Jaskaran Gill was still on probation for a DUI when he was caught doing 100 mph on Interstate 880 in San Jose with his blood-alcohol concentration nearly twice the legal limit.
A second drunken-driving conviction could have stripped him of his driver”s license for at least a year and landed him in jail. But a more devastating likelihood loomed: The State Bar might deny Gill the right to practice law or significantly delay the start of his career at a time when he was more than halfway through Santa Clara University law school.
So, Gill claimed that his blood-alcohol level wasn”t really 0.14, as the Santa Clara County crime lab had reported in early 2010. The lab”s methodology was outdated, he claimed, rendering the test scientifically invalid and therefore not admissible as evidence in court.
Gill”s novel defense tactic failed, thanks to a dedicated young prosecutor who won an epic battle with the law student”s lawyers — and to the county crime lab, which demonstrated that Gill would be considered drunk even if the test had been performed using the more up-to-date procedure.
But now, the same prosecutor, Christopher Boscia, is warning that drunken-driving prosecutions across California are vulnerable to similar legal challenges…Read More