MCSO, MLPD: DUI arrest

Jason Martin of Mammoth Lakes

Jason Martin of Mammoth Lakes

DUI traffic stops leads to arrest of a Mammoth Lakes resident

On the evening of Thursday, March 27, 2014, at approximately 8:20 pm, Mono County Sheriff’s Dispatch received a call from an employee at the McDonald’s in Mammoth Lakes reporting a possible drunk driver in their drive thru.

Mono County Sheriff’s Deputies were clearing an unrelated traffic stop along Hwy 203, outside of the Town of Mammoth Lakes, when dispatch advised of a possible DUI driver at the drive thru at the Mammoth McDonald’s. Deputies responded to the location and witnessed a black pickup truck speeding through the parking lot onto Sierra Park Road. The driver then, rapidly, turned onto outbound Hwy 203 and quickly accelerated. Deputies tried to initiate a traffic stop on the vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed. The truck quickly turned onto Meridian Blvd and proceeded onto Commerce Dr., where the truck stopped in a driveway.

Deputies, with the assistance of Mammoth Lakes Police Department Officers, made contact with the driver, identified as Jason Martin, age 45, of Mammoth Lakes. Mr. Martin would not comply with deputies and officers upon exiting his vehicle and resisted arrest. Mr. Martin was warned that if he continued to resist arrest and not comply with the deputies and officers instructions, he would be pepper sprayed. He continued to resist arrest and was subsequently pepper sprayed so deputies and officers could gain control over him. He was placed under arrest and transported to the Mammoth Lakes Police Department for medical evaluation by Mono County Paramedics. While being evaluated, Mr. Martin provided a breath sample with an alcohol screening test of 0.20%, more than three times the 0.08% legal limit. Mr. Martin was medically cleared and transported to the Mono County Jail in Bridgeport without further incident.

Jason Martin, age 45, of Mammoth Lakes, was arrested for evading a peace officer; resisting and obstructing a peace officer; driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol; driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol over 0.08%; driving with a suspended license for DUI; and reckless driving.

Mr. Martin is currently in custody with all charges pending with the Mono County District Attorney’s Office.

Written and reported by: Jennifer M. Hansen, Public Information Officer


51 Responses to MCSO, MLPD: DUI arrest

  1. Trouble April 2, 2014 at 7:33 pm #

    Last post on this subject, I hope no one drinks and drives ever again. I also hope everybody fights for their civil rights to the better end!

  2. BlazeWhitney April 2, 2014 at 5:28 pm #

    I’ve been watching this post and it amazes me to think that some people still think it’s OK not to report drunk drivers. I wish everyday that someone would have called the police on August 8. 2013. On that night an intoxicated female left an establishment and hit my niece, my nephew and a young friend of theirs. Just an innocent family on a last fishing trip before the start of school. Sitting on a bank at a private pond, this female drove off the road hitting my niece first and then killing my 15 year old nephew instantly. My nephews last thought was that of saving a six year old from the path of the truck she was driving. My niece is facing several surgeries and grieving the loss of her son. Yes, I know, people will say that this accident also destroyed this females life. But, it was her choice to drive that night. So I am asking that if you see someone that has been drinking, give them a ride home or turn them in. The pain that is left behind is something no family should have to endure.

  3. ferdinandlopez April 2, 2014 at 12:56 pm #

    uhhhhhhhhh,hes a drunk driver,good thing he didn’t run anyone down,you cant be easy on these people,they continue to offend over and over

    • Trouble April 2, 2014 at 4:38 pm #

      Jesus drank on his last night here from a story I heard! ya going call 911 on his ass?

  4. enoughalready April 1, 2014 at 7:42 pm #

    Trouble(d?)… I sure don’t understand your apathetic stances towards this story or this issue. Can you really turn a blind eye to crimes being committed in your presents. Could you really watch this guy or any other person in this condition get in a car and drive away. Really? Where is your heart? Where is your common sense? What is with the lack of civility? This is a basic call to what is right and what is wrong. You say its not right to rat on someone and that people are free to do as they please. Not really. They are only free to do as they please only as long as they do not jeopardize the safety and well being of others or themselves. Believe it or not, you are not free to turn a blind eye either. Come on…snap out of it. Join a civil society.

    • Desert Tortoise April 1, 2014 at 8:53 pm #

      If the guy was blowing 2.0 you have to imagine the kitchen staff and half the patrons seated eating could smell him at the drive through window. The servers were probably holding their noses trying not to get sick themselves. 2.0 ain’t just a little light headed. That is reeling drunk slurring their words like a Foster Brooks routine.

      But, oh yeah, just let it slide, none of anyone else’s business. Right? No!

    • Trouble April 2, 2014 at 7:20 am #

      I am truly sorry about your daughter Russ. I will stop mouthing off on this subject and keep keep her in mind when I pick my next subject to address . I didn’t mean to sound like I support drinking and driving, I don’t.

      • Russ Monroe April 2, 2014 at 11:41 am #

        I appreciate your change of tone Trouble.
        As you continue to write “anonymously”, this piece of advice may be more difficult for you, but, I have found that having someone proof read, goes a long way toward minimizing my being misunderstood. What sounds perfectly reasonable in my head, often sounds completely different to a reader. This adding of a step is a more awkward process, but it does seem to keep me from publicly chewing on my own feet….. most of the time.
        The good news is; in a few years, new cars will all have the ability to “talk” directly to each other and the possibility of the kind of crash that so severely injured my daughter will begin to fade away. Until that happens, I may still react very negatively to the concept that impaired driving is a minor offense.

        • Trouble April 2, 2014 at 2:38 pm #

          Good luck to you and your family Russ. Sorry if I offended you.

    • Trouble April 2, 2014 at 8:25 am #

      I questioned the police rights to pull this guy over legally and the reasons they used justify it, I ‘m not supporting drinking and driving.

      • Wayne Deja April 2, 2014 at 11:25 am #

        Trouble….What do you think LE should have done…sat and waited for an accident before they started checking on things ?..with your logic,if LE is called on a possible break-in or murder in progress by a citizen, they would have to sit back and wait untill they heard gunshots or seen someone leaving the home with a television under his arm before they should check on something bad going on…..and even then,have to have your “probable cause” before they confronted him. You’ve shoved your foot DEEP in your mouth on this story…..and offended more than a few people with your “stance”….kinda like some of those trials Court-tv used too air,when someone would commit a terrible crime,and then when it came time to face the music,back away and say “Oh,I’m so sorry”…..too late for that….go back to your posts about marijuana and how Law Enforcement and the court system should ignore the drug dealers and dope addicts…….

        • Benett Kessler April 2, 2014 at 12:36 pm #

          I do think Trouble was contrite in his follow-up emails. Let’s give him that.

        • Trouble April 2, 2014 at 2:28 pm #

          Wayne, call 911 all you want. Ask for Chief Watson, he seems to agree with you. I don’t. Just stop adding nut ball statements like above. I never said I won’t call for a break in or a murder.

          • Dan Watson April 2, 2014 at 4:48 pm #

            Trouble, we will all know whether you are correct that a 911 call of a possible DUI driver does not give an officer the probable cause to make a traffic stop when this goes to the District Attorney for filing and then to court. If the DA or Judge agree with you, the case won’t be filed, or will be dismissed. I’m confident that won’t happen, but lets wait and see.

          • Wayne Deja April 2, 2014 at 5:14 pm #

            Trouble….YOU saying “my” nut ball statements?….my guess would be if you saw a crime in progress you’d be afraid to call the cops,thinking if you did,you’d “get stitches or end up in ditches” if you did….just like you would be if you see a drunk driver and the CRIME he was commiting …….you see,I take your defense of this drunk driver kinda the same way Mr.Monroe did when he read your posts… 18 year old brother,just out of USMC basic-training, was rear-ended at a stoplight on a motorcycle by a drunk driver and killed along with his 17 year old and fellow USMC passenger…so I see drunk driving as a crime..not something that should be seen as a “minor crime” or over-looked because “everyone has done it in their lives”….

      • Desert Tortoise April 2, 2014 at 12:59 pm #

        Trouble, you don’t have a right to drive. it is not the same thing as sitting in your home or walking down the street. If you drive you agree to produce your license, registration and insurance documents to a cop on demand. It is called “implied consent”. You cannot tell a cop no and drive away from that. Refusing causes immediate forfeiture of your license and your driving privilege.

      • Dan Watson April 23, 2014 at 3:04 pm #

        Trouble – The Supreme Court just ruled that police officers can pull over a vehicle based solely on a 911 call. The following is a summary of the Navarette case. The facts would apply to a 911 call of a possible DUI driver.

        Officers Had Reasonable Suspicion of Criminal Activity Based Upon the Totality of the Circumstances

        APRIL 23, 2014

        Overview: The Supreme Court recently held that peace officers who conducted a traffic stop and searched a vehicle based on an anonymous tip did not violate the driver’s Fourth Amendment rights — as long as the officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity based upon the totality of the circumstances.

        Summary Analysis: In People v. Navarette, a 911 caller reported that a truck had run her off the road. The caller provided details about the truck, including the license plate number, to the dispatcher who then broadcast the information to law enforcement officers. Moments later, officers located the reported vehicle and immediately conducted a traffic stop without personally observing the erratic driving. As officers approached the truck, they smelled marijuana. A search of the truck bed revealed 30 pounds of marijuana. After charges were filed against the driver, Navarette, he moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the traffic stop violated his Fourth Amendment rights because officers lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct the traffic stop. The motion was denied and Navarette was convicted and sentenced.

        The Court found the anonymous call was reliable and created sufficient reasonable suspicion that Navarette might have been driving drunk because of the reckless manner of his driving. Since the anonymous call was found to have an “indicia of reliability,” the Court ruled the officers who conducted the traffic stop complied with the Fourth Amendment because, under the totality of the circumstances, the officers had reasonable suspicion the driver was intoxicated.

        • Wayne Deja April 23, 2014 at 4:15 pm #

          But….but,Chief Watson……From reading some of the posts on this site,isn’t being high on marijuana supposed to make you a “better” driver than if you’r driving and not under the influence of anything ?

          • Trouble April 24, 2014 at 6:51 am #

            Wayne, the just say no program needs ya.

        • Trouble April 23, 2014 at 8:34 pm #

          Thank you Dan for your response. I see 5 out 9 judges agreed with you. 4 out of 9 agreed with me. I realize it’s now the law of the land. I can’t say I think it’s a good thing and hope the police try other ways to get people to walk home or get a cab.

          I’ll stop crying now, hopefully some day will have a better way keeping the drunks off the road. Thanks for have the courage to address tuff issues with us .

  5. Desert Tortoise March 31, 2014 at 1:37 pm #

    Good thinking by the drive through staff.

  6. Wayne Deja March 31, 2014 at 8:34 am #

    Russ….After that first DUI,it’s all about public safety….if someone doesn’t learn a lesson after that first DUI and the big fine,court dates,time in jail,increase in insurance,cost of a lawyer….maybe losing your job….maybe losing your vehicle to impound and tow fees…they have no business behind a wheel untill they get straightened out….

  7. Wayne Deja March 30, 2014 at 8:55 am #

    MeadowGal…..I would feel more like what you posted IF he wasn’t putting OTHERS in danger with his continued behavior of multiple DUI’s,reckless driving,etc….having lost a family member to a DUI driver,it’s hard to feel sorry or accept that type of behavior,especially if it happens more than once and a lesson wasn’t learned from it.

    • Russ Monroe March 30, 2014 at 7:16 pm #

      With you on this one Wayne!
      He may be a saint otherwise, but he needs to be out of the drivers seat, now.

  8. Trouble March 30, 2014 at 7:53 am #

    So McDonalds is now encouraging their underpaid-foolishly dressed employees to call 911 at the smell of a beer. It ought to be illegal to eat that stuff.

    • Wayne Deja March 30, 2014 at 1:59 pm #

      Trouble…I think it’s called common sense….what would happen if someone came driving in drunk…got his food….left and had an accident hurting or killing innocent people ?…something that would stick with whoever didn’t alert authorities to the drunk driver for the rest of their lives….where I used to work in Oregon,I used to do it all the time,…and got call-backs from LE telling me what the pulled-over driver blew in the breathilser and thanking me for helping them get him off the highway.

      • Trouble March 31, 2014 at 5:35 am #

        Wayne, I say it’s better to mind your own business and not rat out your neighbors whenever possible. The guy was just sitting in drive thru looking forward to some gut rot. Next thing he knows he’s getting chased down in the local parking lot for “speeding in a parking lot”. Just because the cops get dumb teenagers to call 911, doesn’t mean they have probably cause to chase you down and pull you over. The cops know that, why do you think they made a point to say he was speeding in the parking lot? They have to witness a non felony in the act and can’t go on hearsay alone.

        • Reality Check March 31, 2014 at 9:35 am #

          Trouble, wrong again! The cops can detain anyone for investigation of a suspected crime where an eye witness has contaced them. That is how most arrests are made. Happens every day.

          I doubt that you heve ever seen the results of a DUI traffic collision where someone has died, I have. By going after these DUIs, the cops are not only protecting the public but the DUI driver as well.

          Have you been arrested for DUI?

          • Trouble March 31, 2014 at 7:58 pm #

            Reality, do you have to accuse me of a crime to make yourself more believable? I was surely raised in a different environment then you.

          • Reality Check March 31, 2014 at 11:56 pm #

            Trouble, by your demeanor on this blog, you act like someone who got arrested by the cops and can’t get over it.

            I will take you at your word.

        • Dan Watson March 31, 2014 at 10:33 am #

          Reality Check is correct, Trouble. Phone calls from witnesses to a possible crime establish probable cause for a traffic stop. That’s why the Cal-Trans message signs tell you to dial 911 if you see a DUI driver. I’m sure I’m not the only one who appreciates that someone called 911 to report this threat to your safety and mine. The MLPD gets reports of possible DUI drivers from employees of several different businesses in town and I appreciate their efforts to keep the streets safer. I’m just curious, if you believe it’s better to not “rat out” someone who’s driving under the influence, what type of crime would warrant you dialing 911?

          • Wayne Deja March 31, 2014 at 12:52 pm #

            Good post,Chief Watson !!!……I used to hear that same kind of crap “trouble” said here,about not snitching out anyone when I’d report a DUI driver….the ole’ “snitches end up in ditches and having stitches” thing….what a joke !!!…with “trouble”…and others,I think what it might take to feel different is one of those late-night-early-morning visits,to his home and waking him up, from LE telling him of a DUI accident that maybe injured or killed a family member…or members… or a friend…off the top of my head,I can think of 4 DUI reports I made to the Oregon State Police about possible DUI drivers coming into,and driving out of the business I was working back in the late 90’s….and 3 of the 4 ended up being DUI arrests…and I can think of 3 possible DUI or reckless driving 911 reports I’ve made since I’ve been in Inyo County and driving HWY.395,but don’t know how they turned out.I find it hard to believe someone would tell anyone to “mind their own business” by reporting a DUI CRIME !!

          • Reality Check March 31, 2014 at 3:57 pm #

            Kinda makes you wonder if Trouble has been arrested for DUI? More than once?

          • Trouble March 31, 2014 at 6:56 pm #

            First off Mr. Reality, I have never been arrested for anything. Second, Police need more than hearsay to make a legal stop.

          • Trouble March 31, 2014 at 7:04 pm #

            I can promise you I would never call the police for any type of minor crime. Period!

          • sugarmagnolia March 31, 2014 at 7:31 pm #

            I think the signs should say ‘report unsafe driving’….no matter what I see, I cannot know if someone has been drinking. I can however know for sure if someone is driving unsafely. Also, why does it matter if they’ve been drinking or if they are driving unsafely for some other reason…such as sleepiness, or prescriptions drugs, or ??? Why focus only on drunk driving, which unless I saw them drinking at the bar/restaurant I can’t possibly know?

          • Wayne Deja March 31, 2014 at 8:44 pm #

            Trouble….Do you consider drunk driving as a “minor crime”?……tell that to the families that have lost loved-ones to drunk drivers….

          • Reality Check March 31, 2014 at 11:59 pm #

            Trouble, I will make this easy for you.

            I saw = Eyewitness

            I heard = Hearsay

          • Trouble April 1, 2014 at 6:30 am #

            Glad you asked Wayne, YES, any crime that I figure well over half this country has committed at least once in their lives is a minor crime in my book. You can’t lock up every body that does stupid . Plus I think our gov’t war on drugs does nothing to help people get off of them or prevent them. Politically correct I’m not.

          • Desert Tortoise April 1, 2014 at 8:40 am #

            Trouble, turning a blind eye to lawbreaking you witness very much makes you culbpable for the outcome. If you know someone is blind drunk and you ignore this fact, then you become responsible for any deaths, injuries or destruction of property that results. You have the ability to help prevent a drunk from hurting others. If it is someone you know you can take their keys from them, drive them yourself of call a taxi. If it is someone you do not know, you call the police. if you refuse to accept that responsibility, which is one of those things that comes with adulthood, then you are almost as guilty as the drunk for what happens afterwards.

          • Russ Monroe April 1, 2014 at 8:55 am #

            I generally don’t waste my time reading, much less responding to, garbage from cowardly pseudonyms Trouble, but…..
            How about I take the minute or two it would take to hack this site and locate you. I could bring my daughter, say to your work place, and let her show you personally the effects that one of these “minor crimes” has on a real human body. You could watch as she injects herself twelve times a day. You could feel the needle holes in your muscles. You could taste the, god awful, concoction that she has to drink every two hours. Mmmm; it smells like a cross between DE-comp and dirt. You could watch her writhe in agony for most of her waking hours, every day of her life. Even better your bank account could be hacked to pay for the $3k+ a day the drugs cost and the millions of dollars a year the surgeries and doctors cost. You could experience first “hand” the joys of what it takes for a paraplegic with no colon, to have a bowel movement.
            You may think, if you bother to think at all, that drunk driving is a minor crime, but I doubt that that you could handle one day in her condition, much less the ten years of days that she has fought through to stay alive, since two drunken scumbag’s hit the car she was riding in at over one hundred miles an hour, head on.
            Your ignorance is curable; her condition is not. I would suggest that you work on your knowledge base before you sit down to type again. But hey, your just a pseudonym exercising it’s constitutional right to free speech right? Wrong! You are a vulnerable human, just as frail as the rest of us.

    • Tom O March 30, 2014 at 5:38 pm #

      Why the jab?…. trip trap trip trap.?

      • Wayne Deja April 1, 2014 at 2:37 pm #

        Trouble….with your last post,defending DUI drivers because “we’ve all done it”,as your post went on,now I see what your saying….in your eyes,it seems drugs should be legal…..drinking and driving should be legal,or at least something you shouldn’t be punished for doing…sounds more and more like your posts aren’t probably how you really think,but only saying things to get a negative reaction from… I’ve been stupid enough to do…..may someday the grill of your vehicle meet the grill of a drunk driver….and then see how you and your loved ones feel about it.

    • sugarmagnolia March 31, 2014 at 7:50 am #

      Driving with a BAC of .2 is more than staff smelling alcohol on him. I imagine he was noticeably drunk. I’m glad they called and see nothing wrong with it. I was thinking maybe they could’ve delayed his order and kept him there till LEO showed up. Driving while drunk, and .2 is way drunk, is not cool.

  9. MeadowGal March 29, 2014 at 11:24 pm #

    Be thankful you don’t have the burden of having to work to stay clean and sober. For some it comes naturally, for others it’s a constant battle. Jason is a good person when he is clean. It breaks my heart to see him struggling so much. My thoughts are with him and his family.

  10. TMR March 29, 2014 at 6:16 pm #

    Gosh, an awful lot of folks live in glass houses who post on these threads.

  11. Jason March 29, 2014 at 3:01 pm #

    Only two and one half sheets to the wind, not three. “Mr. Martin provided a breath sample with an alcohol screening test of 0.20%, more than three times the 0.08% legal limit.”

  12. Jason March 29, 2014 at 2:12 pm #

    This guy was fighting with a petite female a couple weeks ago down at the tubs and got arrested. Glad he decided to fight with armed men this time!

  13. Reality Check March 29, 2014 at 1:43 pm #

    Minor detail but three times the legal limit would be .24% not .20%

    Great job by the LEOs and the citizen who took the time to report it. You never know what is prevented by getting these DUIs off the road.

    • Benett Kessler March 29, 2014 at 7:38 pm #

      The MCSO emailed to say they are aware that the “three times” the legal limit was a misprint and recognize it should have said more than twice the legal limit.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.