By Morgan Brickley
In the state of Montana, some believe that a culture of drunk driving and DUI arrests has become so ingrained in the community that only a community-wide change can lead to a decrease in DUI arrests and accidents.
In a recent DUI court case, a surprising number of those involved in the case had been affected by drunk driving, bringing to light the pervasiveness of DUI in Montana’s culture, even at the highest levels.
Greg Barkus, the defendant in a DUI case in Flathead County, Montana, was accused of operating a speedboat while under the influence of alcohol when he ran it into the shoreline.
According to the prosecution, his blood alcohol level was twice the legal limit when the incident occurred. Barkus, a Republican state senator, had been arrested for drunk driving before.
Barkus’ DUI attorney in the case was a man who had himself been arrested for DUI before. The lawyer’s case was dismissed however, because the police officer who would’ve testified in the case was killed by a drunk driver.
In addition, the Barkus case prosecuter’s deputy attorney had a previous arrest for DUI, as did the ex-husband of the case’s original judge.
Across Montana, numerous judges, attorneys, lawmakers and celebrities around the state have faced DUI arrests. Public prominence seems to play no part in the demographic of those impacted by drunk driving.
While certainly many people across America have felt the impact of DUI arrests on friends, family and community, the Barkus case is a microscopic view of a larger problem.
Montana, which ranks among the highest in U.S. states in terms of the rate of alcohol-related vehicle accidents, has a culture of fierce independence, in which citizens are wary of giving up their personal rights.
DUI laws took longer to reach Montana, even as other states adopted them, and a colonel in the Montana Highway Patrol has stated that the prevalent culture in the state is to view drinking and driving as “Montana birthright.”
Advocates of tougher DUI laws in Montana argue that a reduction in DUI-related accidents ensure a more universal right: the right to safer roads. The only way, in their eyes, to solve the problem is to change the culture of drinking and driving in Montana, so that peer pressure and community awareness drive positive change where lawmaking may fall short.
By Morgan Brickley
In a surprising move, Colorado’s Governor Bill Ritter plans to divert more than $1.3 million intended to fight drunken driving to help fill the state’s budget gap estimated at $318 million.
A recent Denver Post article stated that the $1.3 million, which is raised by a surcharge imposed on everyone convicted of a DUI offense in Colorado, has been used to “pay overtime for cops working the ‘Heat Is On’ crackdowns on long holiday weekends.”
This is particularly relevant as the recent Labor Day Weekend statistics are being tabulated and due to be released shortly.
For Colorado, their planned campaign for Labor Day weekend was to be the last funded by those grants if the legislature approves Ritter’s plan, and as of Tuesday, Sept. 8th, the decision has yet to be made.
As of now, in Colorado everyone convicted of an alcohol- related traffic offense pays a $90 fine, roughly 1/3 of which goes to the Transportation Department to fund grants for DUI enforcement.
The money is then dispersed throughout the local law enforcement agencies. For 2009 a total of $1.4 million was available to 56 police and sheriff’s departments. Nearly $375,000 is expected to be left after the Labor Day enforcement campaign.
This being the money that Ritter reportedly froze in an executive order.
Larimer County sheriff’s Sgt. Gerald Baker, who is the head of the department’s traffic unit was quoted as saying, “It’s going to have an impact on our numbers, and it’s a little too early to say whether it’s going to have an impact on injury accidents or fatalities.”
In 2008, within the state of Colorado, nearly 40% of all DUI related traffic fatalities occurred within a 24 hour window of a holiday; the same time period which is now under jeopardy of losing heightened patrolling.
By Morgan Brickley
On August 13, New York Governor David Paterson submitted legislation to increase penalties for drivers convicted of DWI with children in the car.
The Child Passenger Protection Act would make drinking and driving a felony if there were passengers under the age of 16 in the car, according to a statement released by the Governor’s office.
Right now, New York DUI law treats the offense as a misdemeanor or traffic infraction. There are 35 states that have child endangerment laws, imposing higher DUI penalties for offenders who put a child at risk while drinking and driving.
The Governor’s proposed legislation is as follows:
- A DUI offender driving with a passenger under the age of 16 who is killed can be charged with aggravated vehicular homicide and receive five to 25 years in prison if convicted. The charge will be considered a Class B violent felony.
- DUI offenders driving with a passenger under the age of 16 who is seriously injured can be charged with aggravated vehicular assault and may receive three and a half to 15 years in prison if convicted. The charge will be considered a Class C violent felony.
- Individuals convicted of DUI with a passenger who is a child under the age of 16 may receive up to four years in prison. The charge is a Class E felony.
- If an individual is charged with DUI, with a blood alcohol level of .08% or more and there is a child passenger under 16, their driver’s license will automatically suspended, pending prosecution.
- A DUI offender convicted of drinking and driving with a child passenger will automatically lose their license for a year after a first DUI offense. If the offender has prior DUI convictions and the subsequent conviction is within 10 years of the first DUI, he or she will automatically lose their driver’s license for 18 months.
The new legislation proposed by the Governor follows a crash in Westchester County where eight people were killed, including four children.
Source: News Channel 34, WNYC
By Morgan Brickley
As of Sept. 1, people in Louisiana who refuse to take a breath test will have their driver’s license suspended for one year. The penalty is twice as long as the current penalty for breathalyzer refusal.
“Now … it’s worse if you refuse the test,” said DWI attorney Robert Fleming.
Under Louisiana DUI law, a driver who refuses a blood alcohol test on a first DUI offense will have his or her driver’s license suspended for six months and 18 months for a second refusal.
The new law that Gov. Bobby Jindal signed on June 1 doubles the first offense penalty and suspends the offender’s license for two years on a subsequent offense.
Supporters of the new DUI law feel that it will give drivers the incentive to cooperate with police during a DUI stop.
Many supporters say that currently the common thought among many DUI offenders in Louisiana is to refuse the breathalyzer test.
“The problem was that drivers were refusing to take the test” on the advice of DUI attorneys, said Jefferson Parish District Attorney Paul Connick Jr.
According to Donna Tate, executive director of the Louisiana chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Louisiana has one of the highest refusal rates in the country. In 2005, 39% of drivers pulled over for drinking and driving refused a breathalyzer, when the national average was 22.4%.
Source: nola.com
By Editor
There could be some big changes in the DUI laws in Oregon and Rhode Island. The legislatures in both states are considering amendments to the current laws, and, though nothing has been passed yet, you should be aware of the potential changes.
In Oregon, current DUI law makes it difficult to remove a DUI offense from your record, even if the charges were later dropped, lessened or acquitted.
The new law would make it easier to clear your DUI records if you aren’t convicted of the crime.
In Rhode Island, the new law would give police greater power to request and obtain search warrants in order to draw blood from DUI suspects in order to perform a DUI blood alcohol content test.
The law would only apply to DUI cases where an auto accident is involved.
By Editor
Illinois Law Allows License Suspensions without DUI
Illinois has a new alcohol-related law that has led to more than 3,000 teenagers losing their driver’s licenses this year. The teens were not accused of DUI, but the “use-lose” law allows for driver’s license suspensions for those caught underage drinking.
The state law was passed after five teens died last year in an alcohol-related crash. Underage drinkers in Illinois may have their driver’s licenses suspended without any involvement with a car or driving…
Read more.
By Editor
State Law Provides Illinois DUI Memorial Signs
Under a new Illinois DUI law, memorial signs for those killed in drunken driving accidents may be requested by the victims’ families. A sign with Caitlin’s name and the date of the accident that took her life was the first to be requested under “Tina’s Law.” The law is named for Tina Ball, a construction worker with seven children who was killed by a drunken driver while working on I-57 during September 2003. Read more.
Study Shows Felony Wisconsin DUI Offenders are Avoiding Prison
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that lawmakers intended to get repeat Wisconsin OWI (DUI) offenders off the road. However, an analysis of Wisconsin DUI sentencing has shown that less than half of the people who are sentenced for fifth-offense drunken-driving in Milwaukee County end up serving time in prison. View the full article.
Drug Testing Drivers Could Become as Simple as Breath Tests
The National Institute of Health has recently released research guidelines that may lead to the development of new testing methods for drug abuse that can be used as routinely as breath tests. These guidelines were published in the August journal Addiction. Read on.
By Editor
Homework Assignment Inspires DUI Bill
According to a report by the Bulletin, Paul Clymer has introduced legislation that would require mandatory ignition interlock devices for all DUI offenders.
Clymer’s idea for the new legislation came from a 14-year-old boy.
Read more about how the high school sophomore’s homework assignment turned into a purposed DUI law.
The Case for Tougher DUI Penalties
A case involving a Kansas DUI arrest has Kansas residents demanding a change in the state’s DUI law and insisting on stiffer DUI penalties for repeat offenders.
Find out what these tougher laws would mean for people with a DUI conviction.
By Editor
Ohio judges violate DUI law
Under a 2004 Ohio law, drivers with multiple DUI convictions who still need to drive under provisional driver’s licenses are required to have special DUI license plates assigned to their vehicles.
The DUI law mandates that judges order the DUI license plates.
Approximately 33,000 drivers in Ohio have five or more DUI convictions, only 8,500 vehicles in the entire state had been issued the special DUI license plates as of the end of last year.
By Editor
ACLU Says Challenges to Ohio’s No Refusal Law Likely
Under the new Ohio DUI law, drivers who have had two or more DUI convictions can be forced by authorities to submit to a blood or urine test to determine their blood alcohol content.
Previously, the law had required that authorities obtain a search warrant from a judge to test a DUI suspect’s blood or urine in situations where no consent was given.
Civil liberties advocates are speaking out about the new DUI law in Ohio, saying that they believe it is unconstitutional.
Find out more about the debate on this new law.
Utah’s Fruitless New Liquor Law
Utah lawmakers have been at it again. The state already has some of the strangest and strictest liquor sales laws in the country, but apparently legislators still felt that there was some tinkering to be done.
Now Utah has become the first state to ban some fruity alcoholic drink sales.
Read the full article.
Party Bus Driver Playing Police or Parent?
And with this time of the year comes pumpkin carving, sweaters and Homecoming – a quasi-holiday for schools that runs from September to November.
Students can’t wait for festivities, which usually mean an early dismissal for a pep rally, parade, football game and dance.
Maybe you or some of your friends drank after the dance – or maybe even before the dance. You were all underage and alcohol is prohibited on school property, but that was a part of the Homecoming ritual – no big deal.
Except for some teenagers in Highland Park, IL, underage drinking became a big deal.
Read more about the controversey here.