Posts Tagged ‘Dwi Laws’

A Brief History of DWI Law

April 6th, 2010



The first law against drunk driving was passed in New York in 1910. Before long, every state in the US had banned driving a car while intoxicated, which is presumably more dangerous that riding a horse in the same state. These early laws did not specify a maximum BAC (blood alcohol concentration) or describe tests to be administered to the person accused of drunk driving. They merely stated that one should not drive drunk and left it to police officers and judges to enforce this how they saw fit.

The first maximum BAC for driver was set in 1938: that year, it became illegal to drive with a BAC over .15, or 15%. This number was based on studies conducted by the American Medical Association and the National Safety council, who both agreed that research showed a person with a BAC under .15 could still drive reasonably well.

This remained the law throughout most of the US until the 1970′s. At that time activist groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) began campaigning for stricter DWI laws and more vigilant enforcement. Prior to this time, DWI was not considered an overly serious offense, and police officers would not always enforce it very strictly. MADD (and its student group, SADD) felt that too many preventable deaths were resulting from this relaxed attitude towards driving while intoxicated. They successfully pressured most states into lowering their maximum BAC to .10. Now, due to the influence of the federal government, all states have a maximum BAC of .08.

Other important changes to the law followed. MADD’s involvement was one of the factors contributing to congress’s decision to raise the drinking age back to 21. Of course, MADD was not the only group paying attention to this issue. From the 1970′s until now, people have become more concerned and less tolerant of DWI offenses. Sobriety checkpoints have become acceptable, when at one point they were widely considered unfair or even unconstitutional. For drivers under the age of 21, the BAC has been lowered to .01, because legally they should not be drinking at all (even though in some states, such as Texas, minors are allowed to drink in the presence of a legal guardian.)

One current controversy in DWI law is the question of the role law enforcement is meant to play in addressing this problem. If a person is convicted of driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, should they be punished or rehabilitated? Is the punishment approach failing to effectively address the problem, or is the rehabilitation approach merely letting people off too easy?

By: Joseph Devine

Are the DWI Laws Unconstitutional in 2008? – A Review of Minnesota’s Statute

December 18th, 2009

It would seem that the fabric of Minnesota’s DWI laws is slowly unraveling as new challenges are made to the laws and how they comply with constitutional protections. As a result, persons charged with DWI offenses in Minnesota have a number of viable defenses at their disposal and should ALWAYS consult with an attorney before entering any plea.

One of the major issues presently being litigated is whether Minnesota’s laws unconstitutionally coerce persons arrested to provide breath, blood or urine samples for alcohol testing. As many Minnesotans are aware, when a person is arrested for suspicion of drunk driving, they are read an implied consent advisory which is a short statement of their rights. That advisory informs the driver that they have a right to consult a lawyer before submitting to any testing. However, if they refuse to submit to breath, blood or urine testing, they can be charged with a criminal offense. In fact, the criminal offense charged, which is a refusal to test, often has more severe consequences than being charged with a DWI. Specifically, a refusal may turn a misdemeanor DWI into a gross misdemeanor refusal. The former carries with it up to 90 days in jail and a $1000 fine, where the latter may be punished by up to 1 year in jail and a $3000 fine. Moreover, the license revocation for most first offense DWI’s is generally 30 to 90 days. For a refusal, that revocation period is one year. » Read more: Are the DWI Laws Unconstitutional in 2008? – A Review of Minnesota’s Statute

Orlando DUI Law

November 10th, 2009

DUI offenses are more than just ordinary criminal offenses. DUI/DWI laws can be very complex, which means that it is best dealt with by a legal expert if you want to successfully appeal against the charge and get it dismissed. DUI charges are usually based on a person’s BAC or blood alcohol concentration and may be determined by the administering of a breath, blood or urine test (which is usually conducted if drugs are suspected). Each year, states enact stronger DUI laws and more severe drunk driving penalties. There’s several different organizations with a vested interest in keeping the number of DUI arrests up as well as increasing the penalties and fines to keep revenue up as well. When a driver has been acquitted of DUI charges in court, a suspension or revocation will be reversed if it is determined by the DMV that the court decision does, in fact, equal an acquittal. The continuing erosion of fairness and constitutional rights in drunk driving cases from pressure groups like MADD, from a lecture by a former Fulbright Professor of Law and nationally-known California DUI attorney. As of January 2006, state law requires first-time DUI offenders to pick up trash on Tennessee highways and roads for three eight-hour shifts, in addition to losing their.

Orlando Dui Laws

There are many undesirable effects of being charged with DUI/DWI, which can include: Increased insurance costs Hefty fines Driving disqualification Alcohol assessment and treatment. In recognition of its human rights advocacy and expertise, The Dui Hua Foundation was granted “special consultative status” by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations in 2005, and is the only independent, non-governmental organization (NGO) focused on human rights in China to have such status. The crime comes from IMPAIRED driving, or DRIVING with an “unlawful blood alcohol level” (“UBAL”, or “per se” DUI / DWI as lawyers refer to it) in your blood, breath or urine [for those who have submitted to blood testing or breathalyzer testing]. If you have been charged with driving under the influence in Washington State, it is important to speak with an attorney who is an expert in DUI / DWI defense. In order to discourage driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the Arizona Legislature has increased the severity of the criminal penalties for DUI while lengthening the duration of driver’s license suspensions imposed by the Arizona Motor Vehicle Division. If you are arrested for DUI, you may request a hearing within 30 days of the arrest: online, with a Washington driver license and a valid Visa or MasterCard. Paris Hilton’s original DUI charges alleging that on September 27, 2006 she was driving while under the influence, and while “under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and a drug.

Arrested for DUI in Florida

In such cases, the relicensed driver is subject to a zero limit for 3 years following relicensing, or for as long as the person is required to use an alcohol interlock. Your driver license will be returned to you at the end of the suspension or revocation, provided you pay (on or after January 1, 2003) a $125 reissue fee to the DMV and you file proof of financial responsibility. If you have a commercial driver license and you were not operating a commercial vehicle at the time of the offense and pay (on or after January 1, 2003) a $125 reissue fee after a mandatory 30-day suspension, you may request a restricted license to drive to, from, and during work. If your case goes the wrong way you could lose your license, your insurance could go up, you could be fined, it could hurt you when you apply for a job, and you could even go to jail.




By: Kate Riding