Thoughts on recent California DMV vs. Courts re: DUI charges?

[DuffManRHA]

I read a story recently about the DMV suspending people's licenses for a DUI even if there were found not guilty, were acquitted, or had their charges dismissed (they are not the same according to the DMV). While getting more impaired drivers off the road is ALWAYS a good idea, I wanted to see what LEOs thought about the fruit from this tree, before everything gets spun on some commercial for an upcoming referendum.

Just to clarify, I am not an LEO nor have I received a DUI, I just read about this story and wanted to know what actual cops thought.

 

[KushBandit]

I'm not a LEO, but I have experience with this. I was pulled over and charged with a DUI. The DA dropped the charge, but the DMV still suspended my license for about 11 months, which took a lot of paperwork and dealing with the DMV Safety Office to get it reinstated. If you get charged with a DUI, you have up to 5 days to setup an appointment with the DMV to keep your license from being suspended, I didn't know this at the time, so mine got suspended.

Story time:
One day, about 2 years ago, I was driving reckless and slid my truck around a few corners. This was about 9:00pm on a Thursday. No other cars around and no pedestrians near by. A narcotics unit, about a block away, had heard my truck and was looking for me. As I turned into my neighborhood, he spotted me and flipped on the lights. I pulled over, where I was asked to get out of my truck at gun point.

I had no alcohol or drugs in my system, nor on my person. 100% sober. The cop gave me a FST, which included walking a line 6 times, the pen test twice, and recite the alphabet backwards twice. The officer still arrested me and took me to the "drunk tank" at the local county detention center, where I also did 2 more tests; pupil dilation and blood work. Funny thing is, I had just been a accepted into the police academy after completing my written and physical tests. Blew my chances for about 5-7 years because of that.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

Are you talking about the administrative suspension as a result of refusing to submit to FST's or breath/blood testing?

If so, I have no issues with an individual's license remaining suspended, even after a case being dismissed or being found not guilty...

 

[DuffManRHA]

Are you talking about the administrative suspension as a result of refusing to submit to FST's or breath/blood testing?

If so, I have no issues with an individual's license remaining suspended, even after a case being dismissed or being found not guilty...

No, I'm referring to the fact that the DMV, independent of what a criminal court has decided in regards to your license, can choose to still suspend it. I know what you are talking about and no, its not that, its several cases where the courts have dismissed, thrown out, acquitted, etc. and the DMV decides to suspend your license anyway and can basically tell a judge to go pound sand if they disagree with the judge.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

Looks like the DMV is looking at several facts for their administrative hearings:

One of the major things they consider is if BAC testing was performed, and if performed, was the BAC .08 or higher.

If the individual was lawfully stopped with articulable PC and had a BAC of .08 or higher (or refused BAC testing), then I have no problems with a license suspension; regardless of what deals their attorney was able to garner in criminal court.

I have been to far too many fatal DUI accidents.

 

[oldmodman]

If I am reading his story correctly his blood test came back 0.00

And the DMV suspended his license on a paperwork technicality. It appears that if you do not get an attorney and show up at a DMV hearing within 5 days the DMV will automatically suspend your license, even if you had consumed absolutely no alcohol.

It sure sounds like a money grab designed by the attorneys. They lobbied the DMV to get this rule instated to insure just one more Imperial Entanglement.

 

[Lt. ZO6]

If I am reading his story correctly his blood test came back 0.00

Who's story?

 

[KushBandit]

Who's story?

He might be talking about mine, not sure though.

 

[Randy M]

The irony is that if you had a badge at the time you could have flashed it and off you'd go. Cops are largely above traffic laws.