San Diego Drunk Driving Lawyers explore Refusal defenses & legal excuses which California DMV conveniently fails to state in its DMV manualrick
San Diego Drunk Driving Lawyers explore Refusal defenses & legal excuses which California DMV conveniently fails to state in its DMV manual.
California cases cited by DUI attorneys include the San Diego case of Eberle v. DMV – unavailability of blood or breath tests when DUI officer first advised of obligation to submit to test as there was no such test in the street or field when there was first a refusal and then driver later cured refusal;
Ross v. DMV – driver’s reasonable request to first be shown laboratory tech identification before submitting to blood best;
Thompson v. DMV – cop car radio interference caused inability of driver to fully understand or comprehend refusal admonition;
McDonnell v. DMV – DUI officer-induced confusion.
The few DUI Refusal Defenses & Excuses contained in DMV’s hearing officer materials reflects the bias of DMV or their unwillingness to properly and fully research all lawful defenses.
Lawyers appreciate fair & reasonable hearing officers who consider beyond this article containing DMV’s Manual which seems to only limit defenses and mention excuses of a head injury that affected the driver’s ability to refuse to submit to a chemical test, when a driver is unconscious or otherwise unable to understand the warning or refuse the test, special communication problems, and some out-dated officer-induced confusion cases which DMV attempts to unfairly limit, attorneys note.