People v. Randolph
Annotate this Case
The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's dismissal of a criminal complaint against defendant for a misdemeanor DUI violation. The court held that the trial court failed to apply People v. Joehnk, (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1488, and relied incorrectly on People v. Williams, (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 1326, in refusing to recognize as experts two officers the prosecutor was attempting to qualify as experts on alcohol.
The court held that People v. Williams no longer represents the law regarding an officer's testimony about a defendant's performance on a nystagmus test. Rather, an officer may testify to the significance of a defendant's performance on a horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test without separate expert testimony. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion in applying Williams. The court rejected defendant's remaining arguments.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.