We are launching a editorial program at DUINOTE.com/news. We have a team of legal editors who will hand pick the best news around DUI, Drunk Driving, Law Degree, Law School, Law College, Law Degree, Law firms for you.
you can see a snapshot below.
Everyday, the editors of corresponding pages will go through all the news coming in from the nation and world, and pick the one that are most interesting and suitable for our audience.
We know you will love it.
Enjoy!
Over the past several years, law enforcement agencies across Santa Barbara County and California have intensified their efforts to stop impaired driving and the fatalities that sometimes result.
The effort has proved dizzyingly effective, with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recently announcing that DUI deaths in the state reached their lowest level ever in 2010. Statewide statistics are not yet available for 2011.
The state’s Office of Traffic Safety credited a record number of DUI checkpoints with helping the decline.
Peace officers in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties said they are successfully cracking down on impaired driving with a combination of education, enforcement and high visibility.
Checkpoints are a key part of that, they say, as are county-wide holiday crackdown operations throughout the year.
Statistics provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration indicate Santa Barbara County had eight DUI-related traffic fatalities in 2010, down from 14 in 2009, 19 in 2008, 22 in 2007 and 11 in 2006. Those include only crashes that involved a driver with a blood alcohol level greater than .08, the legal limit for adults 21 and over in California.
San Luis Obispo County had five DUI traffic fatalities in 2010, compared to 15 in 2009, 10 in 2008, 13 in 2007 and 16 in 2006.
“I think some of the education is sinking in to some of the population,” said Sgt. John Ploetz of the California Highway Patrol.
He said he believes saturation patrols, where officers look specifically for drivers under the influence, are most effective.
“You don’t know where an officer is. They’re out actively looking for the impaired driver,” Ploetz added.
According to the Office of Traffic Safety, 2010 marked the largest single yearly drop of DUI deaths in the past 14 years for California. In that year, 791 people were killed in DUI crashes on state roadways, compared to 950 in 2009.
Office of Traffic Safety Director Christopher J. Murphy said in a press release that a major milestone had been reached in the fight against drinking and driving.
“While we are elated by these figures, there were still 791 lives, futures and dreams that will never be fully realized. We cannot back off from our ultimate goal — toward zero deaths,” he said.
Local law enforcement officers weighed in on the way they believed their agencies and enforcement programs were affecting the statistics.
ALA CODE § 32-5A-191 : Alabama Code – Section 32-5A-191: DRIVING WHILE UNDER INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL, CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, ETC
Search by Keyword or Citation
(a) A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle while:
(1) There is 0.08 percent or more by weight of alcohol in his or her blood;
(2) Under the influence of alcohol;
(3) Under the influence of a controlled substance to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving;
(4) Under the combined influence of alcohol and a controlled substance to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving; or
(5) Under the influence of any substance which impairs the mental or physical faculties of such person to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving.
(b) A person who is under the age of 21 years shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle if there is .02 percentage or more by weight of alcohol in his or her blood. The Department of Public Safety shall suspend or revoke the driver’s license of any person, including, but not limited to, a juvenile, child, or youthful offender, convicted or adjudicated of, or subjected to a finding of delinquency based on this subsection. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon the first violation of this subsection by a person whose blood alcohol level is between .02 and .08, the person’s driver’s license or driving privilege shall be suspended for a period of 30 days in lieu of any penalties provided in subsection (e) of this section and there shall be no disclosure, other than to courts, law enforcement agencies, and the person’s employer, by any entity or person of any information, documents, or records relating to the person’s arrest, conviction, or adjudication of or finding of delinquency based on this subsection.
All persons, except as otherwise provided in this subsection for a first offense, including, but not limited to, a juvenile, child, or youthful offender, convicted or adjudicated of, or subjected to a finding of delinquency based on this subsection shall be fined pursuant to this section, notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, and the person shall also be required to attend and complete a DUI or substance abuse court referral program in accordance with subsection (i).
(c)(1) A school bus or day care driver shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle while in performance of his or her duties if there is greater than .02 percentage by weight of alcohol in his or her blood. A person convicted pursuant to this subsection shall be subject to the penalties provided by this section except that on the first conviction the Director of Public Safety shall suspend the driving privilege or driver’s license for a period of one year.
(2) A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of a commercial motor vehicle as defined in 49 CFR Part 390.5 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations as adopted pursuant to Section 32-9A-2, if there is .04 percentage or greater by weight of alcohol in his or her blood. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section, the commercial driver’s license or commercial driving privilege of a person convicted of violating this subdivision shall be suspended for the period provided in accordance with 49 CFR Part 383.51 or 49 CFR Part 391.15, as applicable, and the person’s regular driver’s license or privilege to drive a regular motor vehicle shall be governed by the remainder of this section if the person is guilty of a violation of another provision of this section.
(d) The fact that any person charged with violating this section is or has been legally entitled to use alcohol or a controlled substance shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.
(e) Upon first conviction, a person violating this section shall be punished by imprisonment in the county or municipal jail for not more than one year, or by fine of not less than six hundred dollars ($600) nor more than two thousand one hundred dollars ($2,100), or by both a fine and imprisonment. In addition, on a first conviction, the Director of Public Safety shall suspend the driving privilege or driver’s license of the person convicted for a period of 90 days.
(f) On a second conviction within a five-year period, a person convicted of violating this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than one thousand one hundred dollars ($1,100) nor more than five thousand one hundred dollars ($5,100) and by imprisonment, which may include hard labor in the county or municipal jail for not more than one year. The sentence shall include a mandatory sentence, which is not subject to suspension or probation, of imprisonment in the county or municipal jail for not less than five days or community service for not less than 30 days. In addition the Director of Public Safety shall revoke the driving privileges or driver’s license of the person convicted for a period of one year.
(g) On a third conviction, a person convicted of violating this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than two thousand one hundred dollars ($2,100) nor more than ten thousand one hundred dollars ($10,100) and by imprisonment, which may include hard labor, in the county or municipal jail for not less than 60 days nor more than one year, to include a minimum of 60 days which shall be served in the county or municipal jail and cannot be probated or suspended. In addition, the Director of Public Safety shall revoke the driving privilege or driver’s license of the person convicted for a period of three years.
(h) On a fourth or subsequent conviction, a person convicted of violating this section shall be guilty of a Class C felony and punished by a fine of not less than four thousand one hundred dollars ($4,100) nor more than ten thousand one hundred dollars ($10,100) and by imprisonment of not less than one year and one day nor more than 10 years. Any term of imprisonment may include hard labor for the county or state, and where imprisonment does not exceed three years confinement may be in the county jail. Where imprisonment does not exceed one year and one day, confinement shall be in the county jail. The minimum sentence shall include a term of imprisonment for at least one year and one day, provided, however, that there shall be a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 days which shall be served in the county jail. The remainder of the sentence may be suspended or probated, but only if as a condition of probation the defendant enrolls and successfully completes a state certified chemical dependency program recommended by the court referral officer and approved by the sentencing court. Where probation is granted, the sentencing court may, in its discretion, and where monitoring equipment is available, place the defendant on house arrest under electronic surveillance during the probationary term. In addition to the other penalties authorized, the Director of Public Safety shall revoke the driving privilege or driver’s license of the person convicted for a period of five years.
The Alabama habitual felony offender law shall not apply to a conviction of a felony pursuant to this subsection, and a conviction of a felony pursuant to this subsection shall not be a felony conviction for purposes of the enhancement of punishment pursuant to Alabama’s habitual felony offender law.
(i) In addition to the penalties provided herein, any person convicted of violating this section shall be referred to the court referral officer for evaluation and referral to appropriate community resources. The defendant shall, at a minimum, be required to complete a DUI or substance abuse court referral program approved by the Administrative Office of Courts and operated in accordance with provisions of the Mandatory Treatment Act of 1990, Sections 12-23-1 to 12-23-19, inclusive. The Department of Public Safety shall not reissue a driver’s license to a person convicted under this section without receiving proof that the defendant has successfully completed the required program.
(j) Neither reckless driving nor any other traffic infraction is a lesser included offense under a charge of driving under the influence of alcohol or of a controlled substance.
(k) Except for fines collected for violations of this section charged pursuant to a municipal ordinance, fines collected for violations of this section shall be deposited to the State General Fund; however, beginning October 1, 1995, of any amount collected over two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for a first conviction, over five hundred dollars ($500) for a second conviction within five years, over one thousand dollars ($1,000) for a third conviction within five years, and over two thousand dollars ($2,000) for a fourth or subsequent conviction within five years, the first one hundred dollars ($100) of that additional amount shall be deposited to the Alabama Chemical Testing Training and Equipment Trust Fund, after three percent of the one hundred dollars ($100) is deducted for administrative costs, and beginning October 1, 1997, and thereafter, the second one hundred dollars ($100) of that additional amount shall be deposited in the Impaired Drivers Trust Fund after deducting five percent of the one hundred dollars ($100) for administrative costs and the remainder of the funds shall be deposited to the State General Fund. Fines collected for violations of this section charged pursuant to a municipal ordinance where the total fine is paid at one time shall be deposited as follows: The first three hundred fifty dollars ($350) collected for a first conviction, the first six hundred dollars ($600) collected for a second conviction within five years, the first one thousand one hundred dollars ($1,100) collected for a third conviction, and the first two thousand one hundred dollars ($2,100) collected for a fourth or subsequent conviction shall be deposited to the State Treasury with the first one hundred dollars ($100) collected for each conviction credited to the Alabama Chemical Testing Training and Equipment Trust Fund and the second one hundred dollars ($100) to the Impaired Drivers Trust Fund after deducting five percent of the one hundred dollars ($100) for administrative costs and depositing this amount in the general fund of the municipality, and the balance credited to the State General Fund. Any amounts collected over these amounts shall be deposited as otherwise provided by law. Fines collected for violations of this section charged pursuant to a municipal ordinance, where the fine is paid on a partial or installment basis, shall be deposited as follows: The first two hundred dollars ($200) of the fine collected for any conviction shall be deposited to the State Treasury with the first one hundred dollars ($100) collected for any conviction credited to the Alabama Chemical Testing Training and Equipment Trust Fund and the second one hundred dollars ($100) for any conviction credited to the Impaired Drivers Trust Fund after deducting five percent of the one hundred dollars ($100) for administrative costs and depositing this amount in the general fund of the municipality. The second three hundred dollars ($300) of the fine collected for a first conviction, the second eight hundred dollars ($800) collected for a second conviction, the second one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800) collected for a third conviction, and the second three thousand eight hundred dollars ($3,800) collected for a fourth conviction shall be divided with 50 percent of the funds collected to be deposited to the State Treasury to be credited to the State General Fund and 50 percent deposited as otherwise provided by law for municipal ordinance violations. Any amounts collected over these amounts shall be deposited as otherwise provided by law for municipal ordinance violations. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, 90 percent of any fine assessed and collected for any DUI offense charged by municipal ordinance violation in district or circuit court shall be computed only on the amount assessed over the minimum fine authorized, and upon collection shall be distributed to the municipal general fund with the remaining 10 percent distributed to the State General Fund.
(l) A person who has been arrested for violating this section shall not be released from jail under bond or otherwise, until there is less than the same percent by weight of alcohol in his or her blood as specified in subsection (a)(1) or, in the case of a person who is under the age of 21 years, subsection (b) hereof.
(m) Upon verification that a defendant arrested pursuant to this section is currently on probation from another court of this state as a result of a conviction for any criminal offense, the prosecutor shall provide written or oral notification of the defendant’s subsequent arrest and pending prosecution to the court in which the prior conviction occurred.
(n) When any person over the age of 21 years is convicted pursuant to this section and a child under the age of 14 years was present in the vehicle at the time of the offense, the defendant shall be sentenced to double the minimum punishment that the person would have received if the child had not been present in the motor vehicle.
(o) A prior conviction within a five-year period for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs from this state, a municipality within this state, or another state or territory or a municipality of another state or territory shall be considered by a court for imposing a sentence pursuant to this section.
(p) Any person convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol, or a controlled substance, or both, or any substance which impairs the mental or physical faculties in violation of this section, a municipal ordinance adopting this section, or a similar law from another state or territory or a municipality of another state or territory more than once in a five-year period shall have his or her motor vehicle registration for all vehicles owned by the repeat offender suspended by the Alabama Department of Revenue for the duration of the offender’s driver’s license suspension period, unless such action would impose an undue hardship to any individual, not including the repeat offender, who is completely dependent on the motor vehicle for the necessities of life, including any family member of the repeat offender and any co-owner of the vehicle.
(Acts 1980, No. 80-434, p. 604, §9-102; Acts 1981, No. 81-803, p. 1412, §1; Acts 1983, No. 83-620, p. 959, §1; Acts 1984, No. 84-259, p. 431, §1; Acts 1994, No. 94-590, p. 1089, §1; Acts 1995, No. 95-784, p. 1862, §2; Acts 1996, No. 96-341, p. 416, §1; Acts 1996, No. 96-705, p. 1174, §1; Acts 1997, No. 97-556, p. 985, §1; Act 99-432, p. 787, §1; Act 2000-677, p. 1376, §1; Act 2002-502, p. 1299, §1; Act 2005-326, p. 795, 1st Sp. Sess., §1; Act 2006-654, p. 1787, §1.)
DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICANTS
OREGON VEHICLE CODE
GENERAL PROVISIONS
813.010 Driving under the influence of intoxicants; penalty
813.012 Crime classification for purposes of rules of Oregon Criminal Justice Commission
813.020 Fee to be paid on conviction; screening and treatment; mandatory imprisonment or community service; attendance at victim impact treatment session; session fee
Two new laws address driving under the influence of alcohol. One, LB 667 passed by the legislature in 2010, could allow more drivers ticketed for a first offense DUI to keep driving.
Measuring blood alcohol content with a breathalyzer is a common occurrence during a DUI stop. A law enforcement officer typically administers the test.
If a driver registers .08 or higher, an arrest for driving under the influence is likely. But a DUI arrest is a better result than what could happen if the driver continued down the road. Crashes involving alcohol get a lot of attention from Fred Zwonechek, the Nebraska Office of Highway Safety administrator. He said recent efforts to decrease alcohol-related deaths and injuries are working.
“Anytime we’ve done anything in the alcohol-impaired area, they’ve been pretty successful,” he said. “We’re the best we’ve ever been in terms of reducing alcohol-related crashes, the crash rate —
alcohol-related fatalities were the lowest ever recorded in the state’s history since 1937.”
Zwonechek says annually about 25 percent of those arrested for driving under the influence are multiple offenders. But he pointed out that even those arrested for DUI the first time have likely driven after drinking before.
Zwonecheck said the challenge is to help those who drink and drive get help.
“The real issue is to get these people into treatment and
rehabilitation,” he said, “or they are just going to come out and begin to repeat the same behavior over again. We know that because we’ve got ten-time convicted offenders, over 100 of them.”
A new law in Nebraska may actually allow more people arrested for drunk driving to remain behind the wheel, but state officials say a device installed in the vehicle will keep roads safer overall.
Statistics from Mothers Against Drunk Drivers say up to 75 percent of drivers whose licenses have been suspended for drunk driving continue to drive.
Now, after getting behind the wheel, an Interlock Ignition Device won’t allow the vehicle to start if the driver’s been drinking. Like blowing into a breathalyzer, the driver must blow into the I.I.D. before attempting to start the vehicle. State Sen. Mike Flood’s legislation, passed last year, also limits where the driver can go, if the vehicle starts.
“What this law does today is allows the first-time offender, repeat offender to keep their job, to pick up their kids after school, to go to those things that they need to go to, to maintain compliance with probation and parole agencies. That allows us to potentially keep that person off the Medicaid rolls, provide for their family, hopefully they’ll … get the help that he or she needs following an arrest.”
Until this year, before any possible court proceedings, those arrested for DUI often went through administrative license revocation with the Department of Motor Vehicles. Those hearings are costly to the state, in part because arresting officers often would be required to appear during off hours, costing the law enforcement entity overtime.
src http://www.kvnonews.com/2012/01/new-dui-law-could-keep-more-drivers-behind-the-wheel/
(1) A person is guilty of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug if the person drives a vehicle within this state:
(a) And the person has, within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person’s breath or blood made under RCW 46.61.506; or
(b) While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug; or
(c) While the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor and any drug. Click here to read more.. »
The Province is introducing Canada’s most immediate and severe impaired driving penalties to save lives, curb repeat offenders and give police more enforcement tools, Solicitor General Michael de Jong, QC, announced today.
“Despite increased enforcement and significant efforts to promote awareness, we’ve begun to see a rise in impaired driving across British Columbia,” said de Jong. “That trend is unacceptable and that’s why we’re bringing in these new laws: to get impaired drivers off the road with clear, swift and severe penalties.”
In memory of Alexa Middelaer, de Jong also announced a provincial goal: to reduce alcohol-impaired driving fatalities by 35 per cent by the end of 2013. Middelaer was four when she was killed by an alleged drunk driver in Delta two years ago. Click here to read more.. »
Since July 1, police officers have been able to get a judicial warrant requiring motorists pulled over for suspected alcohol or drug use to take a breath, blood or urine test. Prosecutors say the change has helped them win cases against drunk drivers, especially repeat offenders who know how to beat the system.
Civil liberties advocates have worried about officers restraining uncooperative suspects by force to take a blood-alcohol test, and some judges question the constitutionality of requesting a warrant by phone.
Police and prosecutors say it’s still too early to pass final judgment on the new law.
But in the past few months, police officials in many counties say that as more people learn about the law, most suspects now yield to testing without force. Judges, too, say they’re becoming more comfortable with the legality of the law, even if they may still be annoyed by late-night phone calls from an officer seeking a warrant.