By Erin K
Questions about personal responsibility are prevalent in discussions about DUI arrests and offenses, especially in reference to bars and restaurants serving alcohol to customers who are later arrested for DUI.
Should an establishment that serves alcohol be legally responsible for the actions of someone consuming alcohol at that bar? State DUI laws vary, and Connecticut is one state in which police follow-up investigation of alcohol-serving bars and restaurants is available as a legal option.
Recent reports, however, indicate that following a crackdown on DUIs, police in Connecticut may not have followed up with the establishments where DUI suspects claimed to have been drinking.
In Connecticut, the state Liquor Control Commission has the authority to fine or suspend the liquor license of bars and restaurants based on their connection to DUI suspects. In the course of a DUI arrest, law enforcement officials often record the bar or restaurant that served those arrested for suspicion of a DUI offense.
Recently, journalists in Connecticut investigated the follow-up of these bars and restaurants, finding that police did not submit a single establishments’ information to the Liquor Control Commission in the several months of a crackdown and for weeks afterward.
The crackdown came after a rash of DUI-related accidents and deaths in Northeast Connecticut, as police increased patrols along the interstate highway, in an effort to catch more drunk drivers and to decrease alcohol-related accidents, injuries and fatalities.
Extra patrols dedicated to weekend DUI coverage, in addition to those regularly scheduled, led to more than 80 arrests. As a part of the arrest process, officers routinely asked DUI suspects where they had consumed alcoholic beverages and noted it in a standard form.
Following the crackdown, which occurred in the spring of this year, the investigation revealed that officers were not following up with the establishments in question after making an arrest, even as they gathered the necessary information to do so.
After a DUI arrest, wherein the driver tells the police where he or she drank the alcohol, police can forward that information on to the liquor commission, along with a police report.
In a response to the assertion that police weren’t pursuing this option, a police spokesperson claimed that police do follow up with the restaurants or bars that arise during the course of the arrest, noting that the context and particular details of a given incident determine the implementation and nature of the investigation.
Whatever your opinion about the responsibility of bars and restaurants in DUI cases, it would appear based on these investigations that the police in Northeast Connecticut are not taking that route. Why that may be is another question.
By Erin K
The long standing jokes about women who are pulled over by police and how they get out of tickets may have even less merit than before.
Sure there are cases where a woman may flirt to get out of a ticket or bat her doe eyes innocently at the officer in the hopes of avoiding a ticket, but now there maybe concrete evidence to prove that woman are more at a loss when it comes to the standard DUI laws than ever before.
According to an article provided by the Law Offices of Lawrence Taylor, who is Los Angeles area DUI attorney and nationally-known author of the book Drunk Driving Defense, a study out of Italy shows there is a component to a female’s bio-chemical make-up which could make women more predisposed to fail a DUI road test. The study may prove that woman may be unfairly arrested for DUI in some cases and should be given more gender specific tests.
Taylor cites researchers at the University School of Medicine in Trieste, Italy, who found that women have less alcohol dehydrogenase than men. The study asserts that with less of the enzyme that breaks down alcohol in the stomach, women reach the same blood alcohol concentration as men after drinking only half as much.
The study goes on to state that women reached blood alcohol levels illegal in a DUI case after drinking 20 to 30% less alcohol than men of equal weight.
This could be a sturdy claim that could be asserted by many women when they find themselves eye to eye with a Trooper, but one that seems to only find merit in Italy at the moment.
In Canada, a study has shown that women taking oral contraceptives may reach peak BAC levels more quickly. This is a supposition that other attorneys have used when claiming their female clients failed a breathalyzer test due to the fact that they were taking oral contraceptives at the time of the test.
Both studies may eventually be a foundation for a compelling argument in the court room.
The underlying problem in this is that many women may not choose to argue against the validity of their failed test based on their sex. In fact, in the majority of the cases where birth control was a deciding factor for failure, it was a male attorney who plead the case.
At the end of the day, the best way to avoid this all together is to not drink and drive.
By Erin K
One of the more heavy handed aspects to the new South Carolina DUI laws is that the state now counts DUIs (or similar convictions) from other states as previous convictions under South Carolina law- as long as they happened within 10 years of the current DUI offense.
Also, under the new South Carolina DUI laws, DUI charges are now determined by a person’s blood alcohol content (BAC). This new provision may seem elementary to others around the country that live in more progressive states that have historical relied on blood alcohol level in determining DUI charges and impose penalties and fines for lesser violations of drunk driving.
With this, the new laws carry higher fines and lengthier jail sentences. In fact judges are now required to impose a mandatory minimum sentence for even first time offenders.
South Carolina law also now requires both first time and subsequent offenders to complete a substance abuse counseling program as part of their sentence.
The program may be an education program, treatment program or combination of both, depending on the individual’s needs. Each DUI offender is required to pay for their own program, which may cost as much as $2500
First DUI Offense
If a person is facing a DUI charge and had a BAC of .08 to .09%, he or she may face up to 30 days in jail or 48 hours of community service. There is also a $400 fine.
For a first DUI offense with a blood alcohol level of .1 to .15%, the offender may face up to 30 days in jail, or 72 hours of community service, and a $500 fine.
If a first DUI offender has a BAC of .16% or higher, he or she will face 30 to 60 days in jail or 30 days of community service. The fine increases to $1000.
Subsequent DUI Offenses
In addition to the following penalties, second and subsequent DUI offenders also may be required to surrender the registration and license plates of any vehicles they own.
A person convicted of their second DUI may be required to spend a minimum of 5 to 30 days in jail, depending on the driver’s BAC. In strengthening DUI penalties, the State’s legislature removed the possibility of substituting community service hours for jail time for subsequent offenders.
Subsequent DUI offenders with a BAC of .08 to .09% will face a mandatory minimum 5 days in jail and may receive up to 1 year in jail. The fine will range between $2100 to $5100.
If the offender has a BAC of .1 to .15% with a subsequent DUI offense, he or she will face a mandatory minimum 30 day jail sentence and may be sentenced up to 2 years in jail. The fine will jump to $2500 to $5500.
With a BAC of .16% or higher, a subsequent DUI offender will be facing a mandatory minimum 90 days in jail and may be sentenced up to 3 years. The fine will increase to in between $3500 and $6500.
Please keep in mind that this list of penalties is for informational purposes only and is by no means all-inclusive. DUI penalties will vary according to the specific situation.
But just this brief glimpse at the many changes to South Carolina DUI laws proves that the state is no longer a refuge for underage drinkers, and those who see a crack in the system allowing for minimum consequences for maximum negligence when it comes to their decision to drink and drive.
Hopefully, this will breed a more responsible era for South Carolina and make the highways and byways safer.
By Erin K
Since 2005, when New Mexico became the first state to pass a law requiring an ignition interlock device for all people with DUI convictions, 10 other states have enacted DUI laws mandating DUI offenders install ignition interlock devices.
The ignition interlock law campaign is gaining momentum. The federal transportation funding bill that will be discussed by Congress this fall requires every state to mandate DUI offenders install ignition interlock devices. It states don’t pass such a law, the state governments may lose federal highway funding.
An ignition interlock device requires a driver blow into a breathalyzer before the car will start. It will stop the engine from starting if alcohol is detected on the driver’s breath.
Currently, 47 states and Washington D.C. require ignition interlock systems for some offenders. Alabama, South Dakota and Vermont are the only states to not have any such law.
Supporters of the law point out that New Mexico was one perennial national leader in alcohol-related crashes, but when the state launched a campaign and passed an ignition interlock law, there was a 35% drop in DUI deaths.
Today, there are 150,000 vehicles that have ignition interlock systems installed. If every driver with a DUI conviction were required to install the divorce, there would be close to 1 million.
Source: USA Today
By Erin K
Oklahoma State Rep. Harold Wright believes DUI laws need to get tough to cut down on drunken driving deaths. The Republican lawmakers from Weatherford, Okla. wants zero tolerance laws for DUI.
People enjoying glass of wine at dinner or a bottle of beer after work could wind up in jail.
Oklahoma DUI laws currently have the legal blood alcohol limit for driving at .08%. Police also have the right to detain a driver suspected of DUI, no matter what the blood alcohol level.
The proposed legislation will be studied and discussed this fall.
Source: KOCO.com
By Erin K
This weekend is one of celebration as friends and family gather to enjoy fireworks, food and fun. Utahans will be celebrating the holiday like many other people, but the citizens of the state have a little more to be joyful over this year.
Forty years ago, the state passed a private club law, requiring people to have a membership to a bar in order to buy alcohol. The membership was designed with help from members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to limit alcohol consumption and could cost anywhere between $20 and $40 a year.
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. convinced the Utah Legislature to repeal the private club law because it negatively affected tourism, which brings in about $7 billion a year.
Although lawmakers repealed the law, Utah DUI laws were toughened, requiring bars to scanning driver licenses’ of patrons who are under 35 years old and keeping the records for the week.
Senate President Michael Waddoups said the number of DUI arrests or DUI accidents will be monitored to see if the law has a negative affect.
“Obviously my biggest concern is the safety of our citizens, our families, the drivers on the roads,” he told the press, but there are new tools for law enforcement to crack down on DUI, which could leave the state “better off than we were before, so I’m willing to give it a try.”
For now, Utahans are organizing barcrawls in downtown Salt Lake City to celebrate their “newfound freedom.”
By Erin K
Total DUI just wants to wish everyone a happy and safe 4th of July!
I hope that the weekend weather forecast is shaping up for everyone, and you are all excited about spending a long (for some) weekend away from the office.
The Fourth is about celebrating with family, friends, food, fireworks and maybe a little alcohol – which also means swarms of police. All over the country, newspapers and online dailys are talking about a DUI crackdown this weekend.
In states where DUI checkpoints are legal, police will likely have them set up starting tonight until Monday. Any DUI suspects stopped at these checkpoints will be arrested for drinking and driving.
Many states are planning to have the DUI patrol out in full force. Depending on state DUI laws, if you are arrested and convicted of DUI, you may have fines, jail time, probation or alcohol counseling courses.
Driving under the influence is a serious criminal offense so be careful this weekend. Happy 4th of July!
By Editor
ABC 11 in North Carolina reported that six police officers were arrested on charges related to changing DWI records and charges.
Each of the officers faces multiple felony charges. One officer is facing 65 felong counts!
So what does this mean for your DUI trial?
It means that there may be challenge to the evidence in your DUI case. There are strict procedures that poilce must follow during a DUI stop and during collection of evidence.
If these procedures aren’t followed – accidentally or purposefully – you may be able to challenge your case.
First, know your state’s DUI laws. Then, you may want to ask follow-up questions to a local attorney who can offer advice on the some of your options.
Above all, stay on your toes. You never know who was writing your ticket.
By Editor
Already in the news for his response to President Obama’s first congressional address, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is making headlines again, this time for his proposed changes to state DUI laws.
Gov. Jindal’s proposal would not only increase the penalties for drivers who refuses a breathalyzer test, but punish them as if they failed the test.
That’s right: A driver could be punished as if he or she were convicted of a DWI without ever being convicted.
Another proposal would also allow written statements from police to be used in court. Currently, the arresting police officer must appear in court to testify. If the officer does not, the charges are often dismissed.
The proposed changes have critics, many of whom question the constitutionality of the proposed law.
Former special prosecutor Julie Tizzard is quoted in a story by WWLTV:
“I likened it to the police officer is coming to my door and knocking on the door and saying I’d like to come in and search your house, and if you don’t let me in, I’m going to charge with you this criminal violation,” said Tizzard. “It’s the same thing.”
The state legislature has yet to officially consider the new DUI penalties.
By Editor
Another day, another state legislature considering an update to their DUI laws. The debate has been ongoing in Kansas of late. Up for discussion:
- Creation of a 21-member DUI commission to monitor laws and suggest changes
- Creation of a centralized DUI records database
- Felony charges after the third DUI
Kansas DUI lawyer Jay Norton says that more tweaks may be a bad idea. And the Kansas Substance Abuse Policy Board agrees. As quoted by the AP, the board says:
The Kansas Substance Abuse Policy Board says the state’s system for punishing drunken drivers is “so complex and so dysfunctional that it is likely impervious to quick fixes.
Any decisions made will be weighed in the face of cutting a state budget that may face a $1 billion deficit.