Call Now:

Barry Sands logoBarry Gerald Sands
Criminal Defense Attorney
Groundbreaking success in Marijuana DUI defense
Indio, Coachella Valley, Riverside County Court

Primary HomePageAbout BarryRecent VictoriesTips to Avoid ConvictionContact Us
Indio, DHS (Desert Hot Springs), Coachella, Mecca, Thermal, Riverside County, Morongo, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta...

version ☰

☎ 760.600.6829 ☎

Medical Marijuana DUI Lawyer
Marijuana DUI Arrest Defender
Criminal Lawyer Indio
Marijuana DUI Lawyer Indio

Attorney Profile

Crimes Defended:

DUI Alcohol

DUI Marijuana

DUI drugs

Drug Crimes




Probation Violations

Constitutional Rights

Contacted by Police


Sex Crimes


Domestic Violence


Alternative Sentencing

Hit and Run

Teen Drunk Driving


Grand Jury Indictment

Federal Crimes

White Collar Crimes

Internet Crimes

Being Investigated?


Your Criminal Defense Lawyer
Alcohol DUI & Marijuana DUI LAWYER


DUI Lawyer, Attorney in Indio, CA & Palm Springs, CA

Too many people get convicted of DUI without realizing the right DUI lawyer can make that liklihood significantly less. That's where Barry G. Sands comes in for you. Protect your rights, know your options.



In California, being charged with a DUI (driving under the influence) or DWI (driving while intoxicated) is a criminal offense. Many motorists have difficulty accepting the reality that a conviction for drunk driving comes with harsh penalties, including a California criminal record, stiff fines, loss of driving privileges, increased insurance rates, possible jail time and possible loss of your professional license.

As heard on KCLB 93.7 FM,  U-92.7 FM, FOX SPORTS. AM1270 Radio...


DUI Financial ImpactDUI Tips & tricksDUI Field Sobriety Tests
2nd 3rd or 4th DUI Charge

DUI Laws

DUI charges are made against over 1.4 million drivers annually. Last year 35% of all California defendants who were arrested for DUI kept their driver's license simply by requesting a DMV hearing within the allotted time period. If you have been arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, you owe it to yourself to have a clear understanding of the California DUI process, be fully prepared, and secure the best possible outcome for your case. This is most successfully accomplished by retaining experienced California DUI attorneys, such as BARRY GERALD SANDS to be on your side.

California DUI Arrest - Two Distinct Classes

When you are arrested for California DUI there are two distinct cases that are brought against you - the DMV case and the criminal case:
1. DMV Case – There is an administrative hearing controlled by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), where the fate of your driving privileges will be determined. Many motorists charged with DUI don't realize that this DMV hearing must be scheduled within 10 days after arrest; otherwise, the defendant's California driver's license will be automatically suspended 30 days following the arrest date. Trying to represent yourself is not recommended as most defendants will not understand the technical issues raised at the hearing, and will lose due to their inability to understand the legal requirements at the hearing.
Unlike California criminal court, the DMV hearing is very informal and run by a Driver Safety Office (DSO) Hearing Officer, instead of a lawyer or a judge. Although the standard of proof is much lower than in criminal court, the chances of a person winning without an experienced California criminal defense attorney are not very good. The criminal defense lawyer BARRY GERALD SANDS will clarify the proceedings involved in your California DMV hearing, including the confusing documentation and misleading statements which may lead the defendant to believe that it is his or her responsibility to prove that the suspension is not justified. When BARRY GERALD SANDS handles your case, you will see that the responsibility rests with the DMV to prove that the suspension is justified! Additionally, they will fully prepare you to testify (if necessary) in front of the hearing officer as part of your DUI defense. After the hearing is concluded, the hearing officer will take the matter under consideration and will subsequently issue his or her written findings. These findings will usually be sent out to the defendant within a few days of the hearing. If you lose the hearing a license suspension is imposed. However, if you win the hearing and the hearing officer rules in your favor, then no license suspension is issued. 2. Criminal Case – Usually the criminal case follows the DMV hearing. Depending on the facts surrounding you California DUI arrest, you risk facing jail time, fines, rehabilitation, driver education school, community service (live-in or out-patient), CALTRANS (physical labor), having your vehicle impounded, law enforcement's installation of an ignition interlock device on your vehicle, attendance at the Hospital and Morgue program (HAM), or any combination of the above. Penalties for California drunk driving or DUI charges can increase if one or more of these circumstances applies to you:
• Having a prior DUI conviction within the last ten (10) years • At the time of the arrest:    •Speeding or driving recklessly    •Driving with a child under the age of 14    •Having an excessive (over .20%) blood alcohol content (BAC)    •Refusing any chemical test, such as breath, blood, or urine.

The best possible outcome you can expect from a California DUI charge will result from having a qualified DUI attorney. From alternative sentences to sentence reductions, the uncovering of the weaknesses in your case, and various strategies geared toward challenging the prosecution, the odds of a favorable outcome are vastly increased when experienced and aggressive California criminal defense lawyers are fighting your battles.

DUI Penalties - You Need A Good Lawyer

The specific circumstances surrounding your DUI arrest and number of times you have been charged or arrested for DUI (driving under the influence) will determine your final sentence. California DUI convictions are also "priorable" offenses meaning that with each subsequent DUI conviction, the punishment increases. The outcome of your case depends in great part to the experience, skill, and effectiveness of your lawyer.
First DUI Offense – Misdemeanor


• Summary (Informal) Probation for three years • 48 hours minimum to 6 months in county jail; the 48 hours minimum in jail must be served continuously • Fines from $390 to $1000 plus mandatory penalty assessments or approximately thirteen days of community service; Total costs including fines, penalty assessments, and court costs range from $1500 to $2400 • License Suspension for six to ten months &bul; A three month court approved alcohol and drug education program (AB 541 class)
Second DUI Offense - Misdemeanor

• Summary Probation for three to five years • 96 hours minimum to a maximum of one year in county jail • Fines stay in the same general range as in a First DUI (see above) • License Suspension for two years that may be converted to a restricted license after 12 months • An 18 to 30 month court-approved alcohol program • IID-Ignition Interlocking Device may likely be required on a second DUI conviction. See below for a definition of IID.
Third DUI Offense - Misdemeanor

• Summary Probation for three to five years • 120 days (minimum) to a maximum of one year in county jail • Fines stay in the same general range as stated above • License Suspension for three years which may be converted to a restriced license after 18 months • A 30 month court-approved drug/alcohol program • Installation of an IID (Ignition Interlocking Device). An IID is an instrument that is attached to your car that does not allow the car to start until you provide an alcohol-free breath sample.
Fourth DUI Offense - Felony

• Parole for three years • Sixteen months to three years in state prison • Fines stay in the same general range as stated above • License revocation for four years • Automobile Forfeiture (possible). • A 30-month alcohol treatment program • Designation as a "Habitual Traffic Offender." The above penalties are typical for standard DUI offenses. The penalties for your DUI conviction can be increased if there are additional facts and circumstances in your DUI arrest such as:

• Refusing to take a chemical test • Driving with a blood-alcohol level of .20% or more • Causing an automobile accident • Driving recklessly or at excessive speeds • Having a child 14 years or younger in the car • DUI with injury which can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony.

Indio DUI Lawyer

The variations in the DUI penalties depend on the many factors surrounding your DUI charge. The importance of securing aggressive, skilled and effective lawyer BARRY GERALD SANDS , cannot be underestimated. As A CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER, I strive to achieve favorable outcomes for all of my clients by working hard and giving my clients the personal attention they deserve. BARRY GERALD SANDS knows California DUI law and know how to defend against these charges by effectively challenging DUI charges on the basis of a lack of probable cause for the traffic stop, lack of Miranda advisement, illegal arrest, improper testing procedures, faulty testing equipment, and other issues including improper police conduct. Additionally, BARRY GERALD SANDS is very familiar with the alternative sentencing options in a DUI case. These alternative sentencing options include alternatives to county jail or prison that include electronic monitoring or house arrest and live-in alcohol treatment programs. Contact our office for a no-charge confidential consultation to discuss your potential defenses, strategy, and legal options. View the firm's profile at Contact a INDIO DUI lawyer now if you were charged with a DUI or any other type of criminal offense.



“The Fourth Amendment prohibits ‘unreasonable searches and seizures’ by the Government, and its protections extend to brief investigatory stops of persons or vehicles that fall short of traditional arrest.” United States v. Arvizu (2002), citing United States v. Cortez (1981); Terry v. Ohio (1968).

Detention vs. Consensual Contact in California DUI Cases 

In People v. Jones (1991), the court summarized that the law related to a determination of whether or not any particular encounter between a person and cop is a detention versus a consensual contact.
In general, a detention is found whenever a person is ordered, rather than asked, by a cop to stay put, though in individual cases other factors may weigh more heavily.

Entry of Dwelling Without a Warrant in California DUI Cases 

The warrantless entry into a home to arrest someone is an unreasonable seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution absent probable cause and an exigent circumstance. Payton v. New York (1980).

Thus, absent some exception to the warrant requirement, if there is time for the constable to obtain a warrant then it must be obtained.

Furthermore, curtilage around a dwelling is given the same protection. People v. Strider (2009) affirmed that locations where the general public is not permitted to walk without challenge, such as a fenced-in yard, are also protected.

There are various exceptions to the warrant requirement, however, which are set forth in the two-volume treatise, California Drunk Driving Law, Chapter 6.

Search Incident to Arrest in California DUI Cases 

The right of police to search a vehicle incident to arrest is not unlimited. New York v. Belton (1981). In the absence of probable cause to believe that evidence connected to the offense giving rise to arrest may be found in a vehicle, a warrantless search of a driver’s vehicle is unconstitutional where the driver has been placed in custody and no longer has immediate access to the car’s interior. Arizona v. Gant (2009), distinguishing Chimel v. California (1969)--search incident to arrest justified by either officer safety or preservation of evidence).

But see People v. Henry (2010) (review granted), which holds that Gant does not apply retroactively.
Inventory Searches

Colorado v. Bertine (1987) held that police officers may exercise discretion in determining whether impounding a vehicle serves their community caretaking function, “so long as that discretion is exercised according to standard criteria and on the basis of something other than suspicion of evidence of criminal activity.” Id., at 375.

In People v. Torres (2010), the officer testified his department’s policy permitted inventory searches to look for evidence of criminal activity. The court held that such an inventory did not serve the community caretaking function, since it was intended to find evidence.

Tipsters and the Public Safety Exception in California DUI Cases 

When evaluating the constitutionality of a detention based on a tip to the police, one must preliminarily note the distinction between “anonymous tipsters” (folks who telephone the police about a crime, but do not identify themselves and are not known to the police), “government agents” (snitches working for the constable) and “citizen informants” (chance witnesses or crime victims who expose their identity). With regard to “anonymous tipsters” and “government agents,” there is no presumption of reliability attached to their reports. With “citizen informants,” however, there is a presumption of reliability, but even this presumption does not “dispense with the requirement that the informant—whether citizen or otherwise—furnish underlying facts sufficiently detailed to cause a reasonable person to believe that a crime had been committed....” People v. Ramey (1976).

If the officer making an enforcement stop does not know whether the tipster exposed his identity, then the source of the information must be treated as an “anonymous tip.” This is because the constitutionality of the detention turns on what the officer knew prior to the enforcement stop, People v. Ramey (1976), and “a police officer can legally stop a motorist only if the facts and circumstances known to the officer support at least a reasonable suspicion that the driver has violated the Vehicle Code or some other law.” People v. Miranda (1993) (Emphasis added).

All that being said, however, an anonymous and uncorroborated phone tip about a potential drunk driver may trigger the “public safety” exception to the Fourth Amendment, even where the police do not independently observe anything unusual about the motorist or his driving prior to the enforcement stop. People v. Wells (2006)

Racial Profiling in California DUI Cases 

Penal Code § 13519.4(e) prohibits racial profiling. Subdivision (d) states that:

“Racial profiling,” for purposes of this section, is the practice of detaining a suspect based on a broad set of criteria which cast suspicion on an entire class of people without any individualized suspicion of the particular person being stopped.

Speed Traps in California DUI Cases 

A motorist stopped in violation of the speed trap law may still be lawfully arrested for DUI because the statutory speed trap “exclusionary rule” of CVC §§ 40803 and 40804 applies only to speeding violations and “[t]he offense of driving under the influence does not ‘involve the speed of a vehicle’ as defined in [CVC §]40805.”

Community Caretaking Exception in California DUI Cases 

Police may conduct a warrantless detention if the officer feels a person is in need of emergency assistance. It does not require evidence that a crime has been committed.

The lead case in California is People v. Ray (1999). In Ray, the California Supreme Court noted the community caretaking exception is only permitted when there is an imminent danger to life or property.


I’m your solution
(Experience you can rely on)
Decades of real Experience you can Rely On to protect your Rights.

•over 30 years experience in criminal defense law.
•Payment options available to clients.
•Serving in all jails and counties in California.

American Flag Canadian Flag Mexican Flag Gay Pride Flag