The San Francisco MUNI subway system was closed for over two hours due to the suspected drunk driver as he made his way eastward almost into the Van Ness Avenue station. No one was injured in the traffic related incident and the DUI driver is expected to by released on a citation and promise to appear in the San Francisco Superior Court, Hall of Justice.

Some MUNI railway tracks were damaged and the driver will have to pay restitution for the repairs if he is convicted of a DUI.

CHP officers made traffic stops resulting in DUI arrests for speeding and making an illegal left turn. One driver was also arrested for drunk driving after crashing his car on Heather Land in West Sonoma County.

Four children were in the car of one suspected drunk driver and he will likely also be charged with child endangerment by the Sonoma County District Attorney. A conviction for a DUI while having passengers under the age of 14 in the car can result in enhanced penalties including additional jail time. Further, a person convicted of child endangerment will be placed on 4 years of probation and must attend mandatory parenting classes.

A 24 year old man arrested over the weekend was found to be driving without a license and was determined to be on probation. That driver fought with police officers and refused to get out of the police car. He was booked on charges of resisting an officer and violating his probation.

San Rafael Police believe that DUI Checkpoints, along with regularly scheduled high visibility DUI enforcement, are proven strategies with the goal of removing impaired drivers from the Marin County roadways. Police agencies throughout Marin County, the Marin Avoid the 13 multi agency DUI task force, and throughout the San Francisco Bay Area hold DUI checkpoints to deter DUI drivers and to keep unlicensed drivers off the streets.

In a hearing held at the Santa Rosa DMV an administrative license suspension on a 1st offense DUI was set aside when it was shown that the arresting officer did not properly observe the driver prior to administering the breath test. Video introduced by the driver clearly showed that the officer was not with the driver during the required 15 minute observation period. The California Code of Regulations requires that a subject be observed for 15 continuous minutes prior to submitting to a breath test to ensure that the subject does not eat, drink, burp, smoke, regurgitate or do anything else that might compromise the breath sample. In this case, the officer was unable to see, hear or otherwise observe the driver as he had left her in his vehicle and stepped away to conduct other business during the observation period. The DMV had no option but to set aside the suspension due to the violation of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations.

The third set aside of a DMV APS suspension came out of the San Francisco DMV driver safety office. In that matter the DMV called a witness in an attempt to prove that the licensee had actually been driving the vehicle. Due to the witnesses inability to identify the subject as the driver the DMV hearing officer agreed that a set aside of the suspension was appropriate.

Among the citations issued by the Petaluma Police Officers were tickets for speeding, cellphone use, illegal U-turns, passing over double yellow lines, running red lights and a pedestrian obstructing traffic. In addition, officers made two arrests, one for drunk driving and one for possession of a controlled substance. The driver arrested for drug possession had been stopped for a cellphone violation and officers allegedly smelled marijuana before conducting a further investigation.

The 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution protects us all from unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures. That protection extends to traffic stops. Police in California can stop a vehicle based on a reasonable belief that a vehicle code violation has occurred and traffic stops are routinely initiated for lighting and mechanical violations as well as for speeding, cell phone usage, illegal turning movements and failure to stop. For an officer to conduct a search of a person or her vehicle without a warrant there must be probable cause to believe a crime has been committed or the officer must have received valid consent from the driver prior to conducting the search.

Marin County DUI Police Officers will use the newly awarded funds to run DUI and driver's license checkpoints, drunk driving saturation patrols and courthouse stings. The 13 Marin County Police Departments involved in the Avoid the 13 campaign will also target repeat offenders and scofflaws by conducting warrant and probation sweeps.

DUI and Driver's License Checkpoints aimed at deterring people from driving impaired and driving while unlicensed, have become commonplace in recent years. Although these checkpoints amount to a warrantless intrusion and their effectiveness can be questioned, the courts have ruled that checkpoints are legal provided that the police follow guidelines including the giving of advance notice to motorists, the use of proper warning signs and lighting and a neutral based formula for stopping cars.

Drivers in Marin County can expect to see DUI campaigns during the upcoming Thanksgiving weekend and Christmas holiday season as well as on Super Bowl Sunday, St. Patrick's Day, and Cinco de Mayo. Traditionally those holidays see and increase in DUIs.

Marin County man alleged to have been driving 71 mph, based on radar, in a 35 mile per hour zone on Nicasio Valley Road. Court trial in the Marin Superior Court. The citing CHP officer failed to produce a valid traffic and engineering survey and the charged violation of Vehicle Code 22350 and court ordered suspended license from prior trial by written declaration are dismissed.

In California the use of Radar or Lidar on most surface streets where the speed limit has been set at prima facie limit the police must produce a valid traffic and engineering survey in order to justify the use of a speed measuring device. According to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, prima facie speed limits should be set at the nearest 5 mph increment of the 85% of all driver's in the survey unless proper legal reasons allow for a reduction below that setting. The use of Radar or Lidar where there is no valid survey amounts to an illegal speed trap.

The grant money will also be used for warrant searches, DUI stakeouts for repeat offenders, and courthouse stings where officers wait outside for convicted drunk drivers with suspended or revoked drivers licenses who drive away from court.

Drunk driving cases in Solano County are prosecuted in the Superior Courthouses, located in Vallejo and Fairfield. Which Courthouse a case goes to depends on whether the DUI arrest was made in the Northern or Southern part of the County. Typically drunk driving cases originating in Vallejo and Benicia are handled in Department 24 of the Vallejo Courthouse while cases stemming from arrests in Vacaville, Dixon, Rio Vista and Fairfield begin in Department 21 of the Fairfield Court.

The San Rafael Police Department said that the success of the Halloween 2011 drunk driving enforcement can be measured in the fact that there were no major alcohol related injuries deaths in Marin during the weekend.

Driving under the influence enforcement operations will continue with the Marin Avoid the 13 in November and December through the 2011 Holiday season. Those operations will likely include DUI saturation patrols and drunk driving/driver's license checkpoints.

Felony and repeat drunk drivers in Solano County will be targeted with specialized probation supervision measures. Grant money will also be used by the probation department to work with other Solano County Police agencies on anti-DUI efforts. Those multi agency activities will include monitoring of treatment and DUI program compliance, driving under the influence related warrant sweeps, and unannounced home searches of drunk driving probationers.

Marin County.
Speeding ticket, violation of Vehicle Code section 22350 on Lucas Valley Rd. in San Rafael is dismissed at court trial.

San Mateo County.
Violations of Vehicle Code sections 22348(a) speeding over 100 mph and 22349 violating the maximum speed limit. Attorney filed demurrers in both cases which were granted after prosecution failed to file amended verified complaints. Both cases dismissed.

Somoma County.
Speeding ticket on Highway 101 dismissed when demurrer is granted!

In addition to next weeks drunk driving checkpoints in San Rafael the Avoid the 13 will be running a DUI/driver's license checkpoint in San Anselmo on Saturday, August 27, 2011 from 6 p.m. to 1 a.m. Sunday, August 28, 2011. Also, there will be a drunk driving and driver's license checkpoint on Sept. 3 in Novato and the Avoid the 13 will be running roving DUI patrols throughout Marin County from 8 p.m. to 2 a.m. on various nights.

While driving under the influence checkpoints are aimed at deterring drunk driving and keeping unlicensed drivers off our roads, they have been subject to recent scrutiny for being held in areas with high populations of illegal immigrants as undocumented residents cannot obtain driver's licenses in California. However, despite some public backlash against the use of checkpoints, the courts have ruled that they are legal provided that the police follow guidelines including the giving of advance notice to motorists, the use of proper warning signs and lighting and a neutral based formula for stopping cars.

A trial be written declaration must be filed prior to the original due date on a traffic ticket in California and the defendant must post any associated bail in order to have the matter heard. The citing officer must then submit a declaration to the court in order for a trial to be held on the written declarations. If the officer fails to respond or does not provide evidence sufficient for a finding of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt the matter will be dismissed and the bail amount refunded. If the court renders a finding of guilt the defendant then as a right to request a new trial in front of a judicial officer.

A conviction for a violation of Vehicle Code section 22349(b), would have resulted in one point on the client's driving record and increased insurance costs.

In California the use of Radar on most surface streets must be justified by a valid traffic and engineering survey. California Vehicle Code sections 627 and 40802 et sec. discuss the use of radar to detect the speed of a moving vehicle. Absent the proper introduction of evidence, including a valid certified traffic and engineering survey a peace officer's use of radar is an illegal speed trap. When the court finds that the use of radar was illegal the officer is incompetent to give testimony and the court is without jurisdiction to render a finding of guilt.

The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the Vehicle Code require that the speed limit be set within the nearest 5 mph of the 85 percentile of drivers in a traffic and engineering survey. Absent proper justification based on factors not readily apparent to drivers, the speed limit may not be reduced lower than the nearest 5 mph of the 85 percentile. In this case the 85 percentile speed was 45 mph but the speed limit had been set at 35 mph without proper justification and the Court had to dismiss the case.

Once again the San Rafael Police are targeting drunk drivers and unlicensed driver's in the Canal area. There has been backlash in recent years over checkpoints in the Canal and other areas with high populations of undocumented immigrants due to the fact that people without social security numbers cannot obtain a driver's license in California. However, the San Rafael Police Department indicates that they chose the location in the Canal area due to a high number of DUI related accidents, 55% of all drunk driver related accidents in San Rafael so far in 2011.

Friday night's DUI checkpoint will be funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.