Driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs is a serious criminal offense that can have severe consequences, including the possibility of imprisonment and fines. If a person is accused of causing a traffic collision while under the influence of drugs or alcohol and the collision results in the death of another person, the charge could be elevated to DUI homicide.

DUI homicide is a serious charge that carries severe penalties, including the possibility of imprisonment for 15 years to life. The prosecution must prove that the defendant was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the collision and that the defendant acted negligently or recklessly in causing the crash to establish guilt in a DUI homicide case. The prosecution must also prove that the crash resulted in the death of another person.

If you have been charged with DUI homicide, seek legal representation as soon as possible. An experienced criminal defense attorney. At San Luis Obispo DUI Attorneys, we can advise you on your legal rights and options and help you mount a defense to the charges.

How Do Prosecutors Prove DUI Murder?

To establish guilt in a DUI murder case, prosecutors must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • The defendant was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the collision — The prosecutor must present the defendant's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at the time of the incident, observations of the defendant's behavior or appearance made by law enforcement or witnesses, and any field sobriety tests conducted.
  • The defendant acted negligently or recklessly in causing the collision — The prosecutor must show that the defendant acted carelessly or without regard for the safety of others in causing the accident. This includes submitting evidence of speeding, swerving, or other reckless behavior leading to the crash.
  • The collision resulted in the death of another person — For a DUI charge to be elevated to a DUI murder charge, the collision must have resulted in the death of another person.

Every case is unique, and the specific evidence the prosecution presents in a particular DUI murder case depends on the facts and circumstances involved. An experienced criminal defense attorney can advise you on the specific elements prosecutors must prove in your case and help you mount a defense to the charges.

How Do Prosecutors Prove Implied Malice?

In a DUI murder case in California, prosecutors must prove the element of implied malice to establish guilt. Implied malice refers to the defendant's mental state at the time of the collision and requires the prosecutor to prove that the defendant acted with reckless disregard for human life.

Prosecutors rely on BAC test results, the defendant’s behavior, and his/her appearance to law enforcement officers to prove implied malice in a DUI murder case. The prosecutor could also present evidence of the defendant's driving behavior leading up to the collision,for example, speeding, swerving, or other reckless behavior.

In addition, the prosecutor could present evidence of the defendant's prior criminal history or DUIs to show that the defendant had a reckless disregard for the safety of others.

What is a Watson Admonition

A Watson admonition is a warning a judge gives to a defendant in a DUI case in California about the potential for enhanced criminal penalties if the defendant causes injury or death to another individual while driving under the influence. The Watson admonition is named after the California Supreme Court case People v. Watson. The court held that a defendant who causes injury or death while driving under the influence could be held strictly liable for the resulting harm.

The Watson admonition is typically given to defendants who plead guilty or no contest to a DUI charge. It advises the defendant that if they cause injury or death to another individual while driving under the influence in the future, they could face enhanced criminal penalties, including the possibility of imprisonment for 15 years to life.

The Watson warning informs defendants of the grave consequences of driving under the influence and discourages them from repeating this behavior.

Prosecutors show that a defendant received the warning in the following ways:

  1. Introducing the “Tahl waiver” You Signed When You Pled Guilty

To introduce evidence of the "Tahl waiver" that the defendant signed when pleading guilty in a DUI case, the prosecutor must present a copy of the waiver in court. The Tahl waiver, named after the California Supreme Court case In re Tahl, is a form provided to defendants who plead guilty or no contest to a DUI charge in California. The Tahl waiver advises defendants of the potential consequences of their plea, including the possibility of enhanced criminal penalties if they cause injury or death to someone else while driving under the influence in the future.

The prosecutor could introduce the Tahl waiver into evidence to demonstrate that the defendant was advised of the potential consequences of their plea and that they voluntarily entered the plea with this knowledge. The Tahl waiver could be relevant in a DUI case if the state charges the defendant with causing injury or death to someone else while driving under the influence, as the prosecutor could use the waiver to show that the defendant was aware of the potential for enhanced criminal penalties.

The specific evidence the prosecution could present in court to introduce the Tahl waiver will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case.

  1. Introducing the Court Docket Demonstrating that the Judge Read the Watson Advisement During Sentencing

To introduce evidence that the judge read Watson advisement during sentencing in a DUI case, the prosecutor could present a copy of the court docket. The court docket records the proceedings in a court case, including any sentencing hearings. If the judge reads Watson advisement during the sentencing hearing, this should be reflected in the court docket.

The prosecutor introduces the court docket into evidence to show that the court advised the defendant of the potential consequences of their conviction, including the possibility of enhanced criminal penalties if they cause injury or death to another individual while driving under the influence in the future. The Watson advisement is relevant in a DUI case if the state charges the defendant with causing injury or death to another person while driving under the influence. The prosecutor will use the advisement to show that the defendant was aware of the potential for enhanced criminal penalties.

Penalties of a Watson Murder Conviction

DUI murder is a serious criminal offense that carries severe penalties. The specific penalties that a person could face for DUI murder will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case and the defendant's prior criminal history.

Under California law, DUI murder is punishable by:

Additional Penalties in Cases With Injured Survivors

You would face additional time behind bars if an individual survived the accident that caused the death of another. The penalties include the following:

  • Three to six years for any surviving victim who sustains a great bodily injury (GBI) — GBI refers to substantial or significant physical harm caused by using force. Great bodily injury includes injuries like broken bones, lacerations, disfigurement, or loss of consciousness
  • One (1) year for every individual with less grave injuries, with a maximum of three years

If the defendant has one or more prior DUI convictions, the courts could enhance the penalties for a DUI murder conviction. The defendant could also face additional penalties if the collision resulted in the death of more than one person.

Defenses in a Watson Murder Case

Should you face DUI murder charges, consult with a criminal defense attorney as soon as possible. An experienced attorney can evaluate the specific circumstances of your case and advise you on the best legal defenses available. Some potential defenses that he/she could assert include the following:

  1. Lack of Impairment

Impairment is at the core of DUI murder charges. Lack of impairment is a defense that a defense attorney could raise in a DUI murder case if the prosecution cannot prove that the defendant was impaired at the time of the collision. The prosecution must prove that the defendant was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the collision and that this impairment caused the crash to establish guilt in a DUI murder case. If there is insufficient evidence to prove impairment, this could be a defense to the charges.

The prosecution could rely on evidence, for example, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at the time of the collision, observations of the defendant's behavior or appearance made by law enforcement or witnesses, and any field sobriety tests that were conducted to prove impairment. If the prosecution cannot present sufficient evidence of impairment, the defense could argue that the defendant was not impaired at the time of the collision.

Note: This defense is only successful if the prosecution cannot prove impairment beyond a reasonable doubt.

  1. The Crash Was an Accident

In a DUI murder case, the defendant could argue that the collision was an accident and that they were not acting negligently or recklessly at the time of the incident. The prosecution must prove that the defendant acted negligently or recklessly in causing the collision to establish guilt in a DUI murder case. If the defendant can show that the crash was a genuine accident, this could serve as a defense to the charges.

The defense could present evidence, including witness testimony, accident reconstruction reports, and other evidence showing that the defendant's negligence or recklessness did not cause the crash to establish that the collision was an accident. However, it is worth noting that the success of this defense depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the evidence presented.

  1. Mistake of Fact

The defense of mistake of fact is applicable if the defendant genuinely believed they were not impaired at the time of the collision. To raise this defense, the defendant must show that they had a reasonable belief that they were not inebriated and that this belief was based on factual evidence.

For example, if the defendant had only had a few drinks and did not feel impaired, but their BAC was found to be above the legal limit due to a medical condition or another factor, they could use this defense. In this case, the defendant could show that they had a reasonable belief that they were not impaired because they did not feel the effects of the alcohol and that this belief was based on the factual evidence of their subjective experience.

Note: The defense of mistake of fact is only available if the defendant genuinely believed they were not impaired at the time of the collision. This defense would not be applicable if the defendant knew or should have known they were inebriated.

  1. There Was Misconduct by the Police and/or Prosecutor

Your attorney could argue that there was misconduct by the police or prosecutor if there is evidence to support this claim. If the defense can show the police or prosecutor engaged in misconduct that affected the outcome of the case, this could be grounds for a motion to dismiss the charges or for an appeal.

Misconduct by the police or prosecutor includes a variety of actions, like tampering with evidence, coercing a confession, or withholding exculpatory evidence. If the defense can show that misconduct occurred and it affected the outcome of the case, this could be a defense to the charges.

It is important to note that the success of this defense will depend on the case's specific circumstances and the evidence presented.

If police misconduct is evident, we will file a Pitchess motion. The motion requests access to the personnel records of a police officer or other law enforcement official. The Pitchess motion is named after the California Supreme Court case Pitchess v. Superior Court, in which the court ruled that a defendant has the right to request access to an officer's personnel records in certain circumstances.

A defense attorney could file a Pitchess motion in a criminal case if the defendant believes that the officer's personnel records contain information relevant to the case and that it could be used to impeach the officer's testimony or challenge the officer's credibility. To obtain access to the officer's personnel records through a Pitchess motion, the defendant must show that the records are relevant to the case and that the records are not otherwise available through other means.

If the court grants Pitchess ' motion, the defendant and their attorney could review the officer's personnel records to identify any information that could be useful in their defense. The court will typically review the documents on camera (in private) to determine whether any information contained in the documents is relevant to the case and should be disclosed to the defendant.  

The Difference Between a DUI Murder and  Vehicular Manslaughter

DUI murder is a form of vehicular manslaughter. Vehicular manslaughter is a criminal offense involving the death of another person due to the defendant's reckless or negligent behavior while operating a vehicle.

There are two main types of vehicular manslaughter:

  • Gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and
  • Vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated.

Gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is the more serious of the two offenses. It is defined as the unlawful killing of another individual while driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, with gross negligence. The lack of care that is so great that it shows a complete disregard for the safety of others is gross negligence. This offense is punishable by a prison sentence of up to 10 years.

Vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is a less serious offense than gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. It is defined as the unlawful killing of another individual while driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, with ordinary negligence. Ordinary negligence is a failure to use reasonable care under the circumstances. This offense is punishable by a prison sentence of up to six years.

DUI murder is a specific type of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated involving the unlawful killing of another individual while driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, with gross negligence, and where the defendant has previously been convicted of DUI and has received a Watson admonition.

Contact an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney Near Me 

If the state accuses you of DUI homicide in San Luis Obispo, it is crucial to seek legal representation as soon as possible. A DUI murder charge is a serious criminal offense that carries severe penalties. An experienced criminal defense attorney can advise you on your legal rights and options and help you mount a defense to the charge. At San Luis Obispo DUI Attorneys, we have adequate experience handling DUI cases, including Watson murder cases. Contact our team at 805-321-1000 for assistance.