DUI as passenger (California)

[Jay1000]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Hi guys, I got a DUI last fall. My first. I finished everything and I'll be getting my license back next month, but I have a question about probation. I got probation for 3 years.

Someone told me that per the terms of my probation, if I'm riding as a passenger in a vehicle and the driver is found to be drunk, that I would get another DUI. Is this true ? If I am drunk as a passenger I can get another DUI ? (if the driver is drunk). What if I was sober ? Could I still get a DUI if the driver was drunk ? Also, does it matter whose car it is ? For example if it was my car, I would get the DUI, but if it was not, I wouldn't....?

Thanks in advance for any help. Any replies are appreciated.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[StevenJ_420Law]

DUI's in CA are not normally formal probation. Most courts do 36 or 60 months conditional sentence. You usually are not ordered to abstain from alcohol use.

Some people get (formal) probation (DUI causing injury, for example) and must abstain from all alcohol use, and could get a violation for failing to abstain.

Being a passenger is not driving. So you cannot get a DUI for being a passenger.

You would refer to your specific sentencing terms. Those will be on your sentencing minute order.

 

[Isis1]

DUI's in CA are not normally formal probation. Most courts do 36 or 60 months conditional sentence. You usually are not ordered to abstain from alcohol use.

Some people get (formal) probation (DUI causing injury, for example) and must abstain from all alcohol use, and could get a violation for failing to abstain.

Being a passenger is not driving. So you cannot get a DUI for being a passenger.

You would refer to your specific sentencing terms. Those will be on your sentencing minute order.

actually, i have seen instances where the passenger was cited for a DUI. i still don't understand WHY, whether it was no attorney or a bad attorney, but i have seen it happen.

 

[StevenJ_420Law]

You are typically charged with 23152 a & b (counts 1 & 2) in a alcohol DUI (or a wet reckless, or a zero tolerance for under 21). 23152 a/b do not apply to a passenger. The law is clear and in black and white and available at leginfo, it is while driving a vehicle. Perhaps you are discussing some other circumstance,state, or law- perhaps like a zero tolerance case.

 

[CdwJava]

actually, i have seen instances where the passenger was cited for a DUI. i still don't understand WHY, whether it was no attorney or a bad attorney, but i have seen it happen.

If the passenger was believed to have been the driver, yeah, otherwise, I don't see it. Certainly not in CA where the poster is from.

Now, what CAN happen is if the passenger has stipulations prohibiting the imbibing of alcohol and he is found as a passenger and has been drinking, then the old DUI charge for which he is on probation can be resurrected. But, he would not get a new DUI charge.

 

[Jay1000]

If the passenger was believed to have been the driver, yeah, otherwise, I don't see it. Certainly not in CA where the poster is from.

Now, what CAN happen is if the passenger has stipulations prohibiting the imbibing of alcohol and he is found as a passenger and has been drinking, then the old DUI charge for which he is on probation can be resurrected. But, he would not get a new DUI charge.

So are you saying, if it was my car, and I was drunk, and I let someone else drive, and they were drunk, I could be charged with DUI ?

And if it was not my car, I would not be...?

I am wondering if this whole thing is an urban myth or what...but at least 2 people I know who have DUIs have told me this.

 

[CdwJava]

So are you saying, if it was my car, and I was drunk, and I let someone else drive, and they were drunk, I could be charged with DUI ?

Unless YOU were driving or were accused of driving, and you were impaired, you could NOT be charged with DUI. Simply being the owner does not expose you to a DUI offense. the elements of DUI include actually driving the car as well as impairment as a result of drug or alcohol use.

I am wondering if this whole thing is an urban myth or what...but at least 2 people I know who have DUIs have told me this.

Then they have it all skewed. Or, one of two possibilities leap to mind:

One, they were accused of switching places with the driver or had been driving previously (before the stop) and were subsequently convicted.

Or, two, they had previously been convicted of DUI and as a stipulation of probation they were not supposed to consume alcohol. If their probation was violated, then the original DUI comes back to life, so to speak, and they can suddenly find the penalties resurrected.

But, if you are not driving, you cannot (properly) be charged with DUI.

 

[Jay1000]

actually, i have seen instances where the passenger was cited for a DUI. i still don't understand WHY, whether it was no attorney or a bad attorney, but i have seen it happen.

Can you elaborate further on this ? I need to understand exactly what's in violation of the law and what isn't. And how such an instance as you mentioned could arise.

My probation states "no driving with any amount of alcohol" in my bloodstream. That part is easy to understand, and it's the only part I'm really clear on.

Also, I am not restricted from drinking, as someone mentioned as a possibility.

I was just told there is this new law in California, that because I'm on probation for DUI, I can't ride in a car if the driver is drunk, and I can be charged with another DUI. This is BECAUSE I am on probation for DUI....if I was not, it would not be an issue.

Also I am wondering, after the 3 years of my probation are up, would I no longer be subject to this law.....? or would it be 10 years ?

 

[StevenJ_420Law]

Once you are off probation, finished all your stuff, paid up, etc youre done with the case (3 yrs). 10 years is for "prior" purposes.

I've learned that what "lay" people interpret as happened in the rapid and stressful situation occuring in the "administration of justice" in a court room and what legally transpired are often two entirely different things.

That could easily cause confusion whereby someone may think a passenger was charged with a DUI. I've seen people confused about a lot less than that.

The simple fact is, unless you are/were driving under the influence, "Driving Under the Influence" laws do not apply to you.

That is not to say that there arent other things that could occur/laws in place, as has already been discussed.

 

[Jay1000]

Unless YOU were driving or were accused of driving, and you were impaired, you could NOT be charged with DUI. Simply being the owner does not expose you to a DUI offense. the elements of DUI include actually driving the car as well as impairment as a result of drug or alcohol use.


Then they have it all skewed. Or, one of two possibilities leap to mind:

One, they were accused of switching places with the driver or had been driving previously (before the stop) and were subsequently convicted.

Or, two, they had previously been convicted of DUI and as a stipulation of probation they were not supposed to consume alcohol. If their probation was violated, then the original DUI comes back to life, so to speak, and they can suddenly find the penalties resurrected.

But, if you are not driving, you cannot (properly) be charged with DUI.

Hey thanks for the quick reply. Well I will quiz my friends and see what the details are. Perhaps it is the second situation they are talking about. I know the probation terms are more severe for those with higher blood alcohol contents. Mine was .10 so I am at the lower end.....some of these guys are .20 and higher even...that may have something to do with it...

You're in NorCal ? Howdy neighbor. I grew up in Sacramento, and lived in SF/Berkeley 12 years. I live in LA now though.

 

[CdwJava]

I was just told there is this new law in California, that because I'm on probation for DUI, I can't ride in a car if the driver is drunk, and I can be charged with another DUI. This is BECAUSE I am on probation for DUI....if I was not, it would not be an issue.

This is not true. A violation of probation would result in the OLD charge being brought back to life, no NEW charge would ensue for DUI. Now, you might be arrested for public intoxication, but that's not a DUI.

Also I am wondering, after the 3 years of my probation are up, would I no longer be subject to this law.....? or would it be 10 years ?

The conditions of your probation will be done when the probation office and the court says you are off probation. Your DUI can be used as a prior DUI related offense for 10 years. So, if you have any DUI arrests within 10 years of the first DUI arrest the new DUI arrest will be considered a SECOND DUI.

 

[Isis1]

Can you elaborate further on this ? I need to understand exactly what's in violation of the law and what isn't. And how such an instance as you mentioned could arise.

My probation states "no driving with any amount of alcohol" in my bloodstream. That part is easy to understand, and it's the only part I'm really clear on.

Also, I am not restricted from drinking, as someone mentioned as a possibility.

I was just told there is this new law in California, that because I'm on probation for DUI, I can't ride in a car if the driver is drunk, and I can be charged with another DUI. This is BECAUSE I am on probation for DUI....if I was not, it would not be an issue.

Also I am wondering, after the 3 years of my probation are up, would I no longer be subject to this law.....? or would it be 10 years ?

i'm going to apologize in advance if i come off as a little smart aleckish....



don't ever get into a car with a drunk driver. ever. not while your on probation, not while you are off probation. how about not even while you breathe. if you want to die, find another way besides getting in with a drunk driver.

even better idea....just stop drinking.

i cannot go deeper into WHY the 4 people i knew got a DUI while being a passenger because i dont know all the details of their cases. it coul dhave been they lied to me, or even as Carl described. i just know what i heard. and the fact that weird things happen.

 

[Jay1000]

This is not true. A violation of probation would result in the OLD charge being brought back to life, no NEW charge would ensue for DUI. Now, you might be arrested for public intoxication, but that's not a DUI.

I think this may be where people are becoming confused. One instance I was told of: the driver was pulled over, tested, arrested. The passengers were checked out....one was on probation for DUI.....he was given a sobriety test.....

I suppose if he was charged and/or found guilty of public intoxication, that could be a violation of his probation, and bring back the DUI charge...

Maybe that is what these guys are talking about.

 

[StevenJ_420Law]

Joe is on probation for felony DUI and must abstain from alcohol - 4th DUI. He is riding with Pete, who is drunk. Joe had one beer. They get popped. Pete gets DUI.

Joe gets violated for failing to abstain and sent to prison.

That doesnt mean Joe got a DUI. He was on probation for a DUI.

Then alex leaves the court room and says "Did you see that guy go to prison for being a passenger and getting a DUI?"

 

[CdwJava]

What Steven said.