Skip to main content
Chad Raymond Maddox
Avvo
Pro

Chad Maddox’s Legal Cases

12 total


  • Arias v. Superior Court (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th Supp 1

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Oct 07, 2008
    Outcome:
    Dismissal after appeal - new precedent in CA
    Description:
    Defendant was charged with 2nd DUI offense. I made a written demand for a trial within 30 days as allowed by statute. Court and DA failed to bring defendant to trial. I moved to dismiss. Motion initially denied, prosecution claimed demand for trial could only be done in person - not in writing. I sought review by filing a Writ of Mandate (a claim against the California Superior Court). The Appellate Department ruled in favor of the Defendant, and ordered the Superior Court judge to dismiss the case. The Appellate Department also petitioned the CA Supreme Court to publish the case because it contained novel issues of law. The CA Supreme Court agreed to publish the opinion, setting new precedence in CA.
  • Driver v. DMV

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    Another experienced DUI attorney referred me a client who had his driver license taken illegally by the DMV. The DMV failed to provide a printout from the breath machine at the hearing, but suspended the license anyway because the police report had the results listed in it (hearsay). I filed a Writ against the DMV to get a Superior Court judge to order the DMV to reverse its action. The judge reversed the suspension.
  • People v. Godinez

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Oct 03, 2008
    Outcome:
    Win after appeal
    Description:
    This defendant was charged with 2nd DUI and sentenced to 60 days in jail. I had moved to strike the prior offense so that his case would be treated like a 1st offense and he would avoid jail. I claimed that the paperwork from the alleged prior conviction was faulty. The judge ruled against me. I appealed. The Appellate Department ruled in my favor and ordered the judge to strike the prior offense, and treat my client as if this was his 1st offense. No jail time.
  • People v. Dotto

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Aug 01, 2007
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    This defendant was charged with his 3rd DUI. The court was required to give him at least 120 days in jail under CA law. I moved the court to strike his oldest prior because it was more than 7 years old. A statute had recently been changed to allow a prior to be used for 10 years, when it was previously only allowed to be used for 7 years. The court ruled in my favor, so this new case would be treated like a 2nd offense. This kept him out of jail, and he was allowed to do home confinement instead.
  • People v. CLIENT

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    This defendant, and attorney, was accused of refusing to submit to a chemical test, so the DMV suspended his license for 1 year. I filed a Writ (lawsuit) seeking a Superior Court judge's order to reverse the DMV action. Because he was not offered a breath test, but only a blood test, there can be no legal refusal. He must be given a choice. The judge agreed and reveresed the DMV action.
  • Padgett v. DMV

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Mar 19, 2007
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    The DMV suspended defendant's license claiming his BAC was .08% or more. Another attorney handled the DMV hearing, and had an expert testify that his BAC was in fact less than the .09% that was obtained my the machine. When the DMV continued with the suspension, I filed a Writ in court asking a Superior Court judge to reverse the suspension. The judge agreed, and my client got his license back.
  • Rassmussen v. DMV

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    CA DMV suspended this driver's license for 1 year based on a DUI he received in Missouri. I filed a Writ asking a Superior Court judge to reverse the DMV action. I argued the Missouri conviction was not based on facts which would prove DUI if it had been committed here in CA. The judge agreed, and my client got his license back.
  • Client v. DMV

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    The CA DMV alleged this driver refused a chemical test and suspended her license for 1 year. Another attorney referred the case to me to take the DMV to court. I filed a Writ asking a Superior Court judge to reverse the DMV decision, arguing the police officer failed to give an adequate admonition as required by law. The DMV caved before the judge could rule in my favor, but the result is the same - my client got her license back.
  • People v. Rosenberg

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Jul 09, 2007
    Outcome:
    Win
    Description:
    This gunnery sergeant in the Marines was accused of a 2nd DUI offense here in CA. The alleged 1st offense occured in North Carolina. He was facing 60 days in jail in addition to severe military punishment if he was forced to serve time in county jail. I moved the court to strike the prior that was committed in North Carolina, alleging the facts from that case would not have been enough for a DUI conviction here in CA if it were committed here. The judge agreed, and his case was treated as a 1st offense. He stayed out of jail and continued with his exemplary military service, serving 3 tours in Iraq and training hundreds of other soldiers to save lives.
  • People v. Schneiders

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Outcome:
    Dismissal after appeal
    Description:
    Most attorneys think that as long as a misdemeanor DUI is filed within 1 year fo the arrest, then the prosecutors have complied with the law. The prosecution took 10 months to file charges on a typical DUI case against my client. Due to the delay, my client could not recall many details of the evening she was arrested. I moved to dismiss the case for Due Process violation resulting in an unfair trial. The motion was initially denied. I appealed, and won. Just because the prosecution files within the 1 year statute of limitations does not mean that they have filed timely.