Getting Your Hospital Records

 In some DUI cases a person may have been transported to the hospital following a crash or motor vehicle accident.  The question arises: How do you get those hospital records?

One way is for the attorney to serve a subpoena duces tecum on the hospital, however this is a time consuming and costly process for the client.  The other downside to this method is the prosecutor, DMV or court may be able to see the contents of the records as well.

The better way is for the client to simply request the records on their own, directly from the hospital.  Here is how this can be done:

Go to the medical records section of the hospital; do not subpoena.  The client is advised : DO NOT mention any words like "lawyer; court; litigation; charges," etc.  That will tie up the process in months of red tape involving hospital counsel; worse if it's a county or parish hospital.  Front office people are trained to refer the patient's request to their lawyers b/c they're so gun shy about medical malpractice or related civil liabilities.  The patient simply says, "I'm a diligent sort of person and I like to just keep good records of all my medical affairs in my own files."

There's usually a form involved and they just fill it out and sign it.  Sometimes there's a nominal fee and they get the material on a CD-ROM.  For Emergency Dept. records, those are in a separate set if the patient was admitted into the regular hospital for an overnight stay, so they have to specify E.D. records.  But the medical records section usually handles all the records for the hospital.

Verified 2025 Case Wins For Attorney Matthew Ruff

 

In 2025, DUI attorney Matthew Ruff secured several verified legal victories in Southern California, ranging from full dismissals to jury acquittals. His recorded successes for the year include:

 

Jury Acquittals and Not Guilty Verdicts 

• Underage DUI (Los Angeles): In April 2025, Ruff secured a "Not Guilty" verdict for a client in an underage DUI case. The defense successfully challenged complex legal issues, leading the jury to acquit on all charges.
• Torrance Jury Trial: In October 2025, a Torrance jury returned a "Not Guilty" verdictafter Ruff successfully argued that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to support a conviction. 

Case Dismissals (Criminal Court)

• 3rd Time DUI Dismissed (Torrance): In April 2025, Ruff obtained a dismissal of a third-time DUI charge in Los Angeles Superior Court. The victory was achieved by arguing a violation of 4th Amendment rights, resulting in the DUI being dropped.
• DUI with Injury & Hit and Run (Torrance): In July 2025, major charges including DUI with injury, chemical test refusal, and hit-and-run with injury were fully dismissed.
• Commercial Driver Dismissal (Oceano Dunes): Ruff secured a dismissal of DUI charges for a commercial driver facing a lifetime license ban by using retrograde extrapolation to prove the client's BAC was likely below 0.08% at the time of driving.
• Public Intoxication (Santa Monica): In November 2025, a drunk-in-public charge was dismissed and the client's arrest record was sealed to protect future employment.
• DUI Reduced to "Dry Reckless": In December 2025, a client's DUI charge was reduced to a non-alcohol-related "dry reckless" (VC 23103), which was subsequently expunged. 

DMV Administrative Victories (License Saved) 

• 911 Anonymous Tip Challenge (Torrance): In July 2025, the DMV set aside a license suspension for a client with a 0.16% BAC after Ruff proved the initial police stop based on an anonymous 911 call was unlawful.
• Suppression of High BAC (Long Beach): In September 2025, a license suspension was overturned after Ruff uncovered regulatory violations, resulting in the suppression of breath test results recorded at 0.16%/0.17%.
• Refusal Suspension Reversal (Hermosa Beach): In November 2025, a 0.11% breath test case resulted in an order of set-aside, clearing the arrest from the client's record and avoiding an ignition interlock requirement.
• Denied Continuance Victory (Valencia): In December 2025, Ruff successfully opposed a DMV request for a continuance. Because the DMV lacked the necessary blood results at the time of the hearing, the suspension was set aside and the license reinstated. 

Can The DMV Suspend A License When They Lack A Sworn Report (DS367)

 

In California, a driver may compel the 

set aside of an administrative license suspension if the DMV fails to provide a sworn statement in compliance with Vehicle Code (VC) § 13380. Under this section, an arresting officer must "immediately forward to the department a sworn report of all information relevant to the enforcement action".

The following legal arguments are typically used to contest a suspension based on this violation:

1. Violation of Mandatory Statutory Duty

Under VC § 13380, the requirement for a sworn report (typically the DS 367 form) is a mandatory duty imposed upon law enforcement.

• The Argument: The DMV lacks jurisdiction to sustain a suspension if the foundational document—the officer's sworn statement—is missing, unsworn, or fails to contain the "grounds for belief" that the driver was in violation of DUI laws.
• Basis for Set Aside: A "Set Aside" signifies that the Hearing Officer found no factual or legal basis for the original suspension. Without a sworn statement, there is no competent evidence to meet the DMV’s burden of proof.

2. Inadmissibility of Unsworn Evidence

While the DMV can use unsworn reports (like a standard narrative police report) to supplementor explain a sworn statement, they cannot rely solely on them if the sworn statement is fundamentally flawed or absent.

• MacDonald v. Gutierrez (2004): The California Supreme Court held that while "technical omissions" in a sworn report can be corrected by an unsworn one, the sworn report cannot be "wholly devoid of relevant information".
• The Argument: If the DMV provides no sworn statement, any other evidence (e.g., unsworn arrest reports) is inadmissible hearsay under Evidence Code § 1280 (the public records exception), because the specific foundational requirements of VC § 13380 have not been met.

3. Failure to Satisfy the Burden of Proof

In an Administrative Per Se (APS) hearing, the DMV must prove three specific issues: (1) the officer had reasonable cause to believe the person was driving under the influence; (2) the person was placed under lawful arrest; and (3) the person was driving with a BAC of 0.08% or higher.

• The Argument: VC § 13380 requires the sworn report to include the officer’s "grounds for belief" and chemical test results. If this sworn statement is missing, the DMV has failed to provide "competent evidence" to support any of the three required findings