DUI Lawyer Los Angeles

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHARLES P. SUBRAMANI, Defendant and Appellant
Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, Division Four
October 31, 1985

The defendant drove his vehicle striking broadside a vehicle injuring the driver and the passenger. Driver suffered minor injuries but passenger sustained substantial injuries. Defendant was charged as follows on V counts, felony driving under the influence and causing injury to the driver (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (a)); felony driving under the influence and causing injury to the passenger (§ 23153, subd. (a)); felony driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more and causing injury to the driver (Veh. Code, § 23153, subd. (b)); felony driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more and causing injury to the passenger (§ 23153, subd. (b)) and misdemeanor driving with a suspended license. Prior to trial, defendant pleaded guilty to count V. Defendant was convicted of both felony and misdemeanor driving under the influence and driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more based upon one collision in which two persons were injured. The defendant challenged the judgment.

Issues:

Whether the misdemeanor drunk driving counts must be vacated?
Whether the defendant is being properly charged with more than one count from a single act of drunk driving which caused injury to more than one person?

Discussion:

This court held that the defendant could be charged only with one count of felony drunk driving (i.e., with violations of subds. (a) and (b) of § 23153); the injuries of either or both of the victims could be used as proof of the charge. Here, however, the prosecutor charged separate felony counts for each victim; that was improper. Because the felony convictions involving injury to victim Blackwell (counts II and IV) were properly charged and are supported by substantial evidence, they can stand. The misdemeanor counts (counts I and III) involving Brown are mere surplusage and therefore must be stricken.

This court held that while such dual conviction is proper, dual punishment is prohibited by Penal Code section 654. (People v. Duarte, supra, 161 Cal.App.3d at pp. 446-447.) The trial court correctly applied that principle by ordering that the execution of the sentence on one of the felonies (count IV) was to be stayed in accordance with Penal Code section 654.

Conclusion:

This court hence reversed the judgment against defendant only as to the misdemeanor convictions and affirmed the judgment in all other respects. Defendant was properly charged and convicted of felonies for both driving under the influence and driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.10 percent or more.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group.  They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions.  The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

 

Originally published here.

---

Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

---

Century City Criminal Defense Lawyer Barry Sands Successfully Represents Superstar Celebrity Clientele and Launches …
When Superstar celebrities Steve-O (Jackass 3-D), Tom Sizmore (Natural Born Killers and Saving Private Ryan) and Steven Adler (Guns N’ Roses) needed a Lawyer, they all have turned in their time of need to Century City Criminal Defense Lawyer Barry Sands to defend them.

Published Nov 26, 2010.
Read more: PRWeb via Yahoo! News

There are a number of reasons as to why you would pay a large amount of money in order to get the best Los Angeles DUI Lawyers to fight your case for you. If you do factor in all the different aspects of these lawyers, their asking price is justified. People these days expect great results but might not always be ready to pay for them. Hence, if you want someone that can actually win the case for you, it might not be possible by simply going in with the public defender. You will need a really good lawyer by your side.

Scanning for every applicable law

The first place where you will notice the difference would probably have to be when these lawyers are defending you. They will be able to scan through the law books for pretty much every law that is applicable in this case. Hence, unless you are willing to take a chance and have some random lawyer fight your case, you should seriously consider pay a little extra and going in with strong Los Angeles DUI Lawyers. The kind of things that they would use to defend your case is bound to amaze you.

Fighting to the very end

Some lawyers tend to simply give up on the case after a certain point, when it becomes quite clear that you are not going to be winning the case in any way. However, when you get really good Los Angeles DUI Lawyers fighting for you, the case is never over until the verdict is out. Hence, they will fight on your behalf to the very end, even if the outcome seems obvious to others. This kind of perseverance can only be obtained with quality lawyers. Hence, for these reasons, it is recommended that you get such lawyers on your team.

Justice in any way possible

Lawyers are known to go the extra mile in case of their clients, often willing to take risks and chances in order to emerge victorious. When you go in with lawyers that aren’t as savvy to fight for you, the results are quite obvious, even if you started the case with better odds. Hence, a little extra money and getting the more competitive Los Angeles DUI Lawyers can help ensure that you get justice in an effective manner. Your case will be fought such that it will be next to impossible for the jury to not see things in your perspective.

All of these reasons plus a lot more are why you would perhaps be willing to arrange more funds and hire the better Los Angeles DUI Lawyers to defend you. Hence, it is important that you are able to understand these aspects of these lawyers so that you don’t think that you are paying a lot of money for no reason. Hence, if someone else asks you as to why you are going in for such expensive lawyers, you will perhaps have the answer right away. After all, getting convicted and serving a sentence is definitely not a desirable result, which should be avoided as much as possible.

Originally published here.

---

Sagbee C

---