California is Increasing Penalties For DUI Charges
http://www.lawsays.net/articles/2030/1/California-is-Increasing-Penalties-For-DUI-Charges/Page1.html
Alex Weidmann
Find more great DUI tips at Colorado DUI By Alex Weidmann
Published on 03/5/2009
Prosecutors, legislators, and courts are looking to expand on the limits on a driver's criminal and civil liability in drunk driving cases.
Prosecutors, legislators, and courts are looking to expand on the limits on a driver's criminal and civil liability in drunk driving cases. One method that has been widely accepted is increasing the punishments for DUIs drastically.
Certain circumstances call for the misdemeanor offense to be treated as a felony; a felony DUI which is punishable by incarceration in a state prison. When drunk driving results in death, the term "murder" is now being widely used.
If drunk driving results in any injuries or harm to other people, it has reached felony status. California's felony DUI statue is typical: any person who, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, or under the combined influence of intoxicating liquor and any drug, drives a vehicle and when so driving does any act forbidden by law or neglects any duty imposed by law in the driving of such vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than himself, is guilty of a felony. [California Vehicle Code Section 23153.]
Three elements have been added to the code: the violation of a statute, bodily injury, and proximate causation. Attorneys should be aware of two possible sources of error; the violation must be a violation of a statue other than the drunk driving statue. Usually the violation consists of some minor traffic offense such as speeding or running a red light.
Secondly, the bodily injury or harm must be caused entirely by the drunk drivers violation. If there's an independent source that caused the harm, the elements of a felony DUI aren't satisfied. An extreme example in People V. Weems, 54 Cal. App. 4th 854 (1997) shows that the injuries were caused by the failure of the defendant to wear their seatbelt.
There are also situations where an intoxicated driver rammed into another vehicle going much slower in front of them, hospitalizing the driver of that vehicle. An overly zealous or inexperienced prosecutor may automatically think it's felony drunk driving, but there are two parts missing. First there is no evidence that the driver violated a statue other than drunk driving, and second there isn't any evidence that the injuries were caused by another violation.
In Texas, Roberts V. State, 766 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. App. 1989), the defendant caused an accident while running from police, which resulted in injury to two people and death to another. He was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault resulting in serious bodily injury.
Although they appealed, the court found that a car did qualify as a "deadly weapon," and that even though the defendant acted in a reckless rather than intentional way, it amounted to assault.
Certain circumstances call for the misdemeanor offense to be treated as a felony; a felony DUI which is punishable by incarceration in a state prison. When drunk driving results in death, the term "murder" is now being widely used.
If drunk driving results in any injuries or harm to other people, it has reached felony status. California's felony DUI statue is typical: any person who, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, or under the combined influence of intoxicating liquor and any drug, drives a vehicle and when so driving does any act forbidden by law or neglects any duty imposed by law in the driving of such vehicle, which act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to any person other than himself, is guilty of a felony. [California Vehicle Code Section 23153.]
Three elements have been added to the code: the violation of a statute, bodily injury, and proximate causation. Attorneys should be aware of two possible sources of error; the violation must be a violation of a statue other than the drunk driving statue. Usually the violation consists of some minor traffic offense such as speeding or running a red light.
Secondly, the bodily injury or harm must be caused entirely by the drunk drivers violation. If there's an independent source that caused the harm, the elements of a felony DUI aren't satisfied. An extreme example in People V. Weems, 54 Cal. App. 4th 854 (1997) shows that the injuries were caused by the failure of the defendant to wear their seatbelt.
There are also situations where an intoxicated driver rammed into another vehicle going much slower in front of them, hospitalizing the driver of that vehicle. An overly zealous or inexperienced prosecutor may automatically think it's felony drunk driving, but there are two parts missing. First there is no evidence that the driver violated a statue other than drunk driving, and second there isn't any evidence that the injuries were caused by another violation.
In Texas, Roberts V. State, 766 S.W.2d 578 (Tex. App. 1989), the defendant caused an accident while running from police, which resulted in injury to two people and death to another. He was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault resulting in serious bodily injury.
Although they appealed, the court found that a car did qualify as a "deadly weapon," and that even though the defendant acted in a reckless rather than intentional way, it amounted to assault.