Fresno DUI Lawyer
Fresno DUI Law Firm
Free DUI Case Evaluation
Fresno Law Credentials
DUI Defense Firm Firm Profile
    What to do first DUI Resources DUI Questions
      Case Results Contact Us
      Fresno DUI Defense
      DUI Criminal Process in Fresno
      Fresno DMV Process
      Fresno Field Sobriety Tests
      Prior Fresno DUI Convictions
      Felony DUI in Fresno
      Fresno DUI With Accident
      Fresno Blood & Breath Tests
      Driving on Suspended License
      Out of State Drivers
      Fresno DUI Expungement
      Fresno County DUI News
      Fresno DUI Blog
      Hiring the Best DUI Lawyer
      DUI Arrests in Fresno County
      DUI Checkpoints in Fresno County
      Marijuana DUIs in Fresno
      Felony DUIs in Fresno

      Fresno DUI Law Firm Case Results

      Case results can be a good barometer for the success of a potential Fresno DUI attorney. However, you should pay attention to more than just the win/loss column. A truly successful Fresno DUI attorney will have successful results in Fresno DUI cases that are more complex, such as felonies, as well as the typical misdemeanor trials. Additionally, you want to choose a Fresno DUI attorney that is skillful in pretrial negotiations and DMV hearings – without a full complement of skills, your Fresno DUI case may suffer. OurFresno DUI firm has the experience necessary to represent your case and we have the cast results to prove it. Our clients come from every walk of life and every circumstance – teachers, legal professionals, truck drivers and more. We’ve helped hundreds, even thousands of people to retain their driving privileges and reduce or eliminate the penalties most commonly associated with DUI in Fresno.

      DUI Cases and Results

      #1. Client and his girlfriend were drinking in a bar. They began to argue and left. Shortly thereafter, cops respond to a MVA call a block or two from the bar. They come upon a vehicle that had jumped the medium, gone across two lanes of traffic on the other side of the street, bounced over the curb, and was wedged into some bushes on the other side of the sidewalk. The headlights were on, the car was in gear, and client was found in the driver’s seat passed out on the steering wheel. There were no passengers.

      Client was rousted up and pulled out of the car. He smelled of alcohol, was belligerent and uncooperative. He refused to take a chemical test, and was taken off to jail for DUI.

      His defense was that he wasn’t driving the car. According to him (he testified at trial), when they left the bar his girlfriend was driving. The argument escalated, so much so that she jumped out of the car which then went crashing into the bushes. He slid over into the driver’s seat to move the car but was so drunk he passed out. The next thing he remembered was the cops pulling him out of the car. He admitted to being uncooperative with the officers, who he said were not listening to his story.

      On investigation, the bartender confirmed that they were both in the bar drinking, got into an argument and left. We found someone who had been in the parking lot as they were leaving, heard the commotion, watched them get in the car – with the girlfriend driving. Minutes later, and a short distance away, the crash.

      Verdict: Not Guilty! Jury believed him!

      #2. Client was stopped by the police as he was driving his car. He reeked of alcohol. He was given a series of FSTs on which he did fairly well. He was given a breath test (I’m pretty sure) and blew a .36 as I recall!

      I brought a 1538.5. Motion granted and case dismissed! The officers who followed him for a ways could attest to no bad driving! In other words, there was no justification for the initial stop. This paralleled his good performance on the FSTs which supported the fact that he was not under the influence and driving safely even though he had such a high BA.

      #3. Client was an RN with a Master’s Degree, absolutely no prior record, mother of two boys , ages 12 and 14, and recently widowed. Seriously depressed, one night she drank some alcohol at a friend’s house and decided to drive home. While on Avenue 12 about a mile west of HWY 41 in Madera County, she crossed over the double yellow line hitting a Chevy pick-up head on, killing an elderly couple and injuring their daughter who was a passenger in the front seat. Surprisingly, client was not injured and her Lexus had relatively minor damage. A blood alcohol test at the scene measured her BA at .25 and .26. She was given another test about an hour later that showed a .19.

      It was a locally high profile case at the time, garnering media attention and an angry victims’ family. I was confronted on a few occasions; we had to get escorted from the court room after that. (We got client released OR, on standard terms, which infuriated the victims’ family even more). Client was dropped off at the back entrance to the court, and sheriffs would escort her safely into court.

      She was charged with 2 counts of 191.5(a) – Gross Vehicular Manslaughter While Intoxicated, with VC 23558 enhancements [multiple/separate victims], and VC 23153(a) & (b) with 23558 enhancements. Her maximum exposure on this complaint was 11 years 8 months. Prior to the prosecution seeking to amend the Information alleging second degree murder charges, and subsequent to settlement discussions with the judge, we entered a “straight up” plea to these charges.

      At sentencing, she was given a mid-term of 6 years on one of the 191.5’s, consecutive 2 years on the other, and a consecutive 8 months on the 23153. The enhancements were stayed per 654, for a total of 8 years and 8 months. While this does not seem like a lot, we avoided 2 potential 15 year to life terms, and no “violent” felonies. Thus, she was entitled to “half time” in prison and did just about 4 years. We were able to show parole that she had not been convicted of any violent felonies; she was not classified as a “high-risk” offender, and discharged in the minimum amount of time. She is now about to apply for her nursing licenses/certificates again.

      #4. Client, a 26 year old Navy veteran with no prior record, was drinking heavily at a bar late one evening, and decided to drive home. He drove down Shaw Avenue at a speed of over 100 mph, and T-Boned a small truck driven by the victim, who was trying to enter Shaw Avenue from a driveway. The victim died instantly in a horrific accident. Client exited his vehicle and was attempting to leave the scene when he was forcibly detained at gunpoint by 2 off-duty police officers who heard the collision and responded almost immediately. Subsequent blood test showed a blood alcohol level of .15 and also positive for Vicodin.

      Once again, this was a publicized case with dozens of victim family members and MADD monitoring the prosecution.

      Through forensic testing, it was determined that at the time of the accident, the victim’s blood showed the presence of THC – marijuana. This was not a fact that was available to the media, or the victim’s family. With this fact in tow, and his relatively minor criminal record, as well as numerous letters of recommendation and support from his Naval officers, we were able to convince the DA to allow him to plea to a VC 23153 {DUI Causing Injury/Death} with a GBI enhancement per PC 12022.7, thus avoiding either a murder charge or a 191.5(a) charge [10 year exposure], as well as a VC 2800.3 charge [fleeingthe scene of accident causing death], which is now a “strike” offense. He received a term of 5 years for the single count to which he pled, much to the dismay of both the victim’s family and MADD.

      #5 A minor traffic collision occurs on a city street. The at-fault vehicle speeds away. The victim, as well as a Sheriff Deputy who just happened to be in the area at the time of the accident, follow the vehicle through city streets, and eventually onto HWY 168. CHP officers respond, and stop the vehicle. When investigating officers arrive, client is in the passenger’s seat, and her female friend is driving. There were three minor females, including client, in client’s vehicle at the time of the incident. Client is identified by the following Sheriff Deputy and the victim as being the driver of the vehicle. They claim that client and one of the other female passengers switched seats after the accident and before the vehicle was detained. Client denies driving.

      She is given a breath test that determines her BA to be .15. Client is charged with DUI (minor) and Hit-And-Run.At the DMV hearing (and later court trial in juvenile court), victim identifies client as the driver and the deputy/officer as well, as I recall. Held: for client. It could not be proven that she was the driver. She kept her license!

      The juvenile trial was a little different. Court found that the case had been proven BRD that she was driving. We made a motion based on the findings of the DMV, and case resolved as I recall. She kept her license.

      #6. Client was stopped by police officer for going 55 mph in a 40 mph zone at about midnight one evening. He did poorly on his FSTs, usual signs of being under the influence. Breath test revealed a .12 BA. I requested and received all the maintenance/calibration records on the intoxilyzer that revealed that 5 days after the client’s arrest, the machine displayed an “E5 Error” and was sent in for service. I consulted with an expert, who testified at the DMV Administrative per-se hearing that the machine thus did not comply with Title 17. The administrative law judge agreed, and the DMV license suspension was set aside. When the case went to court, the same argument was proffered to the DA, who reduced the charge to a “wet” reckless driving. The client accepted that offer, kept his driver’s license, did no time in jail, had reduced fines and was very pleased at the result.

      Free Consultation

      The results listed here are representative of case results we’ve obtained for clients throughout the state of California. Our Fresno DUI defense firm has represented thousands of clients successfully in the Fresno Court system, and we are pleased to be able to provide you with these examples of our success. However, these results cannot be considered a guarantee that we will be able to win your Fresno DUI case. If you are considering hiring a lawyer to represent you in your Fresno DUI case, contact us today and schedule a free Fresno DUI case consultation that will help you to evaluate your chances for success.


      The Fresno DUI Defense Firm represent clients charged with DUIs in the city of Fresno and surrounding areas including Fresno County, Madera County, San Joaquin valley, Merced, Kern County, Kings County, Coalinga, Clovis, Madera, Bakersfield, Fresno County, Lemoore, Avila, Coarse Gold, Oakhurs.  We proudly serve those from Lemoore Naval Air Service, and those arrested in Sequoia National Park, Yosemite National Park and Kings Canyon National Park as well as those arrested for driving under the influence along highway 41, Highway 99, Highway 192 and Highway 168.  Clients charged with driving under the influence in Sanger, Paso Robles, Selma, Kingsburg, Porterville, Pismo Beach, Corcoran, Shaver Lake, Oceano Dunes, Tulare County, Mariposa, Bass Lake, Delano, Oildale, Madera County, Hanford, and Santa Maria as well as those stopped along highways including Highway 49, Interstate 5, Highway 180 can find representation with our qualified Fresno DUI Firm.


      AVVO RatingCalculate Your BAC

      Office Location:
      2445 Capitol St. Ste. 105
      Fresno, CA 93721
      (559) 233-3724
      SITE MAP:
      Home | Firm Profile | What to do first | DUI Resources | DUI Questions | Case Results | Contact Us
      DUI Defense | Criminal Process | DMV Process | Field Sobriety Tests | Prior Convictions | Felony DUI
      DUI With Accident | Blood & Breath Tests | Driving on Suspended License | Out of State Drivers | Expungement

      California DUI Attorneys | Fresno DUI Blog
      Contact Our DUI Defense Lawyers and Attorneys

      The information on this California DUI Attorney / Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.