DUI With a .18% BAC Dismissed After Successful Suppression Motion

A blood-alcohol concentration of .18% may appear to make a DUI case impossible to defend. But every DUI prosecution begins with a more fundamental question: did the officer have a lawful reason to stop the vehicle?

In this case, the answer was no.

The Officer’s Version of Events

At approximately 2:00 a.m., an officer was sitting in a parking lot when he claimed that he heard tires squealing. According to his police report, he looked over, saw our client’s vehicle spinning its tires, and watched it accelerate out of the parking lot.

Based on those observations, the officer stopped our client, conducted a DUI investigation, and ultimately arrested her. Testing later showed an alleged blood-alcohol concentration of .18%. She was charged with a violation of California Vehicle Codes 23152(a) and 23152(b) – Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol and Driving while Blood Alcohol Level was above .08.

Despite that result, something in the police report did not make sense.

A Critical Detail in the Police Report

Our client was driving a stock Nissan Sentra—a relatively low-powered, front-wheel-drive vehicle. The officer’s account of the vehicle spinning its tires as it left the parking lot immediately raised questions.

We asked our client whether the car had been modified, whether it had undergone a manual-transmission conversion, or whether any other mechanical changes had been made. She confirmed that it was completely stock.

Rather than accepting the officer’s description at face value, the defense challenged the legality of the traffic stop through a motion to suppress evidence under California Penal Code section 1538.5. That statute permits a defendant to seek suppression of evidence obtained through an unreasonable search or seizure.

The Officer’s Testimony Did Not Match the Car

At the suppression hearing, the officer went even further than he had in his report. Under oath, he testified that the car’s rear tire spun and produced smoke as our client drove away.

But a stock Nissan Sentra is front-wheel drive. Power from the engine is delivered to the front wheels—not the rear wheels. The officer’s sworn description was therefore inconsistent with the basic mechanical design of the vehicle.

That detail was critical because the claimed tire spin was the officer’s justification for initiating the traffic stop. If the court did not find that observation credible, the prosecution could not establish a lawful basis for the detention.

The Result: The DUI Case Was Dismissed

We successfully challenged the stop under Penal Code section 1538.5. Once the evidence resulting from the unlawful detention was suppressed, the prosecution could no longer proceed, and the DUI case was dismissed—even though our client’s alleged BAC was .18%.

This case demonstrates why a high BAC does not eliminate every defense. Breath and blood results generally become relevant only after the government establishes that the traffic stop and subsequent investigation were lawful.

Effective DUI defense requires more than reviewing the test result. It requires carefully examining every detail of the police report, comparing the officer’s account with the physical evidence, and challenging testimony that does not make sense.

If you or someone you know has been arrested for DUI, contact JOS Criminal Law for a confidential consultation. A careful review of the traffic stop may reveal defenses that are not apparent from the BAC result alone.

Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.