CA DMV Study Shows IID Pilot Program Not A General Drunk Driving Deterrent

Currently, there are four counties in California that are participating in the ignition interlock device, IID, pilot program:  Los Angeles, Alameda, Tulare, and Sacramento, per California Vehicle Code Section 23700.  The pilot program requires all driving under the influence, DUI, defendants, including first time offenders, to pay for, install, and then maintain the IID for a period of time as determined by the number of drunk driving convictions the individual has.

An IID is a breathalyzer instrument that is professionally installed in the defendant’s vehicle by a court-approved company.  The driver must blow into the device, providing an alcohol-free sample.  If alcohol is detected, the car will not start.  Once started, the driver will be prompted to give another sample within 15-minutes of driving and then again about every 45-minutes.  If alcohol is detected during a random sample, the car will stall and become inoperable.  These are referred to as “sample failures” and are reported to the court.

Recently, the Department of Motor Vehicles released its report to the Legislature of the State of California of its findings regarding the “General Deterrent Evaluation of the Ignition Interlock Pilot Program in California.”  According to this sixty page report, the DMV study found “the IID pilot program was not associated with a reduction in the number of first-time and repeat DUI convictions in the pilot counties.  In other words, no evidence was found that the pilot program has a general deterrence effect.”  (See “Report Documentation Page.”)

However, the report mentioned another follow-up study that is being conducted to determine if the pilot program has any specific deterrence effects.”  The specific deterrent effects address the “specific behavior of individual drivers who were convicted of DUI subsequent to the implementation of the … law and thus were subject to the IID pilot program requirements…” (See page ix.)

The DMV recommended that the legislature consider the specific deterrence evaluation if/when they take any further action regarding the IID program.  That follow-up study is due to be completed in the fall of 2015.  (See ix and x.)

The Law Offices of Susan L. Hartman recently blogged about California State Senator Jerry Hill’s bill, SB 61.  If passed, this bill would require all those convicted of drunk driving, in all California counties, to install an IID.  Senator Hill’s position is that mandatory IID requirements reduce recidivism and first time DUI offenders, just the opposite of what the DMV’s own study found.

Continue Reading...

Montana Attorney General Wants More DUI Monitoring

Montana has a history of a DUI culture that is not as critical of drunk driving offenses as other parts of the country. Recently, the state’s efforts to curb drunk driving have led to more stringent policy.

Now, the state’s Attorney General, Steve Bullock, has proposed the expansion of a pilot program that calls for repeat drunk driving offenders to submit to regular breath tests during their sentence. The program is known as the 24/7 Sobriety Project.

The 24/7 Sobriety Project essentially requires that repeat DUI offenders stay sober all day and all night long, for the duration of their sentence. Whoever fails a breath test would be jailed and have their bond revoked. The idea originated in South Dakota.

Under the program, anyone who is arrested for DUI more than once must take a breath test that measures blood alcohol content twice a day, according to the Great Falls Tribune.

Expanded DUI prevention efforts would also include harsher penalties for those convicted of driving with a blood alcohol content that is higher than .15. Such measures are already in place in most states in the U.S. Such a charge, as proposed, would be an aggravated DUI charge.

In addition to the strengthened DUI laws above, Attorney General Bullock would like to make penalties for refusing a breath test more harsh than they currently are.

The proposals will need approval from the state legislature, which is controlled by the Republican party at the moment. Republican Representative Steve Lavin already plans to sponsor the bill.

Lavin is a sergeant in the state’s highway patrol. He argued that the bill wouldn’t cost anything because those who are required to take the tests would pay for the process themselves. “I just don’t see any opposition to it,” he told the Tribune. “I’ve talked to quite a few of my comrades, and they seem to like it.”

Attorney General Bullock hopes for the necessary political support. “I’m hopeful that all three of them end up with broad bi-partisan support,” he said of the three parts of his proposal for expanded DUI penalties and requirements. “This problem is not a Democrat or a Republican issue. I think these three (proposals) are great parts of what can be done.”

View the original article here

Continue Reading...