Category Archives: DUI Laws

Drunk Driving vs Distracted Driving Amongst Teens

Posted on by
Comments Off

I read in the Department of Transportation’s blog that 80% percent of teens are aware of the dangers of drinking and driving. This seems like a really positive statistic, but it became null when I found out about the amount of teen deaths due to distracted driving.

In fact, according to last Friday’s post on the Department of Transportation blog, there were no corresponding numbers of the jump in deaths of teen drivers due to drinking and driving. However, the numbers of fatalities in teen-driving-related accidents are due to distracted driving and many of these incidents happen during the nighttime.

3 % of teens are aware that nighttime driving is an added risk. Nighttime driving mixed with fatigue and using a cellphone drastically increases this risk.

Despite these rising numbers being unrelated to drinking and driving, it seems to me that the philosophy of these drivers remain the same: they think they will drive home safely. These people think accidents won’t happen to them.

I think it is important for the general driving public to know that you cannot trust that you will get home safely whenever you get behind the wheel with an added risk-factor. There is no way of relying on luck that you will get home safe when you are drunk or distracted on the road. “Risking it” should never be an option.

MI Sobriety Court Gives DUI Offenders a Second Chance

Posted on by
Comments Off

I came across a very hopeful article in the Lansing State Journal about a program called Sobriety Courts in Ingham County, Michigan. This program offers DUI offenders a right to waive their trial to receive treatment, which is heavily monitored by the court.

On April 27th, Judge Donald Allen congratulated the most recent graduates of Sobriety Court. One of them was Larry Sees – a five time DUI offender. Along with treatment, Sees complied to a mandatory testing schedule and had to report to court every two weeks. Because of this opportunity, Sees completely turned his life around. He is now two years sober and actually plans on donating one of his kidneys to Alcoholics Anonymous.

His touching story is a reminder that anyone is able to turn their lives around. With hard work and the support of others, it is possible to have a second chance to be a responsible citizen and lead a healthy life.

Fox Undercover Leads to Revocation of DUI Offender's Bail

Posted on by
Comments Off

Scott Green is a repeat drunk driver in the Boston area who had his license revoked back in 2005. He has since been arrested twice for driving without a license. After his second arrest, Fox Undercover recorded him driving. The judge at the Woburn District Court happened to watch that segment of Fox Undercover and decided to revoke his bail from his most recent arrest.

Despite the clear evidence, Green said he was not driving. He even hired a driver who testified on Green’s behalf and even his bible teacher testified that Green was sober and not getting behind the wheel. (There was a bit of a weird outbreak in the court when the prosecutor asked Green’s bible teacher about seeing Green in trouble. The teacher lashed out and responded, “Trouble is part of our life. Trouble makes a bigger man out of him than you will ever be.”)

Even if Green did have a (for lack of a better word) rational argument, it would be tough for him to catch a break. As we all know, the camera doesn’t lie.

[Source: My Fox Boston]

Tiger Woods' Legal Woes

Posted on by
Comments Off

Consequences of Refusing a Breath Test

Posted on by
Comments Off

The Illinois House of Representatives passed a bill that would require people to have a one-year license suspension if they refuse to submit to a sobriety test. The bill’s sponsor, Representative Deborah Mell, states that this bill is to thwart repeat offenders. However, there were representatives questioning the fairness of this bill. After all, should a person who is found not guilty have their licenses revoked as well?

This is the case with a man in Pennsylvania who is profiled in Pennlive.com today. Abdul Walters claims he was not drinking the night of his accident and refused a breath test. He was found not guilty but still had his license revoked for a year. Despite being innocent, Walters now has a difficult time getting to work and taking his daughters to school. Walters did break Pennsylvania’s “implied consent” law, but is losing his license for a year too harsh a punishment?

[Additional Source: Stltoday.com]

Advancing Interlock Bills in Multiple States

Posted on by
Comments Off

At the end of last week, Vermont and Tennessee both saw advances their proposed ignition interlock bills.

The Vermont House of Representatives approved Representative Eldred French’s ignition interlock bill. Not only will this proposed law reduce fatalities on the road, offenders who opt for an ignition interlock could possibly pay less in civil fines and see reductions in their license suspension.

In Tennessee, Representative Tom Shipley’s ignition interlock bill gained approval from the House Budget Subcommittee. Shipley’s bill beat out a competing bill by Representative Henry Fincher, despite Fincher’s bill being supported by the TN chapter of MADD.

[Sources: Times Argus and Timesnews.net]

PA Bill to Avoid Loophole

Posted on by
Comments Off

I reported last week about a legal loophole that allowed for a DUI offender not to be convicted for a second time since her first conviction had not happened yet. Apparently, this is an issue in many states.

This week, PA representative Seth Grove’s bill was approved by a state House of Representatives Committee. The bill allows people arrested for a second DUI to be considered repeat offenders even if they have yet to receive their first conviction.

There are many supporters of this bill, including the PA chapter of MADD. Ultimately, it will keep roads safer and make people more accountable for their actions.

The bill has yet to be approved by the PA House and Senate. Following the possible approval, the bill will be sent to Governor Ed Rendell.

[Source: York Dispatch]

IL Hospitals Versus Police: Blood Tests

Posted on by
Comments Off

IL Police Chief Jim Puckett believes that doctors and nurses should be arrested if they refuse to do draw blood from a possible DUI offender who refuses a to submit to a blood test.

An incident happened this past weekend in Love Park where Chris Primuth, a two-time DUI offender, crashed his car. He was injured and he was taken to the Saint Anthony Medical Center. He refused to take a sobriety test. When Puckett asked the medical staff to draw blood, both the doctor and nurse refused since Primuth was refusing to submit in the first place. Puckett took Primuth to Winnebago County jail, where the jail nurse also refused to draw blood.

Now, a question of legality arises. Are hospitals required to draw blood from a DUI-suspect who refuses to submit to a sobriety test to begin with? Puckett believes that hospital employees should be aware that hospitals cannot be sued for taking blood against a DUI-suspect’s will. Therefore, if a hospital refuses to draw blood, the nurse or doctor on duty should be arrested.

Puckett’s opinions seems rather harsh because perhaps hospitals may not be protecting the rights of a DUI offender but protecting the safety of other people in the hospital.

[Source: Rrstar.com]

No Organ Transplant for DUI Offender

Posted on by
Comments Off

The state of Nevada has gotten itself in a difficult situation over a sick prisoner. Erik Lawrence Randall is in jail for a DUI causing death charge and a hit-and-run charge. However, he is also suffering from kidney disease.

$50,000 a year is spent on Randall’s dialysis treatments. Furthermore, he cannot earn work credits for his parole because he is seeking treatment in the state medical facility, which forces his parole date to be pushed back.

So, when Randall asked the Nevada Board of Pardons Commissioners to adjust his sentence so he can receive a kidney transplant, he was denied.

Yes, Randall did a terrible thing ending the life of an innocent civilian. However, is the state of Nevada being fair in denying him treatment so he can successfully fulfill his time in prison?

[Source: North Lake Tahoe Bonanza]

The Cost of Drunk Driving – For Those Not Even Involved

Posted on by
Comments Off

In today’s New York Times, Freakonomics blogger, Eric A. Morris discusses the real cost of drunk driving amongst all Americans.

Although he states that the number of drunk driving fatalities has gone down, people still continue to be irresponsible on the road, costing taxpayers a lot of money.

When a drunk driving accident happens, it is the taxpayer’s money that pays for the transportation of the police, fire, and emergency services, as well as medical care for those affected and property damage. In 2000, drunk driving accidents costs the country $114 billion dollars, which Morris states is more than twice the cost of the recent GM bailout.

It is understandable that citizens would be upset to have to pay their own money because the negligence of other drivers on the road. However, with the amount of people who do get behind the wheel after a few drinks, maybe there is a lesser amount of upset citizens and a bigger amount of guilty citizens.

MI: Phone Tips Are a Probable Cause

Posted on by
Comments Off

Michigan Representative Lamar Lemmons is proposing a bill that allows police to pull over a suspected drunk driver when they receive a phone tip from a third party. Currently, in order for police to pull a driver over, they need to witness a reckless driver on the road.

This bill came as a result of a tragic incident in 2009 when a drunk driver killed four teenagers. The drunk driver’s family knew their relative was on the road and called the police, but the tip was not a probable cause for the police to stop the driver.

This bill seems to be polarizing the state of Michigan. While many advocates are thrilled, many who are opposed believe that people will abuse the system. What if someone is misguided about whether a person is drunk or not? A phone call could possibly lead the police down a wrong path. However, a phone tip could save lives if the police do stop a drunk driver and prevent an accident from happening.

It seems as if this law is allowing citizens to be more active in preventing drunk driving. Do you think people are able to accept this responsibility?

[Source: UpperMichiganSource.com]

Loopholes for Repeat FL DUI Offender

Posted on by
Comments Off

Here’s a lesson to us all: commit all of your crimes in a short period of time and you can get away with a simple misdemeanor.

We see legal loopholes all the time, but this story definitely takes the cake. Stacy Slabach is a repeat DUI offender. Under Florida state law, she should be convicted of a felony. In Florida, a third DUI arrest is considered a felony if the arrests are within the same decade.

Slabach was arrested for a DUI back in 2000. However, this year, she was arrested for a DUI on April 15th. On April 19th, she was arrested again for a DUI. Since her April 15th conviction wasn’t placed yet, her April 19th arrest does not factor. Therefore, she cannot be considered a felon.

Talk about good timing.

In the past, this non-DUI-felon also received jailtime for cocaine possession and she even brought in contraband into the facility during her stay. Furthermore, she has also been found guilty of prostitution and heroin possession.

Yeah, this definitely doesn’t sound like someone who could possibly get a felony for a DUI…

VT to Crack Down on Bus Drivers with DUI Offenses

Posted on by
Comments Off

In the news, there has been story after story about bus drivers getting pulled over for a DUI – even in instances when there were children on the bus. This is reprehensible and, of course, concerned citizens would want these bus drivers’ licenses revoked.

Vermont is becoming one of those states to look heavily into this matter. Lawmakers are working on a regulation to ban a driver from getting a commercial driver’s license if they have ever been convicted of a DUI.

This seems fair, but what about DUI offenders who have reformed?

“We all believe in rehabilitation and redemption and the opportunity to move forward and continue to have opportunities in our society, so we have to weigh that against possible safety concerns …whether an absolute ban is right; I want to give it more thought,” states Governor Jim Douglas.

Is this possible regulation fair? Should commercial drivers – especially bus drivers -  be held to a higher standard, even after one DUI?

[Source: http://www.wcax.com]

No-Refusal Weekend in Illinois

Posted on by
Comments Off

Kane County, Illinois, is planning another “No-Refusal Weekend”. No-refusal weekends are when judges and prosecutors are on call to draft up search warrants for drunk drivers who refused to take a sobriety test. These warrants force offenders to submit to a blood test.

There is no legal authorization that permits the use of physical force during no-refusal weekends. However, during past no-refusal weekends, most suspects complied.

This program is mostly aimed at repeat offenders. Many repeat offenders refuse to take a breathalyzer because their punishment could be less severe.

Kane County does not announce when their no-refusal weekends will be; they only announce that one is coming soon. In the past, most no-refusal weekends occurred during a holiday. Maybe one is coming up around Memorial Day?

The Chicago Tribune says there are a of legal uncertainties about no-refusal weekends. Is it fair to draft a search warrant because someone refused to submit to a test?

M.A.D.D. Oversight in Nevada

Posted on by
Comments Off

Last year, the Nevada traffic safety office gave M.A.D.D. a $20,000 grant to educate judges and prosecutors about ignition interlock devices. However, the information M.A.D.D. shared was only in regards to first and second DUI offenses and not DUI felonies.

M.A.D.D. representative Keely Hedderman never spoke with judges or prosecutors about the law that requires DUI offenders to have an ignition interlock device for three years if they have killed or injured someone. She was only looking at first and second offenses and not felonies.

Because of this oversight, Nevada did not renew the grant. M.A.D.D. was unaware of this oversight, as well.

Do you think Hedderman was still being effective with just informing judges about first and second DUI offenses? What do you think this oversight means for M.A.D.D. and the reputation of Nevada’s DUI enforcement?

[Source: The Reno-Gazette Journal]

Interview with DUI Lawyer Steven Fagan

Posted on by
Comments Off

Prospective Harsher Penalties for Repeat DUI Offenders in Colorado

Posted on by
Comments Off

This past Friday, Colorado’s House passed a bill that would create harsher penalties for repeat DUI offenders.

Sponsored by Representative Claire Levy, House Bill 1347 includes a minimum prison sentence of ten days after a second DUI or DWI. For a third DUI, the offender faces 60 days minimum in prison.

The bill also includes a provision that will now require judges to issue ignition interlock devices, along with the offender being required to make periodic court visits and allow government monitoring of their drug and alcohol usage.

[Source: State Bill Colorado]

What is the Reason for Wisconsin's Lenient Drunk Driving Laws?

Posted on by
Comments Off

In the beginning of the month, the Associated Press‘ Scott Bauer analyzed Wisconsin’s drunk driving laws in the wake of state representative Jeff Wood’s third DUI within ten months. He came to understand that drunk driving regulations are never the priority for Wisconsin state legislators, most likely because lawmakers want to protect themselves from their own DUI arrests.

Some of the most popular breweries began in Milwaukee. Because of this, many people believe beer is an integral part of Wisconsin’s culture. However, the state has one of the highest rates of binge drinking and drunk driving. It also has a high rate of lawmakers finding themselves in trouble with the law for drinking and driving.

Rarely are lawmakers punished for their crime. In the case of Jeff Wood, Bauer claims that Wood “… appears poised to serve out his term with only a ceremonial slap on the wrist.”

It is a major accusation that lawmakers are lax on drunk driving laws in order to protect themselves. However, maybe it is time for people to accept that public officials probably care more about their reputations than their constituents.

DUI Bill Passes in Missouri

Posted on by
Comments Off

STLToday.com reports that the Missouri House passed a bill yesterday giving the police the authority to get blood samples from suspected drunk drivers without a warrant. Despite a few opponents believing this bill to be unconstitutional, the bill will move on to the Senate.

Like other states, the bill also includes a provision to issue harsher penalties to drunk drivers with a BAC of .15 or above at the time of arrest.

Is it a violation of rights to take a person’s blood sample without a warrant? How far do you think authorities should go when it comes to investigating a drunk-driving incident? What rights should drunk-drivers retain while their incident is being investigated?

DUI Offenders' Last Drink – Gig Harbor, Washington

Posted on by
Comments Off

Gig Harbor in Pierce County, Washington is a historical waterfront destination that is very popular for tourists. However, after a recent article in The News Tribune, Gig Harbor may become notorious for being a place where DUI offenders have their last drink before their initial arrest.

It is very common for an officer to ask a drunk driver where they had their last drink during their arrest. Whether the person answers accurately or not, their answers are compiled for crime rate speculations and educational purposes.

Nine Gig Harbor bars and restaurants were named as places where DUI offenders had their last drink.

No conclusions have been made regarding enforcement in Gig Harbor as of yet. However, Police Chief Mike Davis plans on cooperating with Gig Harbor bar and restaurant owners to begin the process of resolving the issue.

“Meeting personal with bar owners is a first step before enforcement becomes an issue,” Davis says. “We want to work with them. Law enforcement is about education, too.”