top of page

Comments are open now. You can share your information about how impaired driving has affected you and why think using technology to stop drunk driving forever is important. Comments are open through March 5th.


The United States Government is currently considering rule making on Advanced Impaired Driving Prevention Technology. The public comment period is open. If you have been impacted by a crash involving DUI and would like to share the impact on you or your family, you may share comments here:


Comments are open through March 5th. I am hopeful technology in new cars will end deaths caused by impaired use of vehicles.

8 views0 comments

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) needs your help to stop drunk driving by urging lawmakers to support AB 2210 introduced by Assemblywoman Petrie-Norris that would make California the 36th state to require ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers.  


Taking action is quick and easy. Please feel free to personalize your letter to your lawmakers using the MADD form provided in the link by March 5.



How can this legislation save lives? 

Since 2019, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), drunk driving deaths in California have increased 42 percent, resulting in 1,370 preventable deaths in 2021. According to a 2018 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety study, laws like AB 2210 reduce drunk driving deaths by 16 percent. AB 2210 could potentially save more than 200 lives per year.


What is an ignition interlock? 

An ignition interlock is a device about the size of a smart phone that is wired into the ignition system of a vehicle. If an interlock detects alcohol in a user, the vehicle will not start. Currently, these devices are required for all repeat offenders in California. From 2006 to 2022, ignition interlocks have prevented over 367,000 attempts to drink drunk in California. Can you imagine how many more attempts to drive drunk will be stopped by enacting AB 2210?


25 views0 comments

Re-sentencing has been scheduled for Monday June 12, 2023 3pm. This will be at the Sutter County courthouse. For anyone who can make it, the support of the community is appreciated. Attendance at the re-sentencing will show that Alec is remembered and that the community supports

appropriate consequences for the actions that took Alec's life. Community involvement holds our institutions accountable for doing the right thing.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Below is content from a prior post, explaining the reasoning for the re-sentencing.

The California 3rd District Court of Appeal issued its opinion in The People v. Addison

Case Number C094983, affirming the jury verdict of guilty, and sending the case back to the trial court for resentencing due to the passage of Senate Bill 567. In summary of its opinion, the trial court said:

“The sentence is vacated, and the matter remanded to the trial court for resentencing. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.”

SB 567 is applied retroactively to this case, and it requires specific requirements for sentencing at the highest recommended level when there are three possible sentences (IE 6, 8 or 10 years). In this case the sentence on some of the charges fell into this category, and the trial court did not follow the rules of SB 567 because they did not exist at the time of sentencing, as these rules are being applied retroactively.

SB 567 applies to two of the charges in this case where the trial court "imposed the upper term on count 2 (gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated) and count 3 (hit-and-run driving resulting in death)." The appeal court has sent the entire case back to the trial court for resentencing "so the trial court can exercise its sentencing discretion in light of the changed circumstances." SB 567 does not apply to Count 1 in Sutter County Case CRF19-2791: PC187(a)- F -Murder, where the previous sentence was 15 to life.


Sutter County courts will schedule resentencing. At this time, it is not yet on the docket. You can follow the online case information at https://www.sutter.courts.ca.gov/ (look at online services/online case access)to learn when the re-sentencing is scheduled. The new sentence will be published at this same site after the re-sentencing occurs.

The opinion from the California 3rd District Court of Appeal can be found at this link. It presents the reasoning for the resentencing in very clear language at the end of the document. If you read this document, please be aware that it contains many details of the case which may be difficult to read; please read at a time and place where you have time to process this document and the facts within it. https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/C094983.PDF




1,783 views2 comments
bottom of page