San Francisco Criminal Lawyer Blog

February 23, 2018

New Traffic School for Bicyclists Opens in California

If you are ticketed for a traffic offense while operating your motor vehicle, you likely understand that you have certain options. You can pay the fine, you can go to court and contest the matter, or you may be able to get your citation expunged and your fines dropped if you complete an approved driving school program within the allowed period of time. Recently, a new statute has allowed for the creation of traffic schools for bicyclists, meaning that, if you are cited while operating your bike, you may have all of the same options as vehicle drivers. If you have received a citation, before you make a decision regarding how to resolve it, talk to a knowledgeable California traffic ticket attorney, who understands the process and can advise you on your options and what might work best for your situation.

In 2016, Assembly Bill 902 became law, allowing cities to create traffic schools for bicyclists. The bill, created by a Santa Monica assemblyman, represents the first time that bicycle traffic schools have been allowed under California law. Recently, the San Gabriel Valley Tribune reported on the one of the newest additions to the group of available bicycle traffic schools. That school is based in El Monte in Los Angeles County.

The El Monte-based bicycle traffic school is one of the first in the state. Two of the state’s major universities, UC Berkeley and UC Davis, have established diversion programs for bicyclists, according to the Tribune. Despite bicycle advocates’ efforts, several Northern California cities, like Oakland, Berkeley, and Alameda, have not yet elected to create bicycle traffic schools, according to the report. Because of the wording of AB902, the decision regarding whether or not to create a bicycle traffic school is made independently by each city.

February 16, 2018

The Risks You Take When You Handle Your DMV Driver’s License Suspension Case On Your Own Without a San Francisco Attorney

by Uthman Law Office

There are many things that can derail your legal case. Your case may be unsuccessful because you don’t have enough factual evidence on your side. Your case could also be unsuccessful because of procedural deficiencies. One of the most preventable ways to fail is because you decide to handle your case yourself, and you make procedural errors that you could have avoided with representation from an experienced California DMV attorney. Achieving a successful result in your license suspension case, or any type of legal matter, involves more than just knowing the facts of your case and being able to present them. It involves having a familiarity with the procedural rules of your case and making sure that you follow them.

The case of one East Bay driver serves as a useful story of caution on this point. The case began when a local police officer in Antioch responded to the scene of a two-vehicle accident and identified what he believed was alcohol on the breath of one of the drivers. The officer also thought that that driver’s eyes appeared bloodshot and watery. The driver, Michael, told the officer that he’d last had alcohol more than five hours before the accident, when he’d had two drinks with vodka in them. He indicated to the officer that he’d been awake for 21 hours.

Michael underwent a blood test some 2½ hours after the accident. The test yielded a BAC of 0.08. The DMV suspended his license. After Michael elected to have an administrative hearing, the hearing officer upheld the suspension. The driver took his case to the trial court but was still unsuccessful. He appealed to the Court of Appeal, but once again the suspension was upheld. Significant parts of what plagued Michael’s case on appeal came down to procedural problems, which can be a common shortcoming when people decide to handle their own cases without legal counsel.

February 6, 2018

The Difference Between Domestic Battery and Simple Battery in California

by Uthman Law Office

California has strong legal safeguards, including criminal statutes, to protect against domestic violence. Part of understanding domestic violence-related criminal law is understanding the purpose of the domestic violence statute. The law exists to protect people who are, in the words of the California courts, “in a special relationship for which society demands, and the victim may reasonably expect, stability and safety, and in which the victim… may be especially vulnerable.” In other words, not all relationships are covered by this statute. A person should not be convicted of a domestic violence crime if the facts of their case don’t meet the law’s requirements, including those governing the relationships that are (and aren’t) covered by the law. If you have been accused of a domestic violence crime, it is important to have an experienced California domestic violence attorney, who understands the process and the details of the law, working for you.

One example of a case that went forward as a domestic battery case but should not have was the interaction between “Jane Doe” and a man named Jason. Jane Doe was involved in a sexual relationship with Jason. After Jane Doe made statements that Jason had beaten her “all week long,” the police investigated, but the woman recanted everything and told the officers that the bruises on her body were a result of consensual rough sex she had with Jason. Despite this, the state brought charges against Jason for domestic violence (Section 273.5 of the Penal Code). He was ultimately convicted and sentenced to six years.

Jason appealed, and he was successful. The basis of his appeal was straightforward: he argued that he could not possibly be guilty of violating Section 273.5 of the Penal Code because that statute requires that the abuser and the victim share one of a short list of specific relationships, none of which applied to him and Jane Doe. His attack on Jane Doe could only be simple battery, rather than domestic battery.