Los Angeles DUI vs. Wet Reckless Attorney

Facing a charge of driving under the influence (DUI) in Los Angeles can be a daunting experience, leaving many individuals searching for alternatives to a full DUI conviction. One potential resolution that prosecutors sometimes consider, particularly in cases with less compelling evidence or lower blood alcohol content (BAC), is a reduction to a “wet reckless” offense. While seemingly a less severe charge, it is crucial to recognize that a wet reckless conviction still carries significant legal ramifications and can have lasting consequences on your life. To navigate this complex legal landscape effectively, a DUI defense attorney will help you understand what a wet reckless entails, how it differs from a DUI, and the potential penalties involved, which is indispensable for anyone facing such allegations.

California’s laws regarding driving under the influence are primarily codified in the California Vehicle Code. Specifically, Vehicle Code sections 23152(a) and 23152(b) form the cornerstone of DUI offenses. Section 23152(a) prohibits driving a vehicle while under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug. Section 23152(b) makes it unlawful to operate a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or higher. These two sections are often charged together, providing the prosecution with alternative theories of guilt.

The penalties for a first-time DUI conviction in Los Angeles County can be substantial. These may include a period of probation, mandatory enrollment in alcohol education programs, significant fines, and the possibility of jail time for up to six months. Furthermore, Los Angeles County has a specific requirement for the installation of an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) on the vehicle of anyone convicted of a DUI, even for a first offense. The duration of this IID requirement can vary from several months to multiple years, depending on the number of prior DUI convictions within ten years. Understanding these potential consequences underscores the importance of exploring all available defense strategies.

Despite the serious nature of DUI charges and the potential for severe penalties, it is sometimes possible for a skilled criminal defense attorney to negotiate a plea agreement with the prosecuting attorney to reduce the initial DUI charge to a lesser offense, most commonly a “wet reckless.” The feasibility of such a negotiation often depends on a multitude of factors, including the perceived strength of the evidence against the defendant, the specific circumstances surrounding the alleged driving conduct, and the individual’s prior criminal record. A thorough understanding of the intricacies of a wet reckless charge and how it compares to a standard DUI is therefore essential for any defendant considering this as a potential resolution to their case.

The legal basis for what is commonly referred to as a “wet reckless” in California stems from a combination of two Vehicle Code sections: 23103 and 23103.5. While the term “wet reckless” itself is not explicitly defined in the Vehicle Code, it is a widely recognized term within the legal system. Vehicle Code Section 23103 generally prohibits reckless driving. Section 23103.5 provides the crucial link to alcohol. This section stipulates that when an individual is initially charged with a DUI under Vehicle Code sections 23152 or 23153 (DUI causing injury), and they subsequently plead guilty or no contest to a violation of reckless driving under Section 23103, the prosecution can allege and the court can find that the reckless driving offense involved the consumption of alcohol or drugs. This finding is what gives the conviction the “wet” designation, signifying that the reckless driving was alcohol or drug-related.

It is important to note that a prosecutor will not typically file a charge of wet reckless at the outset of a DUI case. Instead, the initial charge will invariably be a standard DUI under Vehicle Code Section 23152. The possibility of a wet reckless arises during the negotiation phase of the case, often through plea bargaining discussions between the defense attorney and the prosecutor. A wet reckless plea represents a middle ground for individuals who wish to avoid the significant stigma and more severe penalties associated with a formal DUI conviction but are willing to acknowledge some level of culpability related to driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

While the primary charges of DUI and wet reckless fall under the California Vehicle Code, certain sections of the California Penal Code can also be relevant in these types of cases, particularly during the sentencing phase. Although the prosecution of DUI and reckless driving offenses is generally governed by the Vehicle Code, the broader sentencing authority of California’s criminal courts often involves the Penal Code in terms of establishing probation conditions, determining jail sentences, and imposing other potential consequences. Judges will frequently refer to general sentencing principles outlined in the Penal Code when making decisions about the terms of probation, the amount of fines, or the possibility of alternative sentencing options like deferred entry of judgment in eligible cases. For instance, Penal Code Section 17 defines misdemeanors and felonies, classifying both DUI and wet reckless as misdemeanors, which dictates the maximum potential penalties. Additionally, Penal Code Section 1203.4, which addresses the possibility of expunging a criminal record after successful completion of probation, is a significant consideration for individuals convicted of either offense.

The sentencing outcomes for a wet reckless conviction under Vehicle Code Sections 23103 and 23103.5 differ in several key aspects from those of a standard DUI conviction under Vehicle Code 23152. A wet reckless conviction is classified as a misdemeanor. The maximum jail sentence for a wet reckless is typically 90 days in county jail, significantly less than the potential six-month jail sentence for a first-time DUI conviction. Courts also generally impose lower fines for wet reckless convictions compared to DUIs. Many first-time wet reckless convictions involve a period of probation, mandatory participation in an alcohol education program, and the imposition of monetary penalties. However, the length and specific conditions of probation can vary depending on the circumstances of the case and the judge’s discretion.

In the context of a DUI trial, jury instructions serve as the fundamental legal guidelines that explain to the jury precisely what elements the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to secure a conviction. In California, the standard jury instructions for DUI offenses are found within the California Criminal Jury Instructions (CALCRIM). Specifically, CALCRIM 2100 addresses the charge of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (Vehicle Code § 23152(a)), while CALCRIM 2110 pertains to driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or more (Vehicle Code § 23152(b)). These instructions meticulously detail that the prosecution must prove the defendant operated a motor vehicle and, at the time of driving, was either under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or a combination thereof to such a degree that their physical or mental abilities were impaired, or had a BAC of 0.08% or higher.

For a charge of reckless driving, the relevant jury instructions are different. CALCRIM 2200 outlines the elements that the prosecution must prove to establish reckless driving under Vehicle Code § 23103. This instruction typically requires the prosecution to demonstrate that the defendant drove a vehicle with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property. In a “wet reckless” scenario, while there isn't a specific CALCRIM instruction for "wet reckless," the jury would be instructed on the elements of reckless driving under CALCRIM 2200, and the evidence presented would include the fact that alcohol or another intoxicating substance was involved. This establishes the “wet” component.

It is important to note that in cases where a plea agreement is reached, resulting in a wet reckless disposition, jury instructions may not be presented as the case is resolved before reaching the trial stage. However, understanding these jury instructions is still incredibly valuable for a defendant and their attorney as it provides a clear understanding of the allegations, the specific elements the prosecution would need to prove at trial, and the overall burden of proof should the case proceed to that stage. This knowledge can significantly inform the decision-making process regarding whether to accept a plea offer or proceed to trial.

While both DUI and wet reckless convictions have significant consequences, there are several crucial distinctions between them. One of the primary differences lies in the official designation on an individual’s criminal record. A wet reckless conviction is recorded as a reckless driving offense, not as a DUI. This distinction can be particularly important in the context of future employment opportunities, professional licensing applications, and overall personal reputation, as a reckless driving conviction often carries less stigma than a DUI.

Another significant difference involves driver’s license suspensions. A DUI conviction typically triggers an automatic suspension of driving privileges. In Los Angeles County, a first-time DUI offender often faces a four-month suspension, although they may be eligible for a restricted license after a 30-day hard suspension, allowing them to drive to and from work and court-ordered programs. In contrast, a wet reckless conviction generally does not, by itself, lead to a court-ordered driver’s license suspension unless other factors are involved. However, it is critical to understand that the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) may still independently pursue an administrative license suspension if the individual lost their administrative per se hearing or failed to request one within the allotted timeframe following the DUI arrest.

The requirement for an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) also differs between the two offenses. An individual convicted of a wet reckless is not subject to the same mandatory IID installation requirement under current California law. This can result in significant cost savings and avoid the inconvenience associated with the installation and maintenance of the device.

Finally, while both a wet reckless and a DUI will add points to your driving record (typically two points each), which can impact insurance rates, insurance carriers often view a DUI conviction more severely than a wet reckless. While a wet reckless conviction can still lead to increases in insurance premiums or even a cancellation of coverage, it may not result in the same substantial premium hikes that a DUI conviction would typically incur.

Wet reckless convictions have their specific sentencing parameters that differ from those of a standard DUI. As previously mentioned, the maximum jail sentence for a wet reckless is 90 days, compared to the potential six months for a first-time DUI. Fines and court fees associated with a wet reckless conviction are also generally lower than those for a DUI. Nevertheless, depending on the specific circumstances of the case, a judge can still impose a period of probation and mandate participation in alcohol education or counseling programs.

The length of the alcohol education program required for a first-time wet reckless conviction is often shorter than the program mandated for a first-time DUI. For a first-time DUI, the program typically lasts for three months, but it can be extended to nine months if the individual’s BAC was 0.20% or higher. For a wet reckless, the court may require a shorter program, which could range from several weeks to a few months. The specific duration and requirements of the program can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the particular facts of the offense.

Despite the less severe penalties compared to a DUI, it is crucial to remember that a wet reckless conviction is still considered a priorable offense under California law. This means that if an individual is convicted of a DUI within ten years of a wet reckless conviction, the subsequent DUI will be treated as a second offense, leading to significantly harsher penalties. This look-back period highlights the long-term implications of even a reduced charge like a wet reckless.

For individuals charged with DUI in Los Angeles, the possibility of a wet reckless plea agreement often appears to be an attractive option due to the potential for a lighter sentence, the absence of a mandatory IID requirement in many cases, and the avoidance of the “DUI” label on their criminal record. However, the decision to accept a wet reckless plea should not be taken lightly and should only be made after careful consideration and thorough consultation with an experienced DUI defense attorney.

One of the most critical considerations is whether it is in the defendant’s best interest to aggressively fight the DUI charges, particularly if there are significant weaknesses in the prosecution’s case. In some instances, a skilled defense attorney may be able to negotiate for a full dismissal of the charges or even achieve an acquittal at trial. However, if the evidence against the defendant is relatively strong, or if their BAC was within a punishable range, albeit not excessively high, a wet reckless plea can represent a favorable compromise that minimizes the potential negative consequences.

It is also essential to consider how a wet reckless conviction might impact professional licenses or immigration status. Certain professional licensing boards, such as those governing nurses, attorneys, and commercial drivers, may still view a wet reckless conviction as an alcohol-related offense and could potentially take administrative action against the licensee. For individuals who are not U.S. citizens, any criminal conviction can have serious immigration consequences, and a wet reckless conviction, while less severe than a DUI, could still be deemed problematic in certain situations. Therefore, it is imperative to discuss these potential implications with an attorney who has experience in both DUI defense and the relevant area of professional licensing or immigration law.

It is crucial to understand that while the criminal court proceedings related to a DUI charge and the administrative proceedings conducted by the California DMV are separate processes, the outcomes of one can indirectly influence the other. Following a DUI arrest, the DMV automatically initiates an administrative per se hearing to determine whether to suspend the individual’s driver’s license if their BAC was 0.08% or higher or if they refused to submit to a chemical test. This DMV hearing proceeds independently of the criminal case, and the hearing officer will review evidence such as the police report, BAC test results, and any witness statements.

Even if an individual’s DUI charge is ultimately reduced to a wet reckless in criminal court, the DMV can still impose a license suspension if the hearing officer concludes, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that the individual was driving with a BAC at or above 0.08%. This means that avoiding a DUI conviction in court does not automatically guarantee the avoidance of an administrative license suspension by the DMV. Therefore, the most effective strategy is often to work with an experienced DUI attorney who can represent the defendant in both the criminal court proceedings and the DMV hearing, striving to align the outcomes whenever possible.

Successfully negotiating a reduction from a DUI charge to a wet reckless often hinges on the expertise and skill of the defense attorney. A knowledgeable attorney can identify and highlight weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, negotiate effectively with the district attorney, and present mitigating evidence on behalf of the defendant. For example, an attorney may challenge whether the police had a legitimate reason to stop the vehicle, whether the arrest was lawful, whether the blood or breath test was administered correctly, and whether the testing equipment was properly calibrated and maintained. If these challenges raise sufficient doubt about the prosecution’s ability to secure a DUI conviction at trial, the prosecutor may be more inclined to offer or accept a plea to a wet reckless charge.

Furthermore, an attorney’s familiarity with the local court practices and the tendencies of individual prosecutors within the Los Angeles County court system can be invaluable. Practices and policies can vary between different courthouses and even among different prosecutors. Some may be stricter and less willing to offer a wet reckless plea, while others may be more open to such reductions, particularly for first-time offenders with lower BAC levels. An attorney who understands these local nuances can more effectively guide their client toward the most favorable outcome possible.

While a wet reckless conviction offers certain advantages over a full DUI conviction, defendants need to understand that it is still a serious offense with potential long-term consequences. The conviction will remain on the individual’s criminal record and can be used to enhance the penalties for any future DUI offenses within ten years. Additionally, any insurance provider, employer, or licensing agency that conducts a thorough background check will likely be able to see that the reckless driving offense was alcohol-related. However, for many individuals, the distinction between a DUI and a reckless driving conviction, even with the “wet” designation, can represent a significant improvement in terms of background checks, personal reputation, and potential penalties in future legal proceedings.

It is also important to note that a wet reckless conviction will remain on an individual’s criminal record indefinitely unless and until it is expunged according to California Penal Code Section 1203.4. While expungement can provide a significant level of relief by removing certain barriers to employment and preventing the conviction from having to be disclosed on most employment applications, it does not completely erase the fact that the original conviction occurred. In certain contexts, such as applications for professional licenses or in immigration proceedings, the original offense may still be relevant and must be disclosed.

Whether your goal is to negotiate a plea agreement for a wet reckless offense or to fight your DUI charges vigorously, having an experienced and knowledgeable attorney who understands the high stakes involved and knows how to navigate the intricate legal landscape of Los Angeles DUI cases is essential. The potential consequences on your freedom, driving privileges, financial well-being, and future opportunities are simply too significant to leave to chance.

Attorney Michael Kraut, based at the Kraut Law Group Criminal & DUI Lawyers in Los Angeles, CA, offers extensive experience in both DUI defense and DMV administrative hearings. With over 14 years as a former Deputy District Attorney, Mr. Kraut possesses a deep understanding of how prosecutors build cases for DUI and related charges. His firm is committed to helping clients maintain their driving privileges and providing vigorous defense in court. For more information about Los Angeles's wet reackess laws, DUI defense strategies, and how to challenge a suspension, you can contact Michael Kraut for a free consultation. He can be reached 24/7. Understanding your rights and available options is the crucial first step toward achieving a favorable resolution.