Start Your Defense Today

Home → DUI Defense → Prove DUID

What Is A DUID?

In California, DUID stands for driving under the influence of drugs, and the charge is commonly called “drugged driving.” Precisely what constitutes drugged driving? What are the penalties if someone is convicted of DUID? And what does the state have to prove to convict someone of drugged driving? You’re about to learn those answers — and more.

At The Law Offices of Todd Landgren, our attorneys provide you with the information and skilled representation necessary to mitigate or avoid the impact a DUID can have on your life. Speak with us about your case today.

Defining DUIDs

All substance-impaired driving is illegal in California. It doesn’t matter if the impairment is caused by alcohol, cannabis, an illegal drug, a doctor’s prescription such as Xanax or even over-the-counter medicine. Legally set blood alcohol concentration limits attempt to simplify the prosecution of drunk drivers, but when a police officer suspects that a driver is impaired by something other than alcohol, there is no easy way to determine or measure that driver’s level of impairment.

If you are arrested for driving under the influence of drugs in Southern California, The Law Offices of Todd Landgren can help. We have the skills, experience and history of success necessary to reliably challenge these charges and the often flimsy evidence upon which authorities rely to make their case.

How Is A DUID Case Prosecuted In California?

California prosecutors rely heavily on circumstantial evidence of impairment in DUID cases. When a California police officer suspects that the driver is under the influence of drugs, the officer may summon a DRE – a drug recognition expert. If a DRE concludes that a driver is under the influence of drugs, the driver will be placed under arrest and ordered to submit to chemical testing.

The arresting police officer is later called to testify regarding the suspect’s objective symptoms of impairment (a rehearsed list of items like bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, etc.) and other observations made prior to the DRE’s evaluation. Field sobriety exercises conducted by the officer prior to the drug evaluation are also offered in evidence. This ‘investigation’ process is often captured on video and/or audio recordings.

Blood and/or urine testing is routinely administered after a DUID suspect’s arrest, sometimes hours later. Prosecutors attempt to extrapolate the amount of particular substances that might have been in a driver’s blood at the time he/she was driving, the time at which the prosecutor must prove the driver’s legal impairment beyond a reasonable doubt. This guesstimation is combined with the police officers’ observations to hold together the prosecution’s case like bubble gum on a concrete boat. Guesswork should never support a criminal conviction, but it routinely does in the absence of a capable defense.

Contact Us Today For Expert Help

Traffic cops and DREs alike rely on their basic and easily misinterpreted training to form pseudo-medical opinions about drivers that should be vigorously examined by defense counsel. The inherent unreliability of these exercises coupled with the inevitable human mistakes of the observing police officers provides reasonable doubt in many DUI cases. Without competent and zealous legal representation, many drivers who could have averted some or all of the fallout from a DUI arrest find themselves living in the grip of the state. If you have been arrested, contact our lawyers as quickly as possible to maximize our ability to protect your rights.