Inventory/Impound Searches: Standardized Criteria
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, Orange County, CA
Inventory/impound searches cannot be used as a pretext for criminal
investigation and must be conducted pursuant to a “standardized criteria.”
Cases cited: Colorado v. Bertine (1987) 479 U.S. 367; People v. Henry
(2010) DAR 7683. (8:07)

Chatroom Talk Not Confidential Under PC§ 632
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
Online instant messaging and other communications conducted in Yahoo!
chat rooms are not “confidential communications” for purposes of P.C.
Section 632, which prohibits the intentional recording or eavesdropping
upon a “confidential communication” without the consent of both parties –
at least where users are warned such communications may not be private.
Case/Statutes cited: People v. Nakai (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 499; Pen.
Code §§ 632 & 633.5. (10:41)

Search and Seizure: Government Workplace Privacy
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, Orange County, CA
Although government employees (including peace officers) enjoy the same
4 th Amendment protection in the workplace as employees in the private
sector, the “workplace realities” of government work will affect whether
the expectation of privacy is reasonable. Cases cited: O’Connor v. Ortega
(1987) 480 U.S. 709; Ontario v. Quon (2010) DAR 7565. (9:23)

When is Concealing Firearm in Trailer Unlawful?
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
A trailer attached to a van was not a suspect’s “place of residence,” for
purposes of the statutory exemption from the offenses of carrying a
concealed firearm in a vehicle or a loaded firearm in a public place, even if
the trailer was the suspect’s exclusive dwelling place, where the trailer and
van were parked in a public park and were not being used, at that time,
for purposes of habitation. Case/Statutes cited: Garber v.Superior Court
(2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 724; Pen. Code §§ 12025, 12026, 12031.
(10:14)

DUI: Methamphetamine
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, Orange County, CA
Although a driver may be under the influence of methamphetamine, the
people must also prove that such influence impairs his/her ability to drive
safely. Cases cited: People v. Torres (2009) 173 CA4 977; People v. Benner
(2010) DAR 8942. (7:28)

DUI Arrestee's Initial Refusal Governs Despite Later Consent
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
A DUI suspect will be treated as having refused to take either a breath or
blood test if he initially refuses to take a breath test and then submits but
fails to complete the breath test, even if the suspect shortly thereafter
submits to the taking of a blood test. Case/statutes cited: Garcia v.
Superior Court (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 73; Veh. Code §§ 13353, 13557.
(11:24)