Legal Question in Personal Injury in California

I don't see anything improper here. Sometimes the person who gets hit really is at fault, and sometimes it's because he's been drinking. If the officer had reason to think that was what had happened, then he was allowed to investigate.

Police can investigate a possible crime even if no one asks them to, since their job is to protect the public at large and not just particular victims. If you really had been driving drunk, other people would have been in danger. The officer was not required to ignore that risk just because the other driver didn't complain.

Nothing wrong here. It is illegal to drive drunk, so if you were beyond the limit, it may not be an issue as to why the accident happened, but it is illegal.

For the sake of education, it is also worthy of note that if you were injured, but it was determined that you were above the legal limit of .08, you could proceed with a case, but you could not get pain and suffering damages.

So, the officer investigating potential drunkenness is relevant on that level, as well.

Glad you weren't hurt...

Isn''t this what we want our local police to do? Respond to, and investigate, auto accidents? I'd rather they make DUI arrests after accidents than at these roadblock-DUI-checkpoints. Your question suggests that you voluntarily spoke to the officer -- don't do this in the future -- and how did he get in your trunk? You didn't consent to a search, did you?