For Pilots, First DUI Has Greater Impact with the FAA

December 4, 2009 by tgabeh · Leave a Comment 

The FAA has gotten more stringent regarding the treatment of pilots convicted of Driving Under the Influence (Cal. Veh. Code §23152(a) and/or §231252(b)). First-time DUI offenders will not escape the scrutiny by the FAA as easily as they have in the past. In California, Cal. Veh. Code 23152(a) states that it is unlawful to drive a vehicle by any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug. §23152(b) is referred to as the presumptive limit, and that states that it is unlawful for any person who has 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle. 
 
Under the new FAA rules, anyone whose blood-alcohol content was measured at higher than .15 percent (or almost twice the California legal limit of .08) or who refused to provide a sample will automatically have their case referred to FAA headquarters. The FAA medics will then insist that the pilot applicant undergo a substance abuse assessment. Note, these penalties are in addition to any driving privilege suspensions the offender is already facing. In California, failure to submit to blood or breath sample upon arrest, oxymoronically referred to as “implied consent”, will result in a mandatory one year suspension of the offenders driving privilege.
 
There’s continues to be a requirement to report any alcohol related driving offenses to the FAA within 60 days. Failure to do so results in an immediate suspension. Also, any alcohol related driving suspensions must be reported on the application for medical certification when renewal time comes. The FAA has the ability to cross check the pilot applicant with the National Driver Registry that compiles the state’s driving records. If the FAA discovers the pilot failed to disclose an alcohol related driving offense on his medical application, the FAA will impose an immediate revocation to the pilots medical certification, thereby grounding the pilot and suspending their flying privileges until the issue can be sorted out.
 
If you are a private pilot and have been arrested for DUI or any other alcohol related driving offense, you need the assistant of a competent criminal defense attorney familiar with aviation law. Do not wait and do not make any statements to any investigators without first speaking to your lawyer. Anything you say can AND WILL BE used against you. It is important to safeguard your rights and your flying privileges. Contact the attorney’s at Houston Law of California immediately. Call 714.841.3921 today, or email at info@HBLawyers.net.


Pilots Can Lose Medical for Multiple DUI’s or Drug Charges

June 2, 2009 by tgabeh · Leave a Comment 

The Code of Federal Regulations, Formerly known as FAR’s, section § 61.15 specifically deals with offenses by pilots involving alcohol or drugs. A conviction for the violation of any Federal or State statute relating to the various actions related to narcotic drugs, marijuana, or depressant or stimulant drugs or substances is grounds for the denial of an application for any certificate, rating, or authorization for a period of up to 1 year after the date of final conviction or a suspension of your ratings. Read more

Unruly Airline Passenger Faces Federal Criminal Charges

December 17, 2008 by tgabeh · Leave a Comment 

FBI agents were recently called to respond to a JetBlue flight from New York to California. The flight was diverted due to an intoxicated passenger who caused a disruption during the flight. After the other passengers exited the aircraft, the unruly passenger was identified, interviewed, arrested and taken into custody and booked.

The suspect faces a federal criminal complaint, charging him with the assault and intimidation of flight attendants and crew members of an aircraft, thereby interfering with the performance of the duties of the flight attendants and crew members and lessening the ability of the flight attendants and crew members to perform their duties.

Federal Aviation Regulation (Code of Federal Regulations) 91.11 explicitly states: “No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember’s duties aboard an aircraft being operated.” This regulation applies to ANY person, regardless as to whether they are certificated as an “airman”. All persons travelling on board airplanes, commercial or general aviation, are held accountable to adhere to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR’s). The CFR’s are federal law. They apply uniformly to all passengers in any airplane flying in U.S. airspace. Failure to adhere to federal guidelines will result in civil penalties and possibly criminal penalties as well.

If you have received a notice of enforcement action from the F.A.A. for violation of a federal aviation regulation, you need the assistant of a competent aviation lawyer immediately. If you are charged with criminal misconduct while on an airplane, you need the assistance of a criminal defense attorney well versed in the federal aviation regulations. Houston & Blanco emphasizes criminal defense as well as aviation law. We are among the few that understand both fields and we can best represent you on both the civil as well as criminal allegations. Do not wait and do not make any statements to any investigators without first speaking to you’re the aviation and criminal defense attorneys at Houston & Blanco. It is important to safeguard your rights by contacting the aviation attorney’s at Houston Law of California immediately. Call 714.841.3921 today, or email at info@HBLawyers.net.

Flying Too Low In Orange County May Lead to FAA Enforcement Action for “Buzzing”

November 21, 2008 by tgabeh · Leave a Comment 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently cleared a pilot of wrongdoing in several alleged “buzzing” incidents over a Northern California neighborhood in July.

The FAA’s case was based on reports that a single engine Beechcraft Bonanza was seen flying low over a neighborhood belonging to the alleged pilots ex-girlfriend several times over a two-week period.

Nevertheless, unable to establish sufficient evidence to determine conclusively that the Bonanza’s pilot violated the minimum 1,000-foot AGL requirement Read more