In order for someone to be prosecuted for Driving Under the Influence of methamphetamines, the prosecutions must show that that not only did the person have methamphetamines in their system, but that the methamphetamines impaired the persons driving. Unlike alcohol, there is no set limit as to what would cause intoxication. The prosecution must show that the methamphetamines impaired a persons driving, it is not suffice enough to only have methamphetamines in your system. Further, the arresting officer are required to adhere to strict policies and procedures for the traffic stop, the field sobriety test and any chemical testing they perform. This is so that they follow a system that is reliable and can be compared to other cases. Officers are trained on these steps uniformly and should not deviate from the course of their training.
Every arrest is specific to the facts that surround them and the lawyers at the Orange County DUI lawyers at the Johnson Criminal Law Group will go over what defense would fit your particular scenario, however some common defenses include the probable cause for the stop, the matter in which the chemical test were performed, the level of impairment, or other causes for your impairment.
In order for a traffic stop to be constitutional, the arresting officer must have probable cause to believe a law violation had occurred. Other than at DUI sobriety checkpoints, which have their own set of governing policies and procedures, police, must have "probable cause" for a DUI traffic stop. This means they must actually observe you committing a traffic violation or driving unsafely. If there was no probable cause, a stop would be a violation your Fourth Amendment constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures. If that occurs, your DUI case should be tossed.
Another possible defense to a charge of driving under the influence of methamphetamines is a deficiency in how the chemical test was administered. Under Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations there are procedure that must be strictly adhered to during chemical testing. If the arresting agency fails to follow each step properly, the blood, breath or urine sample could have been contaminated.
Further, just because you had methamphetamines in your system, it does not necessarily mean that you were under their influence so as to constitute a DUI. Many other conditions, physical or psychological, such as exhaustion or anxiety could have caused your impairment. In these cases, it is may be that you weren't impaired at all.
It is important to note that it is also a crime in California to drive while addicted to a drug addicted driving is considered a form of California DUI and carries DUI penalties. Prosecutors rarely charge people with driving while addicted to a drug, however if you are caught driving with methamphetamines in your system and argue that you were not impaired; an overzealous prosecutor could try to make the case that you broke the law by driving while addicted.
Another defense to driving under the influence of methamphetamine is that the person charged was not actually the driver or was not driving. Our attorneys have gone to trial and won in cases where a person was simply sitting in the driver’s seat but had never driven the vehicle or had fallen asleep in the vehicle impaired but never drove it. In these “no drive” defense cases, the most important fact is who the driver was. Sometimes individual switch seats and sometimes a true driver will run away from a scene to avoid being detected and a defendant is left accused of driving when he had not.
If you or a loved one have been arrested for driving under the influence of methampetamines, it is important for you to contact the Johnson Criminal Law Group immediately. With our years of experience, we are ready to provide the best defense for those accused of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.