyped by divisional record clerks immediately upon
receipt of the Booking and Identification Record, Form 5.1, from the
location of the arrestee’s detention. Requests may be sent using either
the driver’s license number or the full name of the arrestee.

When using the driver’s license number, the teletype shall be sent in
the following form:

• ID. (Information code, driver’s license number.)

When no driver’s license number is available, the teletype shall
contain: (Manual Section 4/155.15)

• STATUS AND RECORD.
• Arrestee’s full name.
• Arrestee’s address.
• Arrestee’s birthdate (if unknown, give age).

Teletype requests shall originate from the division at which the
arrest reports are completed for distribution. The employee shall use the
appropriate teletype code to ensure that the docket number and the court
of prior conviction, if applicable, appear on the reply from DMV. The
employee making the inquiry shall attach the return teletype information
to the court copy of the arrest report and forward them to the detention
officer having custody of the arrestee.

344. TRAFFIC CASES INVOLVING PHYSICIANS. 344.50 ARREST OF PHYSICIAN
ENROUTE TO TREAT EMERGENCY CASE. When a physician is taken into custody
while enroute to treat an emergency case, the arresting officer shall
immediately cause the patient to be notified. If this is not possible,
the person who summoned the physician shall be notified.

A physician traveling in response to an emergency shall be exempt from
the provisions of Vehicle Code Section 22351 (Speed Law Violations) and
22352 (Prima Facie Speed Limits), if the vehicle so used by the physician
displays an insignia approved by the Department of Motor Vehicles
indicating that the vehicle is owned by a licensed physician (21058
VC).

Note: The caduceus, symbol of the American Medical Association, is the
approved insignia.

346. TRAFFIC CASES INVOLVING JUVENILES. 346.10 CITING
PROCEDURE-TRAFFIC NOTICE TO APPEAR (CITATION). When a juvenile is issued
a Traffic Notice to Appear, Form 4.50.0 for a moving or non-moving
violation, the juvenile shall be advised that a parent or guardian’s
presence is required when at Juvenile Traffic Court in answer to the
citation.

346.20 REFUSAL TO SIGN CITATION-JUVENILES. When a juvenile refuses to
sign a citation, the juvenile shall be processed according to Manual
Section 4/334.40.

346.40 MISDEMEANOR TRAFFIC VIOLATION-JUVENILE ARRESTED. When a
juvenile is booked for a misdemeanor Vehicle or Municipal Code
(traffic-related) violation, the arresting officer shall:

• Complete a Traffic Notice to Appear in the normal manner and have
  the juvenile sign the citation.
• Cite the juvenile to the morning or afternoon session (Manual
  Section 4/320.45) of the Juvenile Traffic Court on the appropriate
  citing date.
• Give the juvenile the defendant’s copy. Note: If
  the juvenile is to be released to a parent or guardian, the
  defendant’s copy of the citation should be given to
  the parent or guardian at the time of release.
• Complete an Arrest Report, Form 5.2, and include the citation
  number and the notation that the court copy of the citation is attached
  to the investigating officer’s copy of the arrest report.
• Attach the court copy of the citation to the arrest report.
• When the juvenile is to be released to a parent or guardian,
  provide the adult with a copy of the Juvenile, Notice to Appear, Form
  9.3.

Exception: Juveniles arrested for violation of Section 23152 VC shall
be processed in the same manner as a non-traffic misdemeanor arrest. A
Traffic Notice to Appear shall not be issued for driving under the
influence.

The investigating officer shall:

• When the juvenile is not detained, forward one copy of the arrest
  report and the court copy of the citation to Traffic Court Liaison,
  Traffic Coordination Section.
• When continued detention is deemed necessary, process the detained
  petition request, court copy of the citation, and related reports in
  the same manner as a detained petition request for any other
  charge.

346.45 JUVENILE OFFENSES INVOLVING ALCOHOL. Officers citing a juvenile
for a violation of 23140(a) VC shall:

• Document probable cause for administering the Intoximeter EC/IR
  Test in the narrative section of a Traffic Notice to Appear or on a
  Continuation of Notice to Appear, if necessary;
• Write the corresponding citation number in the box entitled "DR
  NO." in the upper right corner of the completed Intoximeter EC/IR
  Operator Check List, Form 5.20.7;
• Attach the completed Form 5.20.7 to the Traffic Notice to Appear
  "court copy" (green), and forward it to the appropriate Juvenile
  Traffic Court; and,
• Release the juvenile to a parent or guardian. Note: Section
  23140(a) VC does not require a Field Sobriety Test (FST); however,
  should an officer administer an FST, the results of the FST shall be
  documented on a Driving-Under-the-Influence Arrest
• Report (Continuation), Form 5.2.5. The completed Form 5.2.5 shall
  include the corresponding citation number in the upper right corner in
  the box entitled "DR" and be attached to the Traffic Notice to
  Appear"court copy" (green) and forwarded to the appropriate Juvenile
  Traffic Court. Enforcement of Section 23140(a) VC does not preclude the
  enforcement of 23152(a) VC, Driving-Under-the-Influence of Alcohol or
  Drugs.