TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Xtina's BF -- BELOW Legal Limit During DUI Arrest

4/17/2011 12:30 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Christina Aguilera's boyfriend Matt Rutler was NOT too drunk to drive on the morning he was arrested for DUI back in March -- and will not be charged with a crime ... TMZ has learned.

0415_matthew_rutler_mugshot_ex

The L.A.  County District Attorney has officially rejected the case against Rutler -- citing insufficient evidence to prosecute for driving under the influence of alcohol.

Law enforcement sources tell us ... Rulter's blood alcohol content was ultimately determined to be .06 at the time of his arrest ... which falls safely under California's legal limit to operate a vehicle, .08.

As TMZ first reported, Aguilera was a passenger in the car that morning ... and was arrested for public drunkenness when officers determined she was too hammered to take care of herself.

Hours after the arrest, officials decided they would not pursue any charges against the singer.

34 COMMENTS

No Avatar
16.

seriously    

kp: Did you not read the article? How about the headline? Or is reading comprehension just not your strong suit?

If someone's blood alcohol is BELOW the legal limit (meaning they did not break the law) then how could they be charged with a DUI? Certainly you've had a glass of wine at dinner or a beer at a ballgame and driven home. Not enough alcohol to be considered "drunk" or to put you over the limit but enough that it shows in your system. If you think this doesn't happen in every city and town all over the country every day you need to grow up and get a clue. There's nothing wrong with driving *not-drunk*. Hell, it's far more dangerous to drive when you've not gotten enough sleep. Has that ever happened to you? Maybe you have a newborn or you're taking care of a sick or dying relative..or you're in college and it's finals time. Then you drive to work on little or no sleep and a lot of caffeine. You think you have the same ability to react as someone who is well rested? You don't.

People have these knee-jerk reactions about celebrities and the leniency they receive while theorizing if it happened to "anyone else" they would be thrown in jail. It's so not true. I have a family member who has escaped jail so many times for Really Big Things like trafficking drugs (seriously) across the country, driving someone else's car and having a suspended license. While being a convicted felon who had already served two prison sentences in two different states. It didn't take some big name lawyer to get my brother off the hook. So this idea that celebrities have it easy and police are afraid to charge them is bs. If anything they are treated more harshly to make examples of how the "system works". The average person would never have been arrested, mug shot/finger prints and all if they were under the legal limit. And a passenger would have been able to call for a ride home - no question about it. The police aren't babysitters; that they even took Christina in is so not their job.

1230 days ago
17.

diogenes    

What would TMZ do if they could not run mug shots or DUI or DWI stories?

1230 days ago
18.

dd    

WOW all the talk about her for NOTHING..u should apologize...geez..unfair.

1230 days ago
19.

Steve    

Just because he was under the legel limit for ALCOHOL doesn't mean he wasn't under the influence of something else. Cops can arrest you if you fail the field sobriety test even if you do blow lower than .08

1230 days ago
20.

Truth    

OH YALL NEED TO STFU!!! A PERSON CAN HAVE LESS THAN THE LEGAL LIMIT FOR ALCOHOL AND STILL BEHAVE ERRATICALLY AND A ACT LIKE A MORON MOUTHING OFF AT THE POLICE. SOOO IF THE DOUCHE KILLS SOMEONE OR CAUSES DAMAGE TO OTHER VEHICLES, PHYSICAL OBJECTS OR WHATNOT DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY EXCUSE THEM OF CHARGES BECAUSE THEIR BLOOD ALC. LIMIT IS UNDER THE LEGAL LIMIT?? OF COURSE NOT... THE POLICE WERE IN THEIR RIGHT FOR PURPOSE OF PUBLIC SAFETY. THEY GOT THESE 2 IDIOTS OFF THE STREET *BEFORE* THEY CAUSED DAMAGE TO OTHERS. COPS WERE RIGHT. TRUTH!!!

1230 days ago
21.

Digital    

LMAO @ the idiots in here calling people "losers". HA! Have you looked in the mirror lately? Oh the irony.

1230 days ago
22.

whatevs    

Yet another HARD HITTING (non)news story from TMZ.

1230 days ago
23.

Luan    

@Truth...
Blood alcohol level below legal limit= no illegal activity
No one injured= still no illegal activity.

The police might have done what was "right" but they didn't break the law so you can't charge them for what they didn't do.

1230 days ago
24.

Sloane    

they are both owed a huge apology from the cops and media trying to make them look bad

and even then...the damage has been done to both of their reputations

1230 days ago
25.

Buckaroobonzai    

so can he sue for false arrest??

1230 days ago
26.

PRO US    

Most people here and at TMZ don't know or don't understand what the DUI laws are in California. A driver doesn't need to be found to have a Blood Alcohol Content or a Breathalyzer Alcohol Content of .08% or higher in order to be convicted of a DUI there. Even if your found to be driving with a .06% BAC like Matt Rutler was, you can still be convicted of a DUI for driving while being "impaired". Obviously, the DA decided that Matt did not exhibit behavioral or physiological signs of impairment, so they let him go.

There are two ways in which the state of California can convict you of DUI. The laws are based on two different statutes: California Vehicle Code Section 23152 (a), and Vehicle Code Section 23152 (b). The first count focuses on whether the driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the extent that they are "unable to drive their car with the same caution characteristic of a sober person, of ordinary prudence, under the same or similar cir***stances." This is the legal standard for being considered under the influence of alcohol or "DUI" in California courts. Your CA DUI lawyer can explain more to you.

The second count, known as the “per se” charge, concentrates on whether the driver’s blood alcohol content (BAC) was .08 percent or greater. Whether the motorist seemed to be driving perfectly before the traffic stop or performed field sobriety tests with textbook precision doesn’t matter with this count. It is a charge that is based purely on body chemistry. Regardless of the evidence against you, you are not guilty until the state proves that you are. That’s why you should get a skilled DUI lawyer working for your immediately. You can escape punishment in your case.

1230 days ago
27.

Mitch    

What do you guys think @Jen looks like? When you throw verbal insults around like that, it's almost always because you're insecure about the very same issue.

Without even giving us a picture, we all now know that @Jen is quite possibly the size of a beached wale. Nothing wrong with that of course, more power to her.

We also know that she is highly jealous of the name, life and image Christina has worked decades on making for herself. An image and voice that has already been recorded as one of the greats in history.

Maybe Jen is an aspiring singer, but really can't sing, so she cyber-bullies A-List celebrities who can sing flawlessly?

Who knows, maybe I'm wrong on each count. If so, I'd be very surprised.

1230 days ago
28.

Mitch    

@Truth

Did I just read your comment right, that you believe a *passenger* (Christina) posed a threat to the public safety because she was drunk? LOL! She was a PASSENGER! She was NOT DRIVING! She was "involved in NO CRIMINAL ACTIVITY!" Therefore, the cops had NO right to arrest her. Because she was NOT VIOLATING any laws, NOR was she causing ANY danger to ANY individual in the public, OR herself. She was a PASSENGER!

Would you like a definition of 'passenger?' Here goes:
'a person who is traveling in an automobile, bus, train, airplane, or other conveyance, ESPECIALLY ONE WHO IS NOT the DRIVER, PILOT, or the like.'

You can't proclaim that because she was RESPONSIBLE in not driving herself and chose to RESPONSIBLY be a PASSENGER in the car with a driver who was well BELOW the LEGAL LIMIT for alcohol, that her responsible actions make her an 'idiot,' and/or a danger to the public safety. Additionally, no one was mouthing off to ANYONE, not Christina, not Matt, NO one! Go back and read the original arrest and watch the press conference again - she was not acting belligerently. Writers / news anchors who threw their own little spin on the story don't count. What counts are the words that came out of the officers / police chiefs mouths.

1230 days ago
29.

Melissa    

Why does this chick keep dating these ugly f'ing mutts?

1229 days ago
30.

Jay    

So they both were arrested for no reason while Lindsay Lohan runs free.

1229 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web