DUI Enforcement

Habitual Offender DUI Laws in California: What Drivers in San Diego Need to Know

October 11, 2025 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

Facing a DUI in San Diego with prior convictions can have life-changing consequences. Under California law, multiple DUI offenses can classify you as a habitual DUI offender, leading to felony charges, long license revocations, and years in state prison.

As an experienced San Diego DUI defense attorney, I regularly help clients fight back against habitual offender allegations and protect their futures. Here’s what you need to know.

What Is a Habitual DUI Offender in California?

California has strict laws targeting repeat DUI offenders. If you accumulate three or more DUI convictions within ten years or have a prior felony DUI, you may be prosecuted as a habitual DUI offender.

Key statutes include:

Cal. Veh. Code § 23550 — A fourth or subsequent DUI within 10 years becomes a felony, punishable by 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years in state prison and a 4-year license revocation.
Cal. Veh. Code § 23550.5 — If you have any prior felony DUI, your new DUI can be charged as a felony regardless of when it occurred.
Cal. Veh. Code § 14601.3 — Allows the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to label you a Habitual Traffic Offender (HTO) if you repeatedly drive after DUI-related suspensions. Driving as an HTO carries mandatory jail time.

How This Impacts Drivers in San Diego

The San Diego County District Attorney’s Office takes repeat DUI cases very seriously. If you are charged as a habitual DUI offender, you could face:

Felony DUI charges on your record
State prison time
4-year driver’s license revocation
Habitual Traffic Offender designation by the DMV
Vehicle impoundment or forfeiture
Severe fines, probation, and mandatory DUI programs

These penalties are much harsher than a first or second DUI, and the long-term effects on your employment, licensing, and personal life can be devastating.

Defending Against Habitual DUI Allegations Continue reading ›

California Vehicle Code Section 14601.3: Habitual Offender Designation

December 1, 2017 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

California Vehicle Code Section (VC) 14601.3 states: “It is unlawful for a person whose driving privilege has been suspended or revoked to accumulate a driving record history which results from driving during the period of suspension or revocation. A person who violates this subdivision is designated a habitual offender.”

Once the person has been deemed a habitual offender, any subsequent driving offenses are subject to more severe penalties, including jail time. Upon a first conviction under this statute, the person shall be sentenced to 30 days in jail and a $1000 fine. A second or subsequent conviction within seven years of a prior conviction will result in 180 days in jail and a $2000 fine. Under 14601.3(e)(3), any habitual offender who is convicted of driving on a suspended license and the suspension is due to a DUI, the penalty is 180 days in jail, to be served consecutive to any other jail time imposed for violating any other law, plus a $2000 fine.

To convict someone under this statute, the prosecutor must prove: Continue reading ›

Driving Under The Influence Of Drugs (DUID): California Vehicle Code Section 23152(e)

May 24, 2017 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

Driving under the influence of drugs, or DUID, is essentially the same as a DUI with alcohol. The code section reads: “It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any drug to drive a vehicle. “

In essence, the prosecutor has to prove that the defendant drove a vehicle, and when s/he drove, s/he was under the influence of a drug. The drug can be an illegal substance, a prescribed medication or even an over-the-counter medicine that could affect the nervous system, brain, or muscles of a person.

“Under the influence” is the hardest element for the government to prove. According to the California Jury Instructions (2110), “A person is under the influence if, as a result of…taking a drug, his or her mental or physical abilities are so impaired that he or she is no longer able to drive a vehicle with the caution of a sober person, using ordinary care, under similar circumstances.”

Unlike drunk driving cases involving alcohol, Continue reading ›

California Boating Under The Influence (BUI) Laws

March 20, 2017 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

As the weather warms up in San Diego, people enjoy the outdoors and get more active. Many flock to the bay, ocean, lakes and rivers to enjoy a day on the water, but be aware that law enforcement agencies are out in full force actively looking to cite people for boating under the influence, BUI’s.

In California, if you operate a motorized boat or any watercraft while under the influence, you can be arrested and charged with a crime. (Note: This code section only applies to motorized vessels, meaning that you cannot be charged under these code sections if your vessel is exclusively self or water propelled such as a kayak, rowboat, or a non-motorized sailboat. Also, there is a “zero tolerance” policy for anyone under the age of 21, meaning if you are underage, any measurable amount of alcohol can lead to BUI charges.)

The Harbors and Navigation Code provides the statutes for BUI. The language of the code is very close in the language in the California Vehicle Code for drunk driving, (see California Vehicle Code section 23152).

One Leg Stand (OLS): A NHTSA Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST)

October 6, 2015 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

As you will recall, Susan Hartman, of the Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman, attended The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and The International Association of Chiefs of Police (ICAP) approved DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing Practitioner Course, as presented by Mr. Robert La Pier.

The course went through the three standardized field sobriety tests (SFST’s), as laid out by NHTSA: 1.) The horizontal gaze nystagmus, (HGN); 2.) The walk and turn, (WAT); and 3.) The one leg stand, (OLS). These are the only tests that have been validated by NHTSA and should be used by law enforcement in evaluating each potential DUI. It should be noted that these tests were only validated to correlate to a specific blood alcohol content (BAC) and they are not be used to show impairment.

The two previous blog articles discussed the HGN and WAT tests. This article will address the OLS test.

The NHTSA manual states that this “test requires a reasonably dry, hard, level, and non-slippery surface.” If the person is wearing heels that are more than two inches, they should be given the choice to remove the shoes and perform the test barefooted.

There are many reasons why a person may not be able to adequately perform this test, regardless of their consumption of alcohol. For instance, as a person ages, balance and coordination is more difficult. If a subject has any current or prior injuries to their back or legs, they suffer from inner ear problems, or they are overweight by 50 or more pounds, they may have problems performing the test. However, in my experience, officers often state, “I will take your concerns and medical issues into consideration,” and then they proceed with having the subject perform the test. Continue reading ›

Walk And Turn (WAT): One Of The Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST’s)

September 30, 2015 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

As you will recall, Susan Hartman, of the Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman, attended The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and The International Association of Chiefs of Police (ICAP) approved DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing Practitioner Course, as presented by Mr. Robert La Pier.

The course went through the three standardized field sobriety tests (SFST’s), as laid out by NHTSA: 1.) The horizontal gaze nystagmus; 2.) The walk and turn; and 3.) The one leg stand. These are the only tests that have been validated by NHTSA and should be used by law enforcement in evaluating each potential DUI. It should be noted that these tests were only validated to correlate to a specific blood alcohol content (BAC) and they are not be used to show impairment.

In the last blog article, the horizontal gaze nystagmus, or HGN, test was discussed. This article will address the walk and turn test, (WAT).

The NHTSA manual states that this “test should be conducted on a reasonably dry, hard, level, non-slippery surface.” If the person is wearing heels that are more than two inches, they should be given the choice to remove the shoes and perform the test barefooted.

There are many reasons why a person may not be able to adequately perform this test, regardless of their consumption of alcohol. Continue reading ›

The Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST’s): Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN)

August 18, 2015 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

San Diego DUI defense attorney, Susan Hartman, of the Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman, recently attended The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and The International Association of Chiefs of Police (ICAP) approved DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing Practitioner Course, as presented by Mr. Robert La Pier. This is the very course law enforcement is trained in for DUI investigations, giving them the tools to determine if a person should be arrested for drunk driving.

During the training, which lasted three full days, Susan was tested through written exams and practical demonstrations. In the end, she passed the course and earned the certificate of completion.

According to NHTSA, there are only three standardized field sobriety tests (SFST’s): 1.) The horizontal gaze nystagmus; 2.) The walk and turn; and 3.) The one leg stand. These are the only tests that have been validated by NHTSA and should be used by law enforcement in evaluating each potential DUI. It should be noted that these tests were only validated to correlate to a specific blood alcohol content (BAC) and they are not be used to show impairment.

In this blog article, the horizontal gaze nystagmus, or HGN, will be discussed. The other two tests will be addressed in upcoming blog articles. Continue reading ›

San Diego BUI (Boating Under The Influence) Laws

April 30, 2015 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman recently wrote a blog article about biking or cycling under the influence. Now that it’s almost summer, not only is it good to brush up on the biking laws, it is also good to do a quick refresher on boating under the influence.

If you head out to San Diego Bay, know that law enforcement will be out on the water and on the beach looking to enforce the laws, including the drunk boating statutes, (see California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 655).

This code section only applies to motorized vessels, meaning that you cannot be charged under these code sections if your vessel is exclusively self or water propelled such as a kayak, rowboat, or a non-motorized sailboat.

The language in Section 655 is very similar to the California Vehicle Code (VC) sections for drunk driving involving a motor vehicle. Section 655(b) specifically states, “No person shall operate any vessel or manipulate water skis, an aquaplane, or a similar device while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, any drug, or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and any drug.” This is similar to the VC 23152(a). Continue reading ›

Boating Under The Influence, Or BUI, In San Diego

June 30, 2014 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman recently wrote a blog article about biking or cycling under the influence, BUI and CUI respectively. Now that it’s summer, not only is it good to brush up on the biking after drinking laws, it is good to also do a quick refresher on another BUI, boating under the influence.

If you head out to the bay this summer, be mindful that law enforcement is also on the water and the beach and they are looking to enforce the laws. This includes drunk boating statutes which are found in the California Harbors and Navigation Code Section 655.

This code section only applies to motorized vessels, meaning that you cannot be charged under these code sections if your vessel is exclusively self or water propelled such as a kayak, rowboat, or a non-motorized sailboat.

The language in Section 655 of the Harbors and Navigation Code is very similar to the California Vehicle Code (VC) sections for drunk driving involving a motor vehicle. Section 655(b) specifically states, “No person shall operate any vessel or manipulate water skis, an aquaplane, or a similar device while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, any drug, or the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and any drug.” This is similar to the VC 23152(a).

Google Car May End Drunk Driving Arrests & DUI Enforcement

May 29, 2014 | The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman

San Diego DUI Lawyers Blog posted an article on January 4th, 2013, announcing that Qinetiq, a Massachusetts company, was given a $10 million grant from the federal government and all sixteen major car makers to develop a technology that would prevent a car from operating if a driver has alcohol in their system.

The new technology would be a safety feature in each vehicle much like a seatbelt. And, it would operate much like the ignition interlock devices, or IID’s, that are already being ordered by criminal courts in some drunk driving matters. Current IID’s require a person breathe into the apparatus before the car will start and then continue to provide breath samples while driving to keep the engine running.

These safety devices probably won’t end DUI arrests because they do not detect drugs and the driver can always have a passenger blow into the device. However, have you seen the new car concept by Google? The prototype has no gas pedal, brake, or steering wheel! Instead it uses software and sensors to navigate. All you have to do is enter your destination into a computer and the “vehicle” does the rest. This would eliminate the “driving” element of driving under the influence as the computer sensors and software would be “driving” not a person. This may very well end the need for drunk driving laws and DUI enforcement.