Thursday, November 9, 2017

Matthew Ruff, Top Rated Attorney



Matthew Ruff is a Top Rated attorney with over 20 years experience.  All of the Internet rating services have given a Matthew the highest award, based largely on his experience and client feedback.  Read all of Attorney Matthew Ruff reviews.  Here is one example of a recent review posted by an actual client (edited to protect identity)

".....thanks again for your assistance.  I have read horror stories about the [first attorney I almost hired] and I am 100 percent certain I would have had a different outcome if I had retained his services.  I am quite pleased with this outcome.    I am going to remember you for quite some time and if any LA based pilots or those passing through have any legal issues and I become aware of it, I am going to insist they contact you and  retain your services.  I am carrying your contact info in my wallet.  It is hard to find a stand up person nowadays in a profession that attracts the likes of  [first attorney I almost hired]. I cringe at the thought of how much I could have spent on that guy or someone like him out of desperation, only to support their lavish lifestyle and horrible work ethic.  Your honest good work has been a breath of fresh air.  All the best. "

Matthew is always appreciative of the kind words sent by his clients.


Monday, June 5, 2017

DRE Use in Marijuana DUI Cases Called Into Question

The use of Drug Recognition Experts in Marijuana DUI investigations is on the rise.  Indeed, the numbers of officers with the enhanced training have proliferated over the last few years, influenced heavily by the changes in the laws related to recreational use of pot.

While training of any kind is certainly a good thing, it is important to not place too much reliance on the DRE.  Certainly cops who go through the block of extra training and are certified as a DRE are better suited to evaluate a suspected drugged driver, however we must be careful to not place too much emphasis on their conclusions.

Indeed, many of the DUI arrests associated with marijuana are based primarily on admissions by the defendant.  If the person admits to have smoked pot or ingested an edible containing THC the Officer builds his investigation with that in mind, often “finding” symptoms to fit within his predetermined conclusion that the driver is impaired due to marijuana.

Recently, the Press Enterprise published an article discussing these issues.  The article can be viewed here Attorney Matthew Ruff Quoted in DUI Marijuana Article.



Sunday, May 28, 2017

The Defense Of Officer Induced Confusion in a DUI Case

In a DUI case it is not uncommon to see a driver arrested and refuse to submit to a chemical test.  When this happens the attorney will look for a defense to the refusal in order to get around the suspension and revocation the DMV seeks to impose.  One possible defense is known as officer induced confusion.  

It is well recognized in law that when an officer simultaneously reads a driver his implied consent warnings (no right to refuse a test and no right to consult with or to have an attorney present during its administration) in conjunction with the Miranda admonition (right to refuse interrogation and to have an attorney present at all stages of a police interrogation, etc.), it will likely induce confusion. 

Therefore, in cases where a driver has been given Miranda insists on the presence of an attorney before choosing a test the courts have recognized that he [or she] may have been confused by the two warnings and the officers failure to clarify and explain the difference. In such a case the refusal to take a test has been held not to be a refusal within the meaning of California Vehicle Code section 13353. (Rust v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1968) 267 Cal.App.2d 545, 547.) 


The question of officer-induced confusion is one of fact, often dependent on statements in the report indicative of the defendants desire to speak to a lawyer coupled with signs of confusion about the officers demand for an answer to which test to take.  When a driver who has been given Miranda manifests confusion by asserting his [or her] alleged right to an attorney, it is incumbent upon the officer to explain that the right does not apply to these tests. (McDonnell v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1975) 45 Cal.App.3d 653, 658.  The failure of an officer to clear up the confusion renders any alleged refusal to submit to a test insufficient to suspend a drivers license as a result.

Matthew Ruff is a DUI Attorney in Torrance with over 20 years experience fighting both criminal charges and DMV suspensions in California.

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Entering Canada With A DUI, What You Need To Know

Canada has some of the toughest restrictions on travelers entering the Country in the World.  If you have a conviction for any criminal offense in California or anywhere else in the United States, here is what you need to know:Canada is a major destination for travel and commerce. In some cases, travellers are being rejected at points of entry due to a previous criminal offence. Canada does not distinguish between a misdemeanour and a felony; therefore if you have a pending criminal charge or are on probation for a crime you may no longer be able to travel to Canada, even for a short trip. What makes a person Inadmissable?  Any conviction for a felony and most misdemeanors.  Interestingly, Canada does not distinguish between felonies and misdemeanors so a charge of DUI, drunk driving, reckless driving, manslaughter, theft, writing a bad check, etc.  can result in your denial of entry. If you are deemed inadmissible There are two ways in which one can overcome their inadmissibility to Canada: Criminal Rehabilitation and Temporary Resident Permits.  We will discuss both of them independently:

Criminal Rehabilitation will permanently resolve an individual’s inadmissibility on a permanent basis as long as 5 years have passed since the completion of their sentence for a non- serious crime. If successful, the conviction(s) will no longer be a limitation to enter Canada.

The first step is to determine if the offence that the individual was convicted of is equivalent to a criminal offence in Canada. However, this is a difficult task that often requires legal expertise.
At least 5 years must have elapsed since the completion of a sentence in order to be eligible for criminal rehabilitation.
If 10 years or more have elapsed, and the individual has only one non-serious conviction, s/he would be deemed rehabilitated and admissible to Canada. However, we recommend a Legal Opinion Letter in order to explain any history of criminality. 

Temporary Resident Permits will allow individuals who are criminally inadmissible to Canada to enter the country for a limited period of time.
Immigration officers will evaluate TRP applications and approve them if the individual has a signi cant reason for entering Canada. Travelling to Canada for business purposes and/ or for reasons that benefit Canada will improve their chance of success. 
A temporary resident permit is necessary for entry to Canada if:
Less than 5 years has passed since completing a sentence for a crime equivalent to a Canadian federal offence.

More than 5 years has passed and criminal rehabilitation has NOT been approved. 



Monday, May 1, 2017

How Does The California DMV Define a Refusal

A refusal to take a test following a DUI arrest carries the harshest penalty under law.  The state can revoke your driving privileges for up to 3 years.  How does California define a refusal in legal terms?

Before the DMV may suspend a driver's license for failure to submit to a chemical test, the DMV must make four findings: (1) the officer had reasonable cause to believe the person was driving a vehicle while under the influence of drugs or alcohol; (2) the person was arrested; (3) the person was told that if he or she refused to submit to, or did not complete, a chemical test his or her license would be suspended; and (4) the person refused to submit to, or did not complete, such a test. 

The question whether a driver "refused" a test within the meaning of the statute is a question of fact. To comply with the law, a `driver should clearly and unambiguously manifest the consent required by the law. Consent which is not clear and unambiguous may be deemed a refusal.' In determining whether an arrested driver's conduct amounts to a refusal to submit to a test, the court looks not to the state of mind of the arrested driver, but to "the fair meaning to be given [the driver's] response to the demand he submit to a chemical test.  As such, whether a driver intended to refuse or not is not the determining factor.

Monday, April 17, 2017

Arrested For DUI? Things You Should Know


There is a lot of stress and worry that follows a DUI arrest, knowing what to do and what not to do is important.  First of all, if the person arrested is in jail you should know that most people booked for driving under the influence are released without having to post bail.  The process is call an O.R. release or released on your own recognizance.  The individual signs a paper agreeing to appear in Court on a future date and they are free to go, usually 10-12 hours after arrest.  So hold off on contacting a bail bondsman in the first 24 hours.

Upon release the accused will receive a pink paper called a temporary license and notice of suspension.  This explains the hearing rights pertaining to the DMV suspension that will be triggered by the DUI arrest.  The person has 10 days to demand a hearing.

If an accident was associated with the arrest it is often advisable to consult with a lawyer prior to giving a recorded statement to the insurance company.

 Here are the most common mistakes people make:
1. Forget to demand a DMV hearing. This is THE MOST important thing to do because if you fail to act your rights will be lost forever. When you were released you received a pink piece of paper that has two purposes 1.  It is a temp license, 2.  It tells you that your driving privileges WILL BE SUSPENDED for up to 3 years because of the incident.  Matthew can STOP the suspension in its tracks so you will continue to be able to drive.  He can acquire copies of the reports, chemical test and other evidence BEFORE any action is taken.
2. Not Hiring a Lawyer or Hire the cheapest lawyer in town. Attorneys are professionals and charge based on their experience and skill level. If you hire a cheap attorney you will get what you pay for.  Many folks don’t realize there are dozens of defenses in DUI cases ranging from illegal stop to attacking the breath or blood results.  For example, in one recent case Matt got the DUI charges dropped for a client in Los Angeles even though he had a blood test nearly three times the legal limit and crashed his car.  


The bottom line is that Matt has the experience to detect mistakes in the case and use those to get charges dropped or reduced.  For a more detailed list of results Matt has obtained for clients in DUI cases, click here.
3. Miss your Court date. Many people believe that they will get a courtesy reminder in the mail from the Court telling them about their upcoming appearance. This in incorrect. Unlike a traffic ticket where a courtesy notice is sent, DUI cases are criminal which means you will have to look at the release paperwork you were given and be sure to attend that important arraignment unless you are told otherwise by your attorney.  Matthew can go to Court for you.  Many folks do not or cannot attend Court, Matthew can appear on your behalf and oftentimes resolve the case.
What are the ways to beat or reduce a DUI?
Matthew has been fighting and beating drunk driving charges for over 25 years and knows the ways to get charges dropped.  For example, when it comes to breath test cases there are over 30 ways to throw out the test.  Among the most common are strategies that focus on mistakes the officer makes when administering the test.  In addition, when a blood test in involved, there are at least 24 ways to get the test suppressed and inadmissible in Court.  Also, with regard to refusal cases, Matt has one of the highest success rates in getting refusal allegations set aside at the DMV.
Attorney Matthew Ruff has over 25 years experience fighting DUI cases.  He has handled thousands of DMV hearings and won many cases for his clients.  Although he has obtained hundreds of dismissals, every case is determined based on the individual facts and evidence.  The statements made herein are no guarantee or prediction of the outcome of your case. There are over 20 defenses to breath and blood tests, and one or more of these may exist in your case.  The mere fact you blew into a machine and it read a number above .08 does not necessarily mean you are guilty of DUI.
If you want to schedule a consultation call Matt directly, toll free at 1-877-213-4453 or visit his website:
Best DUI Defense Attorney for more information.

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

What Does DMV Hearing Decision "Under Submission" Mean?

In California a DMV hearing is presided over by a state employee called a hearing officer.  This hearing officer listens to the evidence and arguments made by the attorney and decides whether the DMV has met their burden of proof with respect to a DUI arrest and whether the driver had a .08 or more or refused to take a test under state law.

After a hearing has been conducted a decision can be made immediately or can be given in writing by mail.  In many cases the hearing officer is presented with legal arguments from counsel that require him or her to review the evidence and make a final decision with regard to the case.  It is a good sign that the DMV hearing officer is taking the time to consider all of the issues.

A case taken under submission usually results in a decision being made within a few days or a couple weeks, however, during this time the person's license remains valid and they can continue to drive pending a final decision.