DUI Blogger

California DUI law is primarily regulated under Vehicle Code 23152 VC. Vehicle Code 23152 VC establishes two distinct laws: Vehicle Code 23152(a) VC driving under the influence and Vehicle Code 23152(b) VC driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or greater.

Vehicle Code 23152(a) VC California’s “driving under the influence” law penalizes driving “under the influence”. You are under the influence regardless of what your BAC reveals if you are unable to drive with the caution characteristic of a sober person.

Vehicle Code 23152(b) VC California’s “driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater” law penalizes just that…driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater regardless of whether you are “under the influence”.

Unless a suspect refuses to submit to a DUI chemical blood or breath test, most people arrested for a California DUI are charged with both sections, which carry the exact same penalties. In fact, whether you are convicted of one or both of these charges, California law only sentences you as if you were convicted of one.

And despite the fact that these laws are proven in very different ways, prosecutors often rely on each to help prove the other. In fact, the court instructs the jury that they may (but are not required to) presume that if you were driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater, you were also under the influence.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

Although it may not seem like a DUI has much in common with a child endangerment charge, the two are actually very closely related under California law. This is because any individual who is arrested for DUI (and who has a child under the age of 14 in his/her car at the time) is subject to a penalty enhancement. Depending on the circumstances, this enhancement could add between 48 hours to 90 days of additional jail time to the DUI sentence.

If the circumstances surrounding the DUI were particularly egregious, prosecutors could charge the defendant with a DUI and Penal Code 273a, California’s child endangerment law.

Penal Code 273a, California’s child endangerment law prohibits placing a child in a potentially dangerous situation. California courts have ruled that this includes placing a child in a car with an intoxicated driver. A child endangerment charge subjects an offender to up to six years in the California state prison.

The best way to avoid these severe penalties is to fight the underlying DUI charge. If you aren’t convicted of DUI, there is no criminal act to support the California child endangerment allegation.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Endangerment , DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

Former USC linebacker Rey Maualuga was arrested over the weekend for DUI. He reportedly blew a .157 on the breathalyzer, over twice the legal limit. He was stopped after allegedly hitting a parking meter and two parked cars.

While there’s nothing particularly noteworthy about these facts, it brings up an important point. If you find yourself in the unfortunate position of ever hitting a parking meter, bus bench, or other public property, you must report the incident or face possible charges for Vehicle Code 20002 hit and run.

California Vehicle Code 20002 hit and run charges may be filed anytime you hit public property and don’t immediately report the incident to your local law enforcement agency. You don’t have to leave a note like you would if you hit private property (someone’s car, for example), but you must inform the police.

While the details surrounding Maualuga’s arrest are somewhat scarce, we do know that he was charged with DUI and reckless driving. We can assume that he was either witnessed hitting the meter and cars or that he stopped after doing so, since he wasn’t additionally charged with a hit and run.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Celebrity DUI Arrests , DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Expungement , DUI Legislation , Hit & Run , News & Information

Bookmark:

A 21-year old Temecula woman was arrested for DUI early Sunday morning after she overturned her vehicle, injuring her passenger. He reportedly suffered moderate to major injuries.

Depending on what the California Highway Patrol investigation reveals, prosecutors could charge the woman under Vehicle Code 23152 driving under the influence or Vehicle Code 23153 driving under the influence causing injury.

If the accident occurred as any “typical” accident would…and the driver just happened to be DUI at the time…prosecutors will most likely charge her with a non-injury DUI. Even if this is the case, she will likely face a sentencing enhancement for injuring her passenger.

Continue reading "San Diego Woman Arrested for DUI Following Crash" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

A Lawndale man is wanted on suspicion of DUI and a fatal hit and run that took place this past weekend. The Los Angeles Times reported that after hitting a big rig on the 10 freeway, the driver of a BMW fled on foot, leaving his 20-year-old passenger to die, and another passenger and the driver of the truck to deal with their moderate injuries.

The L.A. Times didn’t include facts to explain why the California Highway Patrol suspected the driver of DUI. But if the CHP’s suspicion is confirmed, the driver not only faces felony hit and run charges…which subject him to up to four years in the state prison and a fine of up to $10,000…but to Penal Code 191.5 PC “vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated” charges as well.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Man Wanted for Fatal Hit and Run Following DUI" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation , Vehicular Manslaughter

Bookmark:

With the holiday season underway, one thing is certain…the number of California DUIs will increase. If you find yourself in the unfortunate position of being arrested for drunk driving, it’s important to understand that pleading guilty to the charge or securing an acquittal are not the only two options. Oftentimes it may be in your best interest to try to negotiate for a reduced California DUI charge.

There are three general California DUI charge reductions. The first…and most common…is what’s known as a wet reckless. A “wet reckless” under Vehicle Code 23103 per 23103.5 VC offers less jail time, a shorter probation period, a shorter DUI school, and doesn’t require a mandatory driver’s license suspension.

Continue reading "Understanding California DUI Reductions" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation , DUI Reductions , Plea Bargaining

Bookmark:

Two men (ages 21 and 24) pleaded guilty to charges under Penal Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated last Friday in Pomona, California. The charges stem from an incident when a female passenger was killed last year when one of the men lost control of his car while they were street racing. Each man faces ten years in the California State Prison.

What distinguishes Penal Code 191.5a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated from Penal Code 191.5b “ordinary” vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated is the level of culpability.

If the men hadn’t been racing…but were guilty of DUI and had an accident that caused the woman’s death…they could have alternatively been charged with DUI with injury or ordinary vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. Both of these charges are “wobblers” which means prosecutors have the discretion to charge the offenses as either misdemeanors or felonies.

Continue reading "Southern California Men Plead Guilty to Gross Vehicular Manslaughter while Intoxicated" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , Exhibition of Speed , Felony DUI , Vehicular Manslaughter

Bookmark:

As if California DUI laws weren’t strict enough, commercial drivers face an even harsher set of drunk driving laws. Commercial drivers who are arrested for a California DUI not only risk a one-year suspension of their commercial driver’s license for a DUI, but possibly a lifetime suspension as well…even if the DUI wasn’t while the driver was driving a commercial vehicle.

California Vehicle Code 23152d prohibits an individual from driving a commercial vehicle with a BAC of 0.04% or greater. Commercial drivers are subject to this law, to the California DUI statutes that apply to the general population…that is, Vehicle Code 23152a driving under the influence and Vehicle Code 23152b driving with a BAC of 0.08% or greater…and the law preventing an individual from refusing to submit to a California chemical DUI blood or breath test.

While a commercial driver faces the same general DUI penalties as anyone else, he/she faces an even greater driver’s license restriction. For a first DUI offense, he/she faces a one-year commercial driver’s license suspension. For a second offense, he/she faces a lifetime commercial driver’s license suspension. Such a suspension will obviously have a huge impact on a commercial driver’s ability to earn a living.

Continue reading "Commercial Drivers Face Tougher California DUI Laws" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Commercial Licenses , DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

Late Thursday night, early Friday morning, Alexandra Kerry (Sen. John Kerry’s 36-year old daughter) was arrested for DUI in Hollywood.

Kerry was reportedly pulled over because of expired registration tags. L.A.P.D. officers suspected her of driving under the influence and conducted a DUI investigation. After refusing an on-scene breathalyzer test (commonly known as a PAS test) and allegedly “failing” her FSTs, Kerry was arrested and booked into the Hollywood police station. Kerry then submitted to a DUI chemical blood test, the result of which revealed a BAC of 0.06%...0.02% lower than California’s illegal limit of 0.08%.

Although Kerry could technically face a charge for Vehicle Code 23152(a) which prohibits driving under the influence regardless of what her BAC was, it is more likely that the case will be dismissed or plea bargained down to a lesser charge.

Continue reading "Sen. John Kerry's Daughter Arrested for DUI Despite 0.06% BAC" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Celebrity DUI Arrests , DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , Field Sobriety Tests , News & Information

Bookmark:

Scott Caulfield faces up to fifteen-years in state prison and up to $100,000 in fines for felony charges of possessing a controlled substance and misdemeanor DUI…charges that were based on an anonymous caller’s tip.

The caller reported that Caulfield almost hit her and her husband head-on, causing them to swerve into a ditch to avoid the accident. The caller provided a description of Caulfield’s car as well as his location. With that, officers stopped Caulfield’s car and began a DUI investigation.

This type of investigation seems to go against the reasonable suspicion or probable cause standard that police must otherwise follow before they can initiate a traffic stop. The United States Supreme Court held long ago in Terry v. Ohio that an officer’s “good faith or inarticulate hunches” simply aren’t enough.

Continue reading "Anonymous DUI Tip Could Result in a 15-Year Sentence" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , DUI Stop Probable Cause , News & Information

Bookmark:

Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations governs how DUI blood, breath, and urine tests are administered, analyzed, and stored. Title 17 violations can result in dismissed California DUI charges…or at the very least, in significantly reduced DUI charges.

This California DUI law establishes the protocol that officers and medical personnel must follow if they want your blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level admitted into evidence. Some (but not all) of these requirements include:

• making sure that you do not eat, drink, smoke, vomit, or regurgitate for at least fifteen minutes prior to taking a breath test (so that your breath test results aren’t contaminated),


• making sure that your blood is drawn by a certified technician, and


• making sure that any testing equipment is properly maintained and calibrated on a routine basis.

Continue reading "How Title 17 Violations Can Help You Win a California DUI Case" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Blood Testing , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

Despite the fact that it is inherently more reliable than DUI breath testing (and certainly more reliable than DUI urine testing), DUI blood testing still has its share of evidentiary problems. Contamination and error frequently contribute to faulty California DUI blood test results, leaving innocent victims to face wrongful charges for Vehicle Code 23152b VC driving under the influence with a BAC of 0.08% or greater.

Although DUI blood testing directly measures the amount of alcohol in one’s bloodstream, there are a variety of external factors that can lead to false California DUI blood test results.

Who drew the blood…whether the injection site was properly sterilized…whether the blood sample was properly mixed with sufficient amounts of anticoagulant and preservative (used to prevent fermentation or clotting)…and, for that matter, whether the anticoagulant and preservatives had expired, are all issues that could compromise the integrity and accuracy of your DUI blood test.

Continue reading "Don't Ever Assume You Shouldn't Fight the Results of a DUI Blood Test" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI Blood Testing , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

California Vehicle Code 23152b penalizes driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or greater. Unlike Vehicle Code 23152a “driving under the influence” people aren’t charged with this offense until after they’ve submitted to a chemical DUI blood or breath test that resulted in a BAC of at least a 0.08%.

The problem with this scenario is that, depending on the circumstances, the BAC that is reported could actually be the person’s BAC at the time of the DUI blood or breath test as opposed to his/her BAC at the time of driving. This theory is based on the scientifically validated rising blood alcohol DUI defense.

The rising blood alcohol DUI defense, also known as the on the rise DUI defense, acknowledges the fact that alcohol doesn’t enter your bloodstream immediately following consumption. On average, alcohol takes about 50 minutes to “absorb” into your bloodstream and may even take as long as three hours. So what does this mean?

Continue reading "Rising Blood Alcohol -- Understanding this California DUI Defense" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , Medical DUI Defenses

Bookmark:

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Virginia case which held that officers will no longer be allowed to pull over suspected drunk drivers based solely on a caller’s tip. The court ruled that officers must personally observe suspicious behavior before stopping a driver for a DUI investigation. As the Los Angeles Times reported yesterday, this essentially means that impaired drivers are entitled to “one free swerve” before they can be pulled over by the police.

The Supreme Court’s ruling isn’t formal and doesn’t require other states to follow Virginia’s lead. It is, however, likely to invite more legal challenges to DUIs that are initiated by citizen tips.

Currently, Los Angeles and a host of other California cities, use electronic roadside message boards located on their freeways to tell drivers to “Call 911 to report drunk drivers”. Although California may still encourage its drivers to report suspected DUIs, a formal ruling on this case would make it so that those calls will not be enough to satisfy the Constitution’s requirement for a reasonable search.

Most states, including California, presently allow these types of searches, so long as the observed vehicle matches the description given by the caller.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , News & Information

Bookmark:

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed several new bills that will go into effect beginning January 1, 2010. One of them is known as Assembly Bill 808, the Ambriz Act.

This law will require every person who either applies for a new driver’s license or who wishes to renew his/her license to sign a statement acknowledging the dangers associated with drinking and driving. While that may not sound so harsh on its face, it sets the driver up for being prosecuted for second-degree murder if he/she is involved in a deadly DUI accident.

Until this bill goes into effect, only those who have suffered prior DUIs can be charged with California DUI second-degree murder, also called Watson murder…and even then, there must be additional facts to support a finding of malice. Without malice, there can be no murder.

Continue reading "Schwarzenegger's Targeting More than First-Time DUI Offenders" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , News & Information , Vehicular Manslaughter

Bookmark:

Every year, the California legislature introduces new laws that relate to driving. In 2009, several of these new laws directly related to driving under the influence.

One of the newer California DUI laws deals with DUI probation violations. California’s zero-tolerance law states that you will automatically lose your driver’s license if you are on probation for a DUI and are caught driving with any measureable amount of alcohol in your system, or refuse to submit to a chemical blood or breath test to determine your blood alcohol concentration (BAC).

Another 2009 California DUI law pertains to DUI school. Prior to this year, if you suffered a second wet reckless conviction, there was no requirement that you attend DUI school. However, since 2009, if you find yourself in this situation…or in a situation where you are convicted of a “wet” and have a prior DUI conviction…you must attend a minimum nine-month drug/alcohol education program.

Continue reading "2009 California DUI Laws" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Chemical Test Refusal , DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , DUI School , News & Information

Bookmark:

Most people think they have a pretty good understanding of California’s DUI penalties. Lose your license for a year or so…possibly go to jail…pay a fine…attend DUI school…

While these punishments do, in fact, comprise the bulk of a California DUI sentence, they do not include perhaps, one of the most burdensome penalties of them all…obtaining an SR 22.

A California SR 22 is a form that you must request from your auto insurance carrier. It verifies that you meet California’s minimum requirements for auto liability insurance. It also alerts your insurance company to the fact that you just suffered a DUI.

The California Department of Motor Vehicles requires you to provide an SR 22 in order to (1) get a restricted license following a license suspension / revocation, or (2) fully reinstate your driving privilege.

Obtaining a California SR 22 can be quite costly. You must pay to file your SR 22…you must pay DMV fees to reinstate your license…you may have to switch insurance carriers if your current carrier won’t issue an SR 22 (and many won’t)…and, following a DUI conviction, you will not qualify for a good driver discount for ten years following your arrest.

Continue reading "And You Thought a Jail Sentence Was Bad..." »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

Kim Fullenwider, 53, was arrested in Ojai, California, on suspicion of drunk driving after making a U-turn in front of an approaching pick-up. Although there were no reported injuries, Fullenwider was driving a school bus full of children at the time of the 7:30 a.m. incident.

The 19-year bus driving veteran was booked into the Ventura County Jail on misdemeanor charges of (1) California Vehicle Code 23152a Driving under the Influence, (2) California Vehicle Code 23152b Driving with a Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or above, and (3) Penal Code 273a Child Endangerment.

Lucky for the 25+ kids on board that no one was hurt. Even luckier for Fullenwider was the fact that none of those kids (nor the driver of the truck who hit her) were injured or even killed.

If the scenario had been different and any or all of those individuals suffered injuries or were killed, Fullenwider could have been charged under California Vehicle Code 23153 DUI with Injury, or under California Penal Code 191.5(b) Vehicular Manslaughter while Intoxicated.

Continue reading "Ojai School Bus Driver Arrested for DUI" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation , News & Information

Bookmark:

Last Thursday in New York, 41 year-old Melonie Lender, a middle school assistant principal, was arrested for DUI. Not only was it 6:40 in the morning, but she was on her way to work and had her 10-month old son in the backseat. In addition, Lender reportedly has two prior alcohol-related driving convictions.

In California, if you are caught driving under the influence and have a child under the age of 14 in your car, you will likely be charged with Penal Code 273 (a) child endangerment in addition to the underlying DUI.

Depending on the circumstances surrounding your California DUI arrest, such as your driving pattern, whether you were involved in an accident, your blood alcohol concentration (BAC), and your prior criminal history, you may face up to one year in the county jail or up to six years in the California State Prison…and you could also potentially lose custody of your child(ren). Keep in mind these are just the penalties for the child endangerment charge. In addition to these penalties, you still face sentencing for your DUI.

Lender, like so many others, has an alcohol addiction, or at least an alcohol problem, which is revealed by her actions. If any of her conduct sounds all too familiar…or like the life of someone you care about…know that help is available.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Child Endangerment , DUI , DUI Accidents , DUI Consequences , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

It never ceases to amaze me. Before I even hear the arresting officer’s testimony in a California DUI trial, I can almost predict verbatim what he/she’s going to say…

“The defendant had red/watery eyes, slurred speech, and the odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from his breath. He fumbled his driver’s license, had an unsteady gait, and failed to perform his FSTs as demonstrated.”

It’s as if every California driving under the influence case involves the same suspect, the same officer, and the same facts. But we know that’s not the case.

Officers are trained to look for what are known as the “objective signs and symptoms of alcohol impairment” and are also trained on how to testify about those symptoms. In a California Vehicle Code 23152a DUI trial, this is the typical testimony.

Continue reading "Typical Testimony in a California Vehicle Code 23152a DUI Trial" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

California Vehicle Code 23152b is what’s known as the “per se” law. This means that if your blood or breath test revealed a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or greater, you are presumably guilty of driving under the influence.

A common defense in a 23152b DUI prosecution in what’s known as the “on the rise” defense. This defense is the essence of having “one for the road”.

Many people consume one last drink when they know they’re about to drive, figuring that they’ll be safely at home, the party, the bar, etc. before they feel the “buzz” from that last drink. And while that may not sound too bright, it’s actually a scientifically valid theory.

Alcohol takes a certain amount of time to absorb into your system, depending on a number of factors. These include (but are not limited to) your weight, what you’ve previously eaten, and your tolerance to alcohol (that is, how much and how often you drink).

Continue reading "One for the Road…" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation , News & Information

Bookmark:

The Ventura County court system boasts a long-standing reputation as one of the harshest in the state, especially when it comes to DUI enforcement. The D.A.'s office refuses to plea bargain DUI cases to lesser charges. And judges impose jail time even on first offense cases with no aggravating circumstances.

But the County's DUI polices have seen a round of changes starting July 1, 2009. First-time DUI defendants with a low BAC are now offered "no jail time" deals. And the Hall of Justice has all but done away with DUI pre-trials, now forcing defendants to settle their cases in arraignment court or else set them for trial. If a case gets set for trial, the "no jail time" deal is off the table and offers go up.

"The court's dockets are simply overloaded with DUI cases," says Ventura County DUI attorney Darrell York. "It's unsustainable. So these policy changes are an effort to settle more DUI cases early and quickly." The courts are using a carrot and a stick. The incentive is a waiver of jail time for the more innocuous cases that plead out early. The stick is "upping" the potential sentencing for cases that don't.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation , News & Information

Bookmark:

In People v McNeal, the California Supreme Court yesterday made it easier for those accused of DUI in the state to challenge the accuracy of breath test results. We applaud the decision.

Prior to the ruling, DUI defendants were precluded at trial from introducing evidence of individual variation in the conversion of breath test results to a blood alcohol reading. The Court's decision in McNeal reverses this policy, allowing such evidence in "generic DUI charges" but not in "per se DUI charges" under Vehicle Code 23152b.

While the McNeal decision marks only a partial victory for DUI defense, it's a significant one nonetheless. The ruling provides DUI defense attorneys much more ammunition at jury trials to challenge the accuracy of breath test evidence. In time, it should lead to significantly more "not guilty" verdicts and reduce the number of wrongful convictions in DUI cases.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI , DUI Legislation , News & Information

Bookmark:

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed off on a new legislation, which will toughen the law when it comes to DUI offenders. Named after Steve Ambriz, an Orange City Councilman who was struck and killed in a DUI crash, the new law required all drivers obtaining or renewing their license to sign a statement admitting that they understand it is dangerous to drive a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs and that they could be charged with murder if found responsible for the DUI crash.

According to an article posted on MSNBC’s Web site , the governor announced the new law at a press conference in Santa Ana, which was attended by Ambriz’s widow and 4-year-old daughter and formalized the legislation during a special ceremony at the California Highway Patrol office as well. The bill had been introduced by Orange Assemblyman, Todd Spitzer. Ambriz was killed in May 25, 2006 when a pick-up driver reportedly under the influence of methamphetamines, slammed head-on into the councilman’s car.

Lawmakers say that this legislation with toughen DUI laws in the state because it will make it easier for prosecutors to pursue second-degree murder charges against those who drive under the influence and cause a fatal crash.

These tough laws, while they aim to catch offenders and put them behind bars, have a flip side in the sense that they could penalize someone who is innocent as well. When someone causes an accident as a result of driving drunk, they should be brought to justice. But as California DUI defense attorneys, we come across numerous cases where the charges are not valid. The science behind a DUI arrest – chemical tests, field sobriety tests and so on – have their inherent flaws. Many times, people who perform these tests don’t know what they’re doing.

As DUI laws get tougher, it becomes even more important to hire the right attorney when you get charged with drunk driving. You need a California DUI Defense attorney, who will present your side of the case and get the best possible result for you. Sometimes, we see that our clients need help, not jail. We will do what it takes to get you an acquittal, get your charges reduced or get you the counseling and help you need. In other words, we’ll do what it takes to keep you out of jail or prison.

If you or a loved one has been charged with a DUI, contact a Southern California Drunk Driving defense attorney at once. We will talk about the best possible solution for your case.

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI Legislation

Bookmark:

State lawmakers in Arizona are trying to make sure people who drive drunk won’t do it again for at least a year. This would be accomplished by requiring those convicted of driving under the influence to install an ignition interlock on any vehicle they drive and keep it in place for a year, according to a news report in the East Valley Tribune.

The interlock device basically prevents the car from starting if a breath sample from the motorist shows traces of alcohol — even if the person is not legally intoxicated. Arizona lawmakers attached the provision to a measure already approved by the State Senate that requires the “drunkest of drunken drivers to spend at least 45 days behind bars,” the newspaper reported. That includes those whose blood alcohol content is at least 0.20 — more than twice the legal driving limit of 0.08. That’s 35 days longer than current law. A second offense within seven years would mean six months in jail.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (www.nscl.org), New Mexico has such a law, with Nevada and Nebraska requiring an interlock device as a condition of a motorist being placed on probation. Lawmakers in Connecticut are considering forcing “serial drunk drivers” to have the interlock devices, according to a news report in the New Haven Register. Currently 21 states mandate these devices for DUI offenders, but mostly for repeat offenders.

Continue reading "More and More States Urging Interlock Devices for DUI Offenders" »

Posted by Neil Shouse | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI Legislation

Bookmark: