Some Noteworthy New Laws for California In 2016

Despite some of Governor Brown's efforts to curtail some of these legislative changes, the Legislature managed to pass several laws relating to crime and punishment.

Assembly Bill 1343 created two brand new Penal Code Sections: 1016.2 and 1016.3. These sections direct both defense lawyers and prosecutors to address immigration consequences of a plea to a criminal charge. It also requires that prosecutors consider the avoidance of adverse immigration consequences in plea negotiations in order to reach a just and proper resolution to a criminal charge. Penal Code Section 1016.3 reads as follows:

• (a) Defense counsel shall provide accurate and affirmative advice about the immigration consequences of a proposed disposition, and when consistent with the goals of and with the informed consent of the defendant, and consistent with professional standards, defend against those consequences.

• (b) The prosecution, in the interests of justice, and in furtherance of the findings and declarations of Section 1016.2, shall consider the avoidance of adverse immigration consequences in the plea negotiation process as one factor in an effort to reach a just resolution.

• (c) This code section shall not be interpreted to change the requirements of Section 1016.5, including the requirement that no defendant shall be required to disclose his or her immigration status to the court.

Under Penal Code Sections 148 and 69, every person who deters or prevents an executive officer from performing any of his or her duties, or knowingly resists the officer, is punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both, as specified. Senate Bill 411 amended those statutes to provide that the fact that a person takes a photograph or makes an audio and/or video recording of an executive officer, while the officer is in a public place or the person taking the photograph or making the recording is in a place he or she has the right to be, is not, in and of itself, a violation of the above-mentioned provision. This is a major change that makes more sense when you consider some of the other legislative changes for 2016 regarding police officers.

Assembly Bill 953 mandates a system for law enforcement to collect information on each traffic stop they make and this data is to be reported to the attorney general each year.

Senate Bill 227 bars the use of grand juries in police shooting investigations.

Senate Bill 178 now requires law enforcement officers to secure a court-ordered search warrant before being able to inspect electronic information stored on electronic devices, such as cell phones, tablets and/or computers.

Senate Bill 491 may provide law enforcement officers with reasonable suspicion to stop and detain motorists who are wearing or using earbuds that cover, rest on or are inserted in both ears. Emergency Responders and those who wear hearing aids are excepted. The law was enacted to ensure that motorists can hear sirens and other safety alerts; but much like the cell phone law that was passed a few years ago, this new law may provide law enforcement officers with a reason to stop and detain you in search of a bigger crime, such as DUI.

Senate Bill 405, which has already taken effect, allows people contesting traffic citations to do so without first paying the fine. After all, you are innocent until proven guilty.

Assembly Bill 1461, known as the “Motor Voter” law registers people to vote when they receive or renew their driver’s licenses unless the person chooses to “opt-out”.

Assembly Bill 1375 increases the amount credited in Penal Code 1205 from $30 to $125 per day, which is a good thing for those who choose to serve time instead of paying any court fines that may be imposed in conjunction with a criminal offense, whether it be a felony or a misdemeanor. At least your time is worth more today than it was last year and years before.

Assembly Bill 8 permits law enforcement agencies to issue what are being called “Yellow Alerts” if a person has been killed or seriously injured in a hit-and-run traffic incident for which law enforcement has information about the suspect and/or the suspect’s vehicle, including a partial license plate number. The law authorizes the California Highway Patrol to use digital message signs when requested by local law enforcement. It also encourages radio, television, and cable and satellite systems to disseminate the identifying information.

Senate Bill 61 granted a one-year extension to the pilot program in Alameda, Los Angeles, Sacramento and Tulare counties that requires all individuals convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) to install an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) in their vehicles. 

Sources: 

http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/1/1/the-biggest-new-laws-of-2016

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/electric-698363-law-vehicles.html

http://crime-iq.com - New 2016 Legislation

Thank you to the above-named sources for providing the information contained in this blog post. 

Fullerton DUI Arrest - Fullerton DUI Attorney

Defending a DUI charge is not easy. It takes time. It also takes knowledge of police procedures and how to use that knowledge to determine whether any legal and/or factual defenses exist and how to use those defenses to obtain a more favorable outcome.

Each agency in Orange County accumulates different types of discovery or evidence that they intend to use against you to convict you of the crime of driving under the influence. Some of those agencies record the entire contact on video, which includes audio. Some agencies use body worn cameras that record the entire contact on video, which also includes audio. 

But there are other types of evidence that need to evaluated, such as the crime lab records relating to the breath and/or blood test that you submitted to after being arrested for DUI - all of this evidence is important to your defense.

None of this evidence is easy to interpret - again, it takes time and it takes knowledge.

The first series of blogs for 2016 deals with the types of DUI Discovery you should expect to obtain or receive in connection with your Orange County DUI Arrest, starting with the City of Fullerton as many of our readers will likely be returning to college and/or graduate schools in that area within a week or two of the date of this post.

The City of Fullerton is patrolled by the Fullerton Police Department. The City of Fullerton did not historically make audio and video recordings of their DUI Investigations; but after some incidents involving allegations against Fullerton Police Department Officers arose, the City decided to begin using Body Worn Camera that capture audio and video of the Fullerton DUI Investigation.

In addition to the Fullerton Police Department there are several campus police organizations, such as the California State University, Fullerton Police Department. These agencies typically do not make any audio and/or video recordings of the DUI Investigation.

Contact Fullerton DUI Attorney Peter F. Iocona to learn more about a Fullerton DUI Arrest and to obtain a Free DUI Consultation and Case Evaluation.

Anaheim DUI Checkpoint - December 26, 2015

According to an Anaheim Police Department Press Release, the Anaheim Police Department will be holding a DUI Checkpoint in Anaheim this evening, Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 1100 Euclid Street between 8:00 p.m. and 2:30 a.m.

If you happen to get caught up in this evening's Anaheim DUI Checkpoint and arrested for DUI, call or contact +Peter F. Iocona for a free DUI Consultation or visit our website dedicated to the types of DUI Discovery you should expect to obtain in connection with your Anaheim DUI Charge.

A DUI Charge Requires Actual "Driving" - Volitional Movement Is Required In California

Many people, (even police officers), erroneously believe that being in "operation and control" of a vehicle is enough to arrest a person for driving under the influence in California. Thus, under that line of thinking, having one's keys in their possession while being behind the wheel would be "sufficient" for arresting someone for driving under the influence. 

This belief is erroneous because the State of California requires a showing of "volitional movement" pursuant to the California State Supreme Court case of Mercer v. DMV (1991) 53 Cal.3d 753. This is an important distinction and one that could mean the difference between a conviction and a dismissal of the DUI charges.

Click the link to learn more about the element of Driving for a DUI charge in the State of California.

Orange County DUI Checkpoints - December 18, 2015 - to - December 20, 2015

There were numerous DUI Checkpoints this past weekend in Orange County, California. If you are interested in learning about the types of discovery or evidence you should expect your DUI Lawyer to obtain in connection with your Orange County DUI Case, check out the following links for each City in Orange County that held a DUI Checkpoint this past weekend:

1. Huntington Beach
2. Fullerton
3. Fountain Valley
4. Placentia
5. Laguna Niguel
6. Garden Grove
7. Brea
8. Costa Mesa
9. Seal Beach
10. Tustin
11. La Habra
12. Irvine
13. Buena Park
14. Santa Ana

The types of discovery that may be available from each agency could mean the difference between a DUI Conviction or a reduction or dismissal.

If you need an experienced Orange County DUI Attorney, contact Attorney +Peter F. Iocona of the Law Office of Barry T. Simons: 888-938-4911 or complete a Confidential DUI Contact Form.

Child Endangerment Charges - Increased Chances of Jail Time

During this holiday season when people may be out shopping and eating with their kids and then have just a drink or two over breakfast, brunch, lunch or dinner, I wanted to remind everyone that some dangers may lie ahead if they were to get arrested for DUI with a child under the age of 14 in the vehicle.

Penal Code § 273a(a) is considered a “wobbler”, punishable by up to one year in the county jail, or two, four, or six years in state prison. Penal Code § 273a(b) is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in county jail. When probation is granted on a Penal Code § 273a conviction, there are minimum mandatory probation terms set forth in Penal Code § 273a(c), though some or all of these conditions may be waived in the interests of justice under Penal Code § 273a(c)(5).

Click the link to learn more about Child Endangerment Charges. 

Click the link to learn more about the Orange County DUI Lawyers of the Law Office of Barry T. Simons.

Motion to Suppress - Anonymous Tipsters Reporting DUI/Drunk Drivers

This is Part IX of the web series dedicated to Motions to Suppress in the State of California that was previously published only to my Google+ Following; which is now available through my blog on Google Blogger.

Part IX of this series focuses on Anonymous Tipsters, which are more and more common now that we routinely see signs along the freeways prompting motorists to report "DUI or Drunk Drivers" by calling 911.

The issue of the constitutionality of a detention based on an anonymous tip to the police by an “Anonymous Tipster” has become an issue of great debate after the California State Supreme Court decision in People v. Wells and even more so after the United States' Supreme Court ruling in Navarette v. California, especially when the officer observed no signs of impaired driving.