Jeremiah 9:23 “This is what the Lord says: ‘Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,’ declares the Lord.”
Nurse v. DMV (01-17-2012) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED. The DMV claimed this driver had suffered a prior DUI in Iowa. We challenged the use of the Iowa prior here in California because the Iowa law does not define the crime the same way we do here. Iowa makes it illegal to be impaired while operating a vehicle – which could mean the person never actually drove a car. In California, we require actual driving. The judge agreed and ordered the DMV to remove the “prior” from the record AND ordered the DMV to reimburse the driver for her attorney fees and costs incurred by bringing the suit!
People v. Travis Webb (12-19-2011) (Orange County)
Case DISMISSED! This person was arrested for a first offense over a year ago. His BAC was reported to be right at .08%. He was stopped at a checkpoint. He wanted to fight the case. When he went to court, there was no case filed. About a year later, he received a notice from DMV telling him his license was suspended for failing to appear in court. He hired me to correct this error and defend the case. I made a motion to dismiss based on a violation of his speedy trial right. The court agreed, and his record remains clear of a conviction now.
Collins v. DMV (11-23-2011) (Orange County)
Ex Parte to Stay the DMV Suspension GRANTED.
DMV claims this person refused a chemical test. What he actually did, was simply say that he would comply with anything as long as it did not violate his rights. The officer interpreted that response as a refusal. The OC judge agreed to stay the suspension in this case until he can hear all the evidence.
Jaffe v. DMV (11-03-2011) (Los Angeles County)
Ex Parte Stay of Suspension GRANTED
DMV alleges this driver refused the chemical test, but the evidence shows he was not offered a blood test because it was considered too inconvenient. We sought review by a Superior Court judge, and the suspension is on hold until he can hear all the evidence.
Ellis v. DMV (10-27-2011) (Los Angeles County)
Ex Parte Stay of Suspension GRANTED.
The DMV claims this driver refused the chemical test, but she has medical reasons why the test was unavailable, therefore she should have been offered a urine test. Of course, she was never offered a urine test. We sought review by a Superior Court judge. The suspension is on hold until the judge can hear all the evidence.
Cirel v. DMV (8-12-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in Orange County and the Court granted the Writ, ording the DMV to issue a restricted license.
Ogaz v. DMV (8-11-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in Orange County and the Court granted the Writ, ording the DMV to issue a restricted license.
Deardorff v. DMV (6-28-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
The DMV used an Ohio conviction against this driver to increase his suspension period from 30 days to 12 months. I filed a Writ alleging the DMV did not have sufficient evidence to use the Ohio prior. The court agreed. The DMV was forced to treat his California DUI as a first offense.
Ogaz v. DMV (6-13-2011) (Orange County)
Motion for Preliminary Injunction GRANTED. Judge determined that we were likely to prevail on the underlying Writ and ordered the DMV to stay the suspension. This is another Writ forcing the DMV to comply with the new IID license for 2nd offenders.
Petrosian v. DMV (4-27-2011) (Los Angeles)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
This driver lost his DMV hearing. He had an expert testify, but so did the DMV. We had to have a real judge weigh the evidence to get the correct decision. The judge ruled in favor of the driver, and he got his license back. The Court granted the Writ.
Viani v. DMV (4-19-2011) (San Diego)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
This 2nd offender had an offense date prior to 7/1/2010 AND a conviction date prior to 7/1/2010. DMV claimed the new law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply. We challenged that in San Diego County and the Court granted the Writ, ording the DMV to issue a restricted license.
Wedemeyer v. DMV (4-14-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in Orange County and the Court granted the Writ, ording the DMV to issue a restricted license.
Medina v. DMV (4-14-2011) (Orange County)
Another Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
Facts and outcome identical to Wedemeyer, above.
McFarland v. DMV (3-24-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
The DMV used a Florida conviction against this driver to increase his suspension period from 30 days to 12 months. I filed a Writ alleging the DMV did not have sufficient evidence to use the Florida prior. The court agreed. The DMV was forced to treat his California DUI as a first offense.
Segundo v. DMV (3-16-2011) (Los Angeles)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
I handled this client’s 2nd offense DUI, and resolved his case as a 1st offense to avoid jail time. The DMV claimed that he did not have 2 DUI convictions, despite the 1-year suspension imposed by the DMV after he was arrested the 2nd time. The court agreed with my client, that he had suffered 2 convictions, and therefore was eligible for a restricted license after 90 days. He was not required to suffer the entire 12 month suspension.
People v. Lewis (3-16-2011) (West Covina)
Red Light Camera Ticket – Trial: NOT GUILTY
Please note: I only handle DUI cases and related DMV matters. I handled this red light camera ticket as part of the defense provided in a DUI case.
Doan v. DMV (3-11-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED. Driver awarded $2,000.00 + costs.
After the DMV ruled against the driver at the APS hearing, we challenged the DMV decision. The DMV claimed the arresting officer did not have to sign the arresting document (DS-367), and that when another officer signed the proof of service section that was sufficient. After we filed the Petition for Writ of Mandate, the DMV conceded we were right and gave back the driver license. The court required the DMV to reimburse the driver the attorney fees and costs he had incurred in the process.
McNerny v. DMV (3-10-2011) (Los Angeles)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in Orange County and the Court granted the Writ, ording the DMV to issue a restricted license.
Vargas v. DMV (3-9-2011) (Orange County)
Ex Parte GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in Orange County and the Court granted a restricted license pending the outcome of the case.
Viani v. DMV (3-3-2011) (San Diego)
Ex Parte GRANTED.
DMV claims the new 7/1/2010 law allowing restricted license for 2nd and 3rd offenders installing the IID does not apply to people with offenses prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged that in San Diego County and the Court ruled that the driver made compelling arguments, and granted a restricted license pending the outcome of the case.
Black v. DMV (2-17-2011) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
DMV claimed that the new 7/1/2010 law giving a restricted license to 2nd or 3rd offenders does not apply to drivers with offense dates prior to 7/1/2010. We challenged this claim in the Superior Court of California, Orange County. The Judge ruled that it did apply to my client, despite the offense date being prior to 7/1/2010.
Enoc v DMV (2011-01-21) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
Driver arrested for DUI. DMV attempted to suspend his license without giving him an oportunity to present expert testimony. We sought review from the Superior Court. The court ruled the DMV was required to give the driver a new hearing to present the expert testimony. The expert testified that the driver’s BAC was .01-.07% at the time of driving. The DMV ignored the testimony and suspended the license. We sought review from the Superior Court again. The court overturned the DMV decision, and the driver’s license was reinstated.
Celso v. DMV (2011-01-20) (Los Angeles)
Fee Waiver – GRANTED.
Driver is challenging unlawful suspension of his license by DMV. He applied for a fee waiver and the Superior Court held a hearing to determine if the waiver should be granted. It was granted.
Lisa v. DMV (2011-01-7) (Orange County)
Writ of Mandate GRANTED.
Driver was arrested for DUI. She was asked to do a blood or breath test and she declined. The officer never advised her that her license would be suspended if she refused. The DMV suspended her license anyway. We challenged the DMV at the Superior Court. The court GRANTED the Writ, overturning the 1-year suspension.
People v. Jason (2010-12-27) (Whittier)
Client found NOT GUILTY by Court.
After beginning a jury trial, and winning an important motion limiting the admissibility of breath evidence, the prosecution dropped one charge, and the judge found the driver Not Guilty of the other charge. This outcome avoided a conviction for DUI, and resulted in an immediate reinstatement of the driver license.
