Colorado makes it a misdemeanor for a person to drive a vehicle while under the influence or while impaired by the use of alcohol, drugs, or both. ( People v. Swain (Colo. 1998) 959 P.2d 426, 429.) California does not have a law identical to Colorado's "driving while ability impaired". Under Colorado's "driving while ability impaired" statute, C.R.S. section 42-4-1202(1)(b), it is illegal for a person to drive when affected "to the slightest degree so that he is less able than he ordinarily would have been . . . to exercise . . . due care in the safe operation of a vehicle." (C.R.S. 42-4-1202(1)(g) (1990).) Colorado law presumes that one driving with a blood-alcohol content (BAC) over .05 percent and less than .10 percent commits this offense. (C.R.S. 42-4-1202(2)(b).) In 1993, C.R.S. section 42-2-1202 provided: "(1)(b) It is a misdemeanor for any person who is impaired by alcohol or by one or more drugs, or by a combination of alcohol and one or more drugs, to drive any vehicle in this state. "(1)(g) 'Driving while ability impaired' means driving a vehicle when a person has consumed alcohol or one or more drugs, or a combination of both alcohol and one or more drugs, which alcohol alone, or one or more drugs alone, or alcohol combined with one or more drugs, affects him to the slightest degree so that he is less able than he ordinarily would have been, either mentally or physically, to exercise clear judgment, sufficient physical control, or due care in the safe operation of a vehicle. . . . "(2) In any prosecution for a violation of paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (1) of this section, the amount of alcohol in the defendant's blood or breath at the time of the commission of the alleged offense or within a reasonable time thereafter, as shown by analysis of such person's blood or breath, shall give rise to the following presumptions: "(a) If there was at such time 0.05 or less grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of blood as shown by analysis of such person's blood or if there was at such time 0.05 or less grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath as shown by analysis of such person's breath, it shall be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of alcohol and the defendant's ability to operate a vehicle was not impaired by the consumption of alcohol. "(b) If there was at such time in excess of 0.05 but less than 0.10 grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of blood as shown by analysis of such person's blood or if there was at such time in excess of 0.05 but less than 0.10 grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath as shown by analysis of such person's breath, such fact shall give rise to the presumption that the defendant's ability to operate a vehicle was impaired by the consumption of alcohol, and such fact may also be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether or not the defendant was under the influence of alcohol . . . ." Under a separate statute, Colorado makes it unlawful to "drive under the influence," which requires a driver be "substantially incapable" of safe operation of a vehicle. (C.R.S. 42-4-1202(1)(f); see Barnes v. People (Colo. 1987) 735 P.2d 869, 871-872, fn. 2 under Colorado law, a defendant is considered " 'under the influence of intoxicating liquor' " if the degree of influence is " 'substantial so as to render the defendant incapable of safely operating a vehicle' ".) That offense is generally based on a BAC of .10 percent or greater. (See Barnes v. People, supra, 735 P.2d at pp. 872-873 .10 percent or greater BAC creates permissive inference that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol.) Referring to both statutes, the Colorado Supreme Court recently pointed out that by enacting the legislation, Colorado's General Assembly "sought to foster public safety by discouraging individuals from driving while under the influence of alcohol" and cited cases recognizing that " 'the health, safety and welfare of citizens . . . are endangered by those who drive while under the influence of intoxicating liquors. . .' " (People v. Swain, supra, 959 P.2d at p. 429, citing People v. Rister (Colo. 1990) 803 P.2d 483, 487 recognizing that "it is beyond debate that drunken driving is a serious problem, and that the state has a substantial interest in preventing the loss of life and damage to property caused by drunk drivers".) California does not have a law identical to Colorado's "driving while ability impaired" STATUTE. SECTION 23152 PROVIDES: "(a) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle. (b) 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." ( 23152, subds. (a), (b).) CALJIC No. 16.831 defines the term "under the influence" for purposes of section 23152. It provides in part: "A person is under the influence of an alcoholic beverage . . . when as a result of drinking such alcoholic beverage . . . his her physical or mental abilities are impaired to such a degree that he she no longer has the ability to drive a vehicle with the caution characteristic of a sober person of ordinary prudence under the same or similar circumstances." (See People v. Weathington (1991) 231 Cal. App. 3d 69, 81 282 Cal. Rptr. 170; People v. Schoonover (1970) 5 Cal. App. 3d 101, 107 85 Cal. Rptr. 69 CALJIC No. 16.831 properly defines "under the influence of intoxicating liquor".) Under section 23152 " 'it is not necessary to prove any specific degree of intoxication, but . . . the question whether the accused was "under the influence of intoxicating liquor" is a question of fact to be determined by the court or jury from all the proven circumstances of the case. . . .' " ( People v. Weathington, supra, 231 Cal. App. 3d at p. 81, quoting People v. Torres (1959) 167 Cal. App. 2d 36, 38 333 P.2d 787.)