I don't understand the point of installing a "breathalyzer" into a convicted drugged driver's car. If no blood alcohol level was recorded, let alone exceeded, what function does the device serve other than to be an expensive, useless annoyance? If this is a pilot program going on in four counties to determine how to implement similar procedures statewide, now would be the time to address this.
And couldn't this even be a legal challenge as well as a procedural or policy reevaluation? Doesn't this expense and inconvenience infringe upon liberty? People v. Carbajal (1995) implies there must be a connection between the crime committed and the probation restriction imposed. Making a driver who was convicted of being under the influence of drugs subject to an alcohol evaluation prior to driving as a probationary condition makes no sense.
I hate our criminal justice system. It is so corrupt and unjust it's a miracle more innocents aren't caught in it's web. To all those convicted of DUID in Alameda, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and Tulare counties since July 2010 and have been forced to pay to install a "breathalyzer" in their cars as a condition of probation, I stand with you. This is a farce and wholly unfair. May justice be served eventually!
No comments:
Post a Comment