Category — Lake Tahoe Attorney

I’ve often been asked, AFTER a traffic stop that results in an arrest for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), whether co-operating with the officer’s request to submit to the coordination/sobriety tests, and giving a breath sample in the field was a good idea or not.  There are some general guidelines about what to do or not to do.  The best advice available before a traffic stop is DO NOT EVER DRINK AND DRIVE!  But….

A DUI arrest will usually involve the same series of events.  Generally, the arresting officer must move from one step to the next to be sure the case is constructed correctly, or when it comes time to prove the case in court, the case can be dismantled, sometimes by just removing one or two small but critical parts of the officer’s case.

Assume the officer has a valid reason to stop and detain you.  (See highlighted notes.)  If pulled over, BE COURTEOUS AND COOPERATIVE!  But don’t answer the question, “Do you know why I pulled you over?” with an admission that you must have been speeding or otherwise breaking the law. (This helps build the officer’s case.)

“In California, under current law, an officer’s “stop” can be justified as legally valid if the reason comes from an anonymous phone call reporting bad driving even if the officer did not see any bad driving or the smallest traffic violation.

The California Supreme court has ruled that such detentions and arrests that arise from them are VALID.  Scholars and attorneys see this as a “bad” ruling that should be overturned by the U.S. Supreme court.  The specific California case is now working its way to that court for review.

The current state of the law accounts for the many signs seen on California highways requesting you to report bad (“Drunk”) Drivers!”

If you are willing to risk an arrest, here is how to not participate in building a DUI case against yourself:

The officer will ask you to watch his pen or finger as it moves across your field of vision, and to perform some coordination tests.  And then you will be asked to give a breath sample in the field to test for alcohol. THEN you will be arrested.  In California, you will then be given the choice between an alcohol blood test or breath test.  (If the officer suspects drugs are involved, you will be requested to give a urine test.)  THE POST ARREST TEST IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MATTERS!

You don’t need to help the officer build his case by giving him observed evidence of impairment.  You do not have to submit to any coordination tests or the field alcohol test.  But you MUST submit to the post arrest test, or you will lose your license for at least ONE YEAR.

If you are afraid of needles, and weak of breath, say so, and request a urine test.  For alcohol testing, the breath test is less reliable and easier to attack than the blood test.  The urine test is easier to attack for alcohol content, but harder to attack for drugs.

For more information about what to do AFTER an arrest, visit this informational website.

Workers’ Compensation laws are “no fault.”  That means it does not matter whether someone, (employer, employee or third party) or no one, is at fault.   If the injury or death is work related, it is covered.  Secondly, under California’s compensation laws, both the facts and the law are liberally construed in favor of sustaining a claim.   And following this reasoning, a special rule was developed to find in favor of industrial “causation” of many injuries and deaths.  It is called the “Bunkhouse rule.”

The “Bunkhouse Rule” provides extra protection to employees who live in employer provided housing.  Injuries suffered on the employer’s premises are generally covered by the compensation laws.  The reasoning is that the housing is provided not only to benefit the employee, but is for the employer’s benefit as well.   And there are many other situations where injuries suffered away from the regular workplace are covered.  (For example, while on business trips, attending certain educational, and even some recreational programs, sometimes while commuting in a company vehicle, even while indulging in certain totally personal activities.)

If you or anyone you know have suffered an injury (or the death of a family member) it is important to contact a Workers’ Compensation specialist to determine whether benefits for the worker, or the survivors, might be available.  There are strict time limits to file a claim, so it is VERY important to contact an attorney as soon as possible.  Even when a claim is accepted, the extent of benefits payable will usually be increased when represented by an attorney compared to proceeding without one.

For more information about California workers’ compensation claims, or if you have questions about workers’ compensation issues, contact Kim Steven LaValley at (877) 233 8399, or visit him at:  ksl@law-in-tahoe.com.

One of the many interesting aspects of Workers’ Compensation is how wide the coverage “net” is.  Work related injuries or death often are covered in surprising circumstances that on first impression would not appear to be work related.

For example, and not long ago, there were three tragic deaths at a well known ski resort in the California Sierra Nevada mountains.  As reported in the Sacramento Bee and the Yuba Appeal Democrat, three young women from Yuba County (Marysville, Olivehurst and Loma Rica,) were employees at the resort and lived in “company housing” at the resort.  At a point in time not specified in the news, they went outside and got into their car in the employer’s parking lot.  They fell asleep while the car was running in a snow storm, and over time the snow covered the car and the car’s exhaust pipe.  The accumulating snow trapped the exhaust from the running engine, and its deadly component, carbon monoxide, was forced into the passenger compartment.  All three died of asphyxiation—lack of oxygen.

There is a good chance that these deaths would be compensable under California Workers’ compensation law, providing the possibility of substantial benefits to the surviving families.  As is often the case in answering a legal question, much depends on the particular facts of the case under consideration.  A detailed review of the facts would be needed to determine whether the case could be pursued or not.