Washington Department of Licensing: Stupid is and Stupid does

This week I received back another DOL Hearing Order from the Department of Licensing.  And according to script, the DOL hearing officer ruled against my client.  This is not unusual as the DOL is a difficult organization to deal with however, in this particular case the facts and the law are entirely in my client's favor and it's a black and white case - my client must win.  No doubt - yet the DOL officer ruled differently.  A good question is, how could this happen?  A good answer is, because some DOL hearing officers (not all - want to be clear about that) are completely incompetent.  Period.  This particular hearing officer is not a lawyer so it is easy to understand why he clearly does not understand the law - yet it remains frustrating.  I debated whether to mention by name this hearing officer, but for now I will not.  However, if it does not reconsider his opinion (not bloody likely) then I just might.  The next blog will be about my client's options now that the ruling was against him.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Seattle DUI News: Wife talks to another man at hot dog stand then ejected from car in DUI incident

SEATTLE – A Seattle man was arrested for vehicular assault early Sunday after his wife ended up pinned beneath their car.  When officers arrived they found an unoccupied vehicle that witnesses identified as having run a red light. The female victim had been ejected from one vehicle in the collision and ended up with a foot trapped under the tire of the other vehicle.  Police say the incident allegedly began at a hot dog stand a block away, where the woman spoke to another man, which led to a verbal dispute between the couple. As the man drove recklessly away and ran a red light, the man's wife was somehow ejected from the vehicle.  The victim's husband was processed for DUI and then booked into King County Jail for Investigation of Vehicular Assault.

For more on the story click here:

http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seattle-man-arrested-after-wife-ends-up-pinned-beneath-car-105633613.html

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Seattle DUI News: Seattle Municipal Court Judge Charles Accused DUI Lawyers of Misconduct

SEATTLE – There are complaints that a group of DUI attorneys is breaking elections rules in a judicial campaign.
Seattle Municipal Court Judge Edsonya Charles says those attorneys support her opponent for Seattle Municipal Court because Charles is tough on drunk drivers.
Judicial candidate Ed McKenna has the support of a political action committee called Citizens for Judicial Excellence. The PAC is funded almost entirely by drunk driving defense attorneys who often appear in Judge Charles' courtroom.  But, the DUI attorneys say they support McKenna because he is the better candidate. The Washington Bar Association rates McKenna as "exceptionally well qualified" and Charles as "qualified."
For more information click here:
http://www.king5.com/news/politics/Complaints-against-DUI-attornies-in-judge-race-104383984.html
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: Jury acquits woman for DUI/Vehicular Homicide

  A jury in Tacoma has acquitted a Bonney Lake woman who was charged with vehicular homicide in the deaths of her two sons.  Forty-two-year-old Jayme Lynn Davis left the courtroom without comment Tuesday after the jury returned with the not guilty verdict.  Jordan Davis, 11, and Jared Davis, 8, were killed when their mother's car was T-boned on State Route 167 near Tacoma in January. Their mother was charged with two counts of vehicular homicide because investigators said she was drunk and caused the crash.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

King County DUI News: DUI Emphasis Patrol this Thursday in Bellevue from 5-9 p.m.

The Bellevue Police Department and officers from the King County Target Zero Task Force will conduct a DUI emphasis patrol in Bellevue from 5 to 9 p.m. Thursday.  The patrols will focus on DUI, seatbelt, speeding and cell phone/texting violations.
Click here for the entire story: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/theblotter/2013260924_dui_emphasis_patrol_planned_th.html
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Seattle DUI News: Attorneys in the know support Ed McKenna for Seattle Municipal Court Judge

A political action committee of DUI attorneys has spent $74,000 on mailers supporting Ed McKenna for Seattle Municipal Court. The PAC, Citizens for Judicial Excellence, is at the center of the nasty race between McKenna, a city prosecutor, and the incumbent, Presiding Judge Edsonya Charles. Charles' supporters have filed a complaint with the state's Public Disclosure Commission alleging that the PAC illegally strategized with the McKenna campaign.
The McKenna flier quotes Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes supporting McKenna and highlights Charles' low scores in a King County Bar Association survey of attorneys. It bears a gold medal that says McKenna is endorsed by the Citizens for Judicial Excellence without explaining what that is. The PAC has raised $200,000, mostly from DUI defense attorneys, to spend in several judicial races.
For the entire story click here:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2013265809_dui_attorneys_spend_74000_to_b.html
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: DUI Emphasis patrol durnig Happy Hour in Bellevue, King County

The Bellevue Police Department, along with officers from the King County Target Zero Taskforce, will conduct a DUI emphasis patrol in Bellevue on Oct. 28.  The 5-9 p.m. event is designed to reduce collisions and make the roads safer for commuters to get home from work or school.
The Washington State Patrol Target Zero Team will join with the Bellevue, Redmond and Snoqualmie police departments in enforcing DUI, Seatbelt, Speeding and Cell phone/Texting violations during the Happy Hour hours on the date. Additionally an officer from the Liquor Control Board will be patrolling establishments in the area.
The emphasis also coincides with the Surround the Sound DUI patrols for Halloween weekend 2010. The Happy Hour patrol will be made up of foot patrol officers, motorcycle officers and DUI specialists.
http://www.seattlepi.com/sound/429130_sound105781783.html
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Snohomish County Deferred Prosecution Procedures

Preparing a Petition for Deferred Prosecution is relatively straight forward…unless you are in Snohomish County.  The District Courts have their own little set of procedures that they strictly enforce.  What follows is that set of procedures.

SCLCrRLJ 7.1

DEFERRED PROSECUTION PETITION AND ORDER.

A Petition for Deferred Prosecution pursuant to RCW 10.05 must be filed with the Court's Probation Department and the prosecuting authority no later than seven (7) days prior to proposed entry unless good cause exists for delay.  An Order deferring prosecution will not be granted unless proof of compliance with the following is shown:

1.    Petition for Deferred Prosecution is submitted on the form identified in CrRLJ 4.2.

2.    Order for Deferred Prosecution is submitted on a form approved for use by the Court.

3.    Petitioner has completed at least thirty-six (36) hours of Phase I Treatment.

4.    An ignition interlock device has been installed on every vehicle operated by Petitioner.

5.    Petitioner has applied for an ignition interlock driver's license.

[Effective November 2, 2009]

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Moving out of State and the Interstate Compact for DUI cases

If you have received a second DUI where the probation is a year or more and
have subsequently decided to leave the state (ie. move to a different
state), you might be in for some bad news. Simply, you may not be able to
leave the state until you have applied for and been accepted into the
Interstate Compact. This is a relatively complicated procedure but
basically it means that your probation is transferred from one state to
another. Be sure to check with your attorney and/or your probation officer
before you commit to moving to another state.
For more details on the Interstate Compact and how it may affect your DUI
probation, click here:
http://www.supremecourt.ne.gov/probation/interstate-compact/Interstate%20Com
pact%20News%207-09.pdf
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: Diffusion in the lung

DIFFUSION IN THE LUNG
The process of diffusion governs the exchange of gas between blood and air
in the alveolus. As blood enters the capillary in the alveolus, it is
exposed to the alveolar air. If alcohol is present in the blood, some of the
alcohol will diffuse out through the cells separating the blood from the air
and increase the alcohol concentration in the alveolar air. The amount of
the decrease of alcohol in the blood is extremely small and is governed by
the relative amount of ventilation and blood flow to the alveolus.
The exchange of alcohol across the alveolar-capillary membrane is not
limited by diffusion as has sometimes been stated in the alcohol test
literature. Blood is in the pulmonary capillary for a long enough time such
that the alcohol in the alveolar air is in equilibrium with the alcohol in
the blood after it has traversed only a small fraction of the alveolar
capillary. This equilibrium is maintained until the end of the capillary.
Under such circumstances, the distribution of alcohol is governed by the
partition ratio for alcohol in blood at the temperature in the alveolus
(normally 37° C). This is true for a very soluble gas like alcohol in a
normal alveolus with nearly the same amount of blood flow and air flow.
Gases diffuse very easily within the air of the lung. So the concentration
of alcohol is virtually identical throughout the alveolar acinus (containing
many alveoli). This addresses another common misconception in the alcohol
breath testing literature. The changing alcohol concentration during
exhalation is not because the gas near the alveolar surface is in better
equilibrium with the blood. Almost all of the gas in the lung (except that
in the dead space) is in equilibrium with the blood before exhalation. The
changing alcohol concentration during exhalation is caused by another
mechanism related to the changing of temperature of exhaled air.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: The physiology of the lungs

Okay, time for some science. The following is information on how the lungs
work and ultimately, how they work in conjunction with the breath testing
machinery in DUI cases.
PHYSIOLOGY OF THE LUNGS
The lungs are located within the chest. The organ allows inspired air to
come into close proximity with the blood so gases (such as oxygen and carbon
dioxide) can exchange between the air and the blood. The lung is made up of
over 300 million small air sacs called alveoli. Outside air comes to the
alveoli from the mouth or nose via the airways. The major airway leading to
the lungs from the throat is the trachea. The trachea divides into the left
and right "mainstem bronchi" (going to the left and right lungs) which
divide further into the "lobar bronchi." This division goes on about 23
times until the alveoli are reached. Actually, some alveoli begin to appear
at about the seventeenth generation airways. Surrounding each alveolus are
small blood vessels. The thinness (less than 0.001 millimeter) of the
membrane separating blood from the air in the lungs allows oxygen and carbon
dioxide to exchange readily between the blood and air. Because of the large
number of very small alveoli, there is a very large surface area (70 square
meters) for this gas exchange process. The alveolar region is where alcohol
comes from the blood into the air in the lungs. But in order for an alcohol
test to occur, the breath must first pass from the alveoli along the
branching network of airways to the mouth. During this journey through the
airways, a great deal happens to the air that changes the alcohol
concentration.
The lung does not actively participate in the breathing process. The muscles
that cause breathing are located outside the lung in the chest wall
(intercostal muscles) and the abdomen (diaphragm). There are small muscles
in the lung around the blood vessels and airways which assist in controlling
the way in which blood flow and air flow are distributed to different
alveolar groups (acini). To initiate inspiration, the external intercostal
muscles are contracted. This pulls the ribs upward and outward increasing
the chest size. In addition, the diaphragm pulls downward, also increasing
the chest size. The change in chest size causes a decrease in pressure
around the lung which causes the lung to expand and air to move into the
lung. To initiate exhalation, the diaphragm and external intercostal muscles
are relaxed. The previously stretched lung and chest wall then relax and
shrink down increasing the pressure of the air in the alveoli causing air to
flow out of the lung. If a rapid exhalation or an exhalation against a
resistance, such as that caused by an alcohol breath testing instrument, is
required, then the internal intercostal muscles can also be used to pull the
ribs down, assisting with the exhalation.
The number of molecules that leave the blood and enter the alveolar air is
dependent on the blood alcohol concentration and the partition ratio (PR).
In order to calculate the BAC from an alveolar sample, the alveolar alcohol
concentration and the partition ratio each must be known precisely. However,
it is impossible to sample air directly from the alveoli because of the
small size of the airways. Therefore, all alcohol breath testing devices
attempt to take a sample from the end of the breath for analysis under the
assumption that the concentration of alcohol in the end-exhaled breath is
the same as the concentration of alcohol in the air within the alveoli. In
other words, it is assumed that nothing happens to the alveolar air sample
as it is passing through the airways to the breath tester. However, changes
do occur to the breath as it is exhaled which serve to alter the breath
alcohol concentration.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: Do you think the BAC machines are not accurate? So does the Washington State Patrol!

Washington DUI Cases will be subjected to new Breath Testing Devices in the
very, very near future. HB 2465 (a new law) took effect June 10th, 2010,
and paved the way for a new breath testing machine, the Draeger Alcotest.
These machines are believed to eliminate some of the errors of the current
machines, the DataMaster units. So this brings to mind an obvious question,
if the new machines have been approved to replace the old machines because
they are more accurate, how come the Washington State Patrol and every other
police force and prosecuting attorney has, for years, claimed the DataMaster
machines to be accurate? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Car Accident near Burlington sends Sedro-Woolley man to Hospital - suspected cause, DUI driver!

BURLINGTON - A male driver and his female passenger were injured early this
morning after the man drove a 1995 Chevrolet Corsica off the road, through a
gravel parking lot and a farm field, ultimately crashing into a dirt wall,
the State Patrol reported.
The State Patrol is investigating the crash as a DUI. There was evidence
alcohol use may have contributed to the crash, Trooper Keith Leary said.
For more information click here:
http://www.goskagit.com/home/article/2_injured_in_possible_dui_crash/
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI Cases: The pitfalls of the DUI motion hearing

If you have a DUI case in Skagit County and have not received an offer from the Prosecuting Attorney to reduce/amend your DUI, then you still have options.  Those options are to proceed with the case and push it to trial (may be a good option, may not be depending on your case) and of course, deferred prosecution.  It you chose to push the case to trial this may involve setting the case for a motion hearing to argue the validity of certain evidence.  Perhaps getting some evidences suppressed may indeed help your DUI case for trial or result in an offer from the prosecutor.  However, in Skagit County (and arguably in some other courts) you must be aware of one pitfall with going to a motion hearing.  That pitfall is that the prosecutor may thereafter object (oppose) you entering into the deferred prosecution program.  
Unlike Snohomish County DUI cases where the PA wil object to a Deferred Prosecution if you lose the motion hearing, in Skagit County DUI cases the PA "may" object.  You must know this before proceeding to the motion to protect your future interests.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: The pitfalls of the motion hearing

If you have a DUI case in Snohomish County and have not received an offer from the Prosecuting Attorney to reduce/amend your DUI, then you still have options.  Those options are to proceed with the case and push it to trial (may be a good option, may not be depending on your case) and of course, deferred prosecution.  It you chose to push the case to trial this may involve setting the case for a motion hearing to argue the validity of certain evidence.  Perhaps getting some evidences suppressed may indeed help your DUI case for trial or result in an offer from the prosecutor.  However, in Snohomish County (and arguably in some other courts) you must be aware of one pitfall with going to a motion hearing.  That pitfall is that the prosecutor will thereafter object (oppose) you entering into the deferred prosecution program.   This is important if you are still thinking about the program.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Seattle woman goes shopping in Anacortes and buys a DUI

In Anacortes, Skagit County, on October 10, 2010, a 22-year-old Seattle
woman was arrested on a charge of DUI after an officer stopped the car she
was driving for an equipment violation around 12:58 a.m. The officer spotted
the southbound car in the 1400 block of Commercial Avenue and noticed the
brake lights were not working. The woman reportedly showed signs of
intoxication. After allegedly failing physical sobriety tests she was
arrested and taken to the police station for a breath test. She was cited
and released.
Interesting! Cheap stop to be sure - brake lights (happens all the time
though). And by the way, NHTSA makes no mention of "failing" field sobriety
tests. There is no such thing - the word "fail" is invented by law
enforcement.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Anacortes man upset with DUI arrest protests and Officers then take him down

On October 11, 2010, in Skagit County a Washington State Trooper on routine
patrol spotted a pickup truck traveling at 68 mph in a 55 mph zone westbound
on Highway 20 at the city limits around 1:10 a.m. The officer stopped the
truck on Commercial Avenue. The driver, a 27-year-old Anacortes man,
appeared intoxicated and did not have a driver's license. He refused to
submit to field sobriety tests or a breath test, then reportedly resisted
arrest and had to be physically subdued and placed in a patrol vehicle. He
had a small amount of marijuana with him. He faces charges of DUI, driving
without a valid license, possession of marijuana and resisting arrest.
Very interesting! It is unclear from the report if he refused the BAC at
the station, but if he did so he may have a chance with this case. However,
it is concerning that he was perhaps belligerent.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: DUI Driver "fails" FSTs, despite the impossibility of "failing" FSTS

On October 10, 2010, a 55-year-old Anacortes woman was arrested on a charge
of DUI after an officer saw the vehicle she was driving swerving into
oncoming traffic in the area of 12th Street and Commercial Avenue. The
vehicle was stopped in the 1200 block of M Avenue around 1:44 a.m. The
driver allegedly failed physical sobriety tests (although the word "fail" is
not used by NHTSA in conjunction with FSTs) and was taken to the police
station for a breath test. She was cited and released to a sober adult.
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Anacortes woman refuses to drive with a license then refusal BAC test

On October 11, 2010, in Skagit County a 34-year-old Anacortes woman was
arrested on charges of DUI and driving on a suspended license after an
officer saw her vehicle making unsafe lane changes and drifting from the fog
to center line on Commercial Avenue around 11:39 p.m. She reportedly told
the officer she had no license and she was intoxicated. She refused a breath
test. Perhaps issues with the stop? The refusal of the breath test may or
may not benefit her but the statements, if she admitted being "intoxicated,"
won't help!
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: COPs contact driver solely based on 911 call

On October 12, 2010, in Skagit County, Anacortes Police Officers were called
to the 2200 block of Commercial Avenue after receiving a report there was a
possible drunk driver northbound from a local business around 11:46 a.m.
Officers found the vehicle pulled off to the side of the street with the
driver, a 51-year-old Anacortes woman, still in it. It apparently struck a
vehicle in front of it. According to the Officer the driver showed obvious
signs of intoxication. She refused to comply with officer's directions and
was removed from her vehicle. She was arrested on a DUI charge and taken to
the station for a breath test. Another Skagit County (Anacortes) DUI Case
for the courts...
Defense issues galore in this case! Look up the case Campbell v. DOL!
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Washington State DUI News: Washington State Cities not ranked Nationally as DUI hotspots

DUI emphasis patrols are now in force throughout the State of Washington.
Hence, if you are driving in King County (Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, Kent,
Shoreline, Seattle), Snohomish County (Lynnwood, Everett, Mukilteo, Edmonds,
Marysville), Skagit County (Mount Vernon, Burlington, Anacortes), Island
County (Oak Harbor or Coupeville) or Whatcom County (Bellingham or Blaine)
watch out!! The Washington State Troopers are looking for ways to stop you
and check if you're driving under the influence. This then begs the
question, do any Washington State Cities rank national as serious DUI hot
spots? The answer is below (it's no by the way).
An auto insurance group has reviewed its data and generated a list of the 20
most populated US cities with the most drunk driving violators. While the
list compiled by Insurance.com shows relative numbers of DUI/DWI arrests in
each of the cities, there is much debate as to the reasons for the number of
arrests. Several factors influencing drunk driving arrests include; younger
population centers, availability of mass transit, areas with a greater car
culture and aggressiveness of law enforcement efforts to combat drinking and
driving.
The ranking was determined by taking the 20 largest cities by population,
reviewing the total number of requests for insurance quotes from each city
and analyzing those requests for drivers indicating at least one alcohol
related traffic offense on their driving record. The list then reflects a
percentage of drunk driving offenders to general population. Note that no
statistics were available for Boston.
Having a DUI/DWI conviction on your driving record can result in
cancellation of auto insurance or significantly higher premiums, driving
limitations and in many states, the mandatory installation of an ignition
interlock device.
US cities with the highest percentage of drunk driving offenders:
1. San Diego, CA
2. San Jose, CA
3. Charlotte, NC
4. Phoenix, AZ
5. Columbus, OH
6. Indianapolis, IN
7. Los Angeles, CA
8. San Francisco, CA
9. Austin, TX
10. Jacksonville, FL
11. San Antonio, TX
12. Dallas, TX
13. Houston, TX
14. Fort Worth, TX
15. Memphis, TN
16. Philadelphia, PA
17. New York, NY
18. Baltimore, MD
19. Chicago, IL
20. Detroit, MI
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Washington State Deferred Prosecutions about to change

If you are considering entering into the Deferred Prosecution in Skagit County, you might want to consider waiting until January to do so.  The reason is that the Department of Licensing is changing the rules for keeping your license.  Currently if you enter into the Deferred Prosecution program and want to keep driving you must obtain an Ignition Interlock Device for a period of two years.  This Ignition Interlock Device requires an Ignition Interlock Device and SR 22 Insurance.  The big change as of January 1, 2011 includes the removal of the requirement to obtain SR 22 insurance.  This is a big change and a big deal.  Good news for those entering the Deferred Prosecution program, not so good for SR22 insurance companies like Vern Fonk (who are excellent by the way).  More on this topic in future blogs.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Island County DUI News: Washington State Deferred Prosecutions about to change

If you are considering entering into the Deferred Prosecution in Island County, you might want to consider waiting until January to do so.  The reason is that the Department of Licensing is changing the rules for keeping your license.  Currently if you enter into the Deferred Prosecution program and want to keep driving you must obtain an Ignition Interlock Device for a period of two years.  This Ignition Interlock Device requires an Ignition Interlock Device and SR 22 Insurance.  The big change as of January 1, 2011 includes the removal of the requirement to obtain SR 22 insurance.  This is a big change and a big deal.  Good news for those entering the Deferred Prosecution program, not so good for SR22 insurance companies like Vern Fonk (who are excellent by the way).  More on this topic in future blogs.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Washington State Deferred Prosecutions about to change

If you are considering entering into the Deferred Prosecution in Snohomish County, you might want to consider waiting until January to do so.  The reason is that the Department of Licensing is changing the rules for keeping your license.  Currently if you enter into the Deferred Prosecution program and want to keep driving you must obtain an Ignition Interlock Device for a period of two years.  This Ignition Interlock Device requires an Ignition Interlock Device and SR 22 Insurance.  The big change as of January 1, 2011 includes the removal of the requirement to obtain SR 22 insurance.  This is a big change and a big deal.  Good news for those entering the Deferred Prosecution program, not so good for SR22 insurance companies like Vern Fonk (who are excellent by the way).  More on this topic in future blogs.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Patrol to Patrol from the Sky (DUI Emphasis Patrols are back!)

A recent story in the Everett Herald (Snohomish County) highlighted the new
way the State Patrol intends on catching DUI drivers
Trooper Keith Leary was quoted saying that "[c]atching drivers who have been
using drugs and alcohol is the patrol's top priority. Too many troopers
have had to notify families that they've lost someone in a car crash that
was caused by an impaired driver.
"(We) do not want to make that knock on a door," he said. "That's the worst
part of our job."
The use of airplanes in detecting DUI Drivers will be part of the DUI
Emphasis patrols employed by the Washington State Patrol. According to the
Patrol the holiday emphasis patrols will last through New Year's Day.
For more information on this story click here:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20101020/NEWS01/710209837
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Look up in the sky It's a bird It's a plane, yes it's Super (DUI) Trooper

A recent story in the Everett Herald (Snohomish County) highlighted the new
way the State Patrol intends on catching DUI drivers. The story focused on
DUI detection from airplanes. Interesting indeed!
As Trooper Keith Leary stated: "It allows us to get DUIs we might not get.
It can literally mean the difference between someone living or dying that
night."
When Trooper Speckmaier sees an erratic driver, he follows the vehicle,
radioing its location until a trooper can catch up.
"He's able to give very accurate info to troopers on the ground," Rudeen
said. "He basically walks us over there."
The plane's high-tech video camera starts recording the vehicle. The video
footage can be used to build probable cause for the trooper or to buttress
cases in court.
For more information on this story click here:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20101020/NEWS01/710209837
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: High Troopers looking out for High (DUI) Drivers

EVERETT - From 2,000 feet up, the nighttime traffic on I-5 in Everett is
beautiful.
Paul Speckmaier looks for the pins of light that aren't behaving properly.
Speckmaier is a trooper and pilot with the Washington State Patrol. He
stopped by Snohomish County on Friday night to help local troopers begin
their holiday emphasis patrols.
From a Cessna 206, he scanned the traffic below.
"After you start watching it for awhile, it's pretty obvious which cars
stand out," he said.
This weekend marked the earliest start to holiday patrols ever in the state,
trooper Keith Leary said. Between Friday and Sunday, troopers arrested 24
impaired drivers in Snohomish County alone.
Fall weather triggers the party mentality that unfortunately flows into the
roads, Leary said.
Troopers have seen Halloween become more and more of an adult party night,
trooper Kirk Rudeen said. The parties are getting bigger, better organized
and more alcohol-fueled.
For more information on this story click here:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20101020/NEWS01/710209837
For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish
County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI
attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys,
or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at
http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: How do I know if my loved one was booked into jail?

If you are the loved one of a person who you suspect has been arrested and booked for DUI in Skagit County, or know for certain that this person has been arrested and booked for DUI in Skagit County, you may be wondering where this person is.  Good question!  If your loved one has been processed (taken to the police station for a BAC test) and then released, then he or she is not in-custody (jail).  However, in some instances in Burlington, Anacortes, Mount Vernon and area the DUI suspect is then processed and booked into the Skagit County Jail.  The following link provides details on the daily bookings in jail – so you can locate the person you love.

http://www.skagitcounty.net/jail/HTML/jailbooking.xml

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Washington State DUI News: Supreme Court rules that Tribal cops can detain off reservation

SEATTLE (AP) - The Washington Supreme Court said Thursday that tribal police can pursue non-Indian drivers suspected of traffic infractions beyond a reservation's boundaries and detain them until other authorities arrive.
The court's ruling was a reconsideration of an opinion it issued last year, in which it unanimously reached the same conclusion. This time, the judges split 6-3.
The majority said that under the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliot between the U.S. and area tribes, it was OK for a Lummi Nation officer to continue pursuing a suspected drunken driver, Loretta Eriksen, beyond the reservation's boundaries in 2005 and detain her until Whatcom County deputies arrived. The treaty required tribes to turn over lawbreakers to U.S. or state authorities, the justices said.
They also said the stop was justified under the doctrine of "fresh pursuit," which allows officers to cross jurisdictional lines when there's a threat to life or property.
"To allow drunk drivers to escape the law by crossing a reservation boundary would unnecessarily endanger lives by incentivizing high-speed dashes for the border," Justice Richard Sanders wrote for the majority.
Some lawyers said that although the ruling referenced the ability of tribal police to make traffic stops beyond a reservation's boundaries, it seemed likely that the same logic would apply for officers pursuing suspects in other crimes.
Justices on both sides agreed that letting drunk drivers get back behind the wheel simply because they're not tribal members was a terrible idea.
But the minority argued that the treaty provided tribes no authority to detain non-Indians beyond their borders. It simply required tribes to turn over suspected lawbreakers who sought haven on a reservation, they said.
They also said the doctrine of "fresh pursuit" applies only to felonies. DUI is a gross misdemeanor.
In her dissent, Justice Mary Fairhurst said she agreed that a tribal officer could pursue Eriksen beyond the reservation's boundaries. But once the officer determined Eriksen wasn't enrolled in the tribe, he should have let her go, she said - a conclusion that troubled her.
"It is ludicrous that a suspected drunk driver who has been stopped outside a reservation's boundaries by a tribal police officer must be allowed to get back on the road if she is not a tribal member," Fairhurst wrote. "However, I cannot avoid my duty to faithfully interpret the law."
The Legislature recently passed a law that said tribal police could be designated general authority peace officers - meaning they'd have power to enforce state laws - if they sent their officers to the State Patrol academy, provided the state with proof of public liability insurance and agreed to waive sovereign immunity if officers were sued in state or federal court.  Lummi police officers have not been so designated.
Eriksen's lawyer, William Johnston of Bellingham, said Thursday's ruling was problematic because, if tribes have inherent authority to detain non-Indians, there was no reason for them to comply with the state law, which took effect in 2008. He questioned whether a tribe would allow itself to be sued in state court if an officer conducting a pursuit off reservation caused an accident.
"Sooner or later, there is going to be a hot pursuit, and in that hot pursuit, somebody's going to be hurt who is not a criminal," he said.  Robert Anderson, the director of the Native American Law Center at the University of Washington, said many tribes waive sovereign immunity for tort actions against tribal governments and have insurance to cover awards for damages.  Lawsuits can be brought in tribal courts, he said.
"It seems to me like the remote possibility of an uncompensated injury is a risk more than outweighed by recognizing tribal law enforcement authority to pursue offenders off the reservation and detain them if they are non-Indians suspected of a crime," Anderson wrote in an e-mail.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

 

Whatcom County DUI News: $5.5 million awarded in Whatcom DUI negligence case

MOUNT VERNON -- A jury in Mount Vernon says Whatcom County and the state must pay $5.5 million to a woman injured in a crash with a drunken driver.
The jury found Tuesday that Whatcom County was negligent for not better supervising Janine Parker, who was on deferred prosecution for a prior DUI arrest.
The jury found the State Patrol negligent because a trooper who found her drunk drove her home, allowing her to later take a cab back to her car.
Parker was driving on the Mount Baker Highway in January 2007 when she collided with the car driven by Hailey French who was seriously injured and has continuing medical bills.

The Bellingham Herald reports the county will have to pay about $2.8 million, the state $2.6 million and Parker $25,000.

For more information on this story click here:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20090429/NEWS03/704299660

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: Driver charged with DUI after crashing in the City of Snohomish

On September 23, 2010, in the City of Snohomish a driver was arrested for driving while under the influence after crashing into vehicles along the 500 block of Avenue D. The police in their blotter released no further information.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Snohomish County DUI News: DUIs from Snohomish Bars much higher than average

The liquor board has been wary of Snohomish's track record for more than two years. Compared to an average city, the amount of overservice violations and Driving Under the Influence (DUI) incidents from Snohomish bars are quantifiably higher, Dixon said.
Since January 2008, the 10 bars on First Street have racked up 47 incidents where the person receiving a DUI said they had last come from a First Street bar. The statistics, though, are "hearsay," liquor board spokesman Brian Smith said — since anyone can say they were drinking somewhere they weren't if stopped for a DUI.
For more on the story click here:  http://snoho.com/Stories/080509_first.html

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Anacortes man Charged with DUI and Hit and Run

On October 4, 2010, a 29-year-old Anacortes man is in custody on charges of DUI, hit and run and driving with a suspended license following a collision he reportedly caused by running a stop sign northbound on N Avenue at 15th Street around 2:23 p.m. Officers found the man's vehicle abandoned in a nearby alley. They found him a short distance away. He was transported to the hospital for his injuries and for a blood alcohol test. He was booked into Skagit County jail.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Man orders Big Mac then Taken to the Big House on DUI Charges

On October 3, 2010, Anacortes Police Officers responded to a disturbance call at McDonald's and contacted a 23-year-old man driving away from the restaurant around 10:50 p.m. The man pulled into a driveway on 24th Street. He told officers he had not caused any problems but officers noticed he appeared intoxicated. After failing field sobriety tests he was arrested and transported to the police department for a breath test.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Felony DUI charge out of Anacortes

On October 3rd, 2010, in Anacortes, Skagit County, a 40-year-old man was charged with felony DUI after he did not heed warnings not to drive. Officers were called to a gas station at 24th Street and Commercial Avenue around 12:10 a.m. after the clerk saw what he believed to be a very intoxicated men drive up in a truck. Officers contacted the man, who appeared intoxicated to them as well. They told him not to drive and offered to drive him home or to call a friend, family member or taxi for him. The man declined assistance and said he would walk home. An hour later the clerk called back and said the man retrieved his car and drove away. An officer found the vehicle on Highway 20 near Thompson Road and arrested the driver. Because of a previous vehicular homicide conviction, the man's DUI arrest was charged as a felony. He was taken to the hospital for a blood draw and taken to jail.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Skagit County DUI News: Guemes man arrested for DUI in Anacortes

On October 2, 2010, in Anacortes, Skagit County, a 56-year-old Guemes Island man was arrested on a charge of DUI after an officer spotted a vehicle parked with no lights on in the lane of travel on Whistle Lake Road near Haddon Road around 7:28 p.m. The driver, who was sitting in the car, said he was waiting for a tow truck but could pull off the side of the road. Instead he drove off. The officer followed the car, and reported that the man was driving recklessly. After stopping the vehicle, the officer saw open containers of alcohol in the vehicle. The driver failed sobriety tests and was arrested and taken to the office for a breath test.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

Washington DUI News: Prescription Drug DUIs in the news

As illegal prescription drug use soars, the number of cases of driving under the influence in which the substance is a prescription drug rather than alcohol is rising steadily, authorities say.

But prosecuting and obtaining convictions against suspects charged with DUI involving prescription drugs can be a challenge.

Many states, including Florida, do not require a test to quantify the amount of drugs in a person's body in a DUI case, and impairment is difficult to prove.

"What we and other states have run into historically is that there is a well-developed system to quantify the amount of alcohol in the human body," said Rob Parker, a Brevard County, Fla., prosecutor.

However, "when you have oxycodone or an opiate, we do not have a well-developed way to quantify the amount of drugs so that a jury can then compare that value to a standard established as an unlawful when operating an automobile."

Parker prosecuted a man charged with four counts of DUI after a crash in Melbourne in 2007. Minutes after the accident, a police officer observed that the 33-year-old driver's eyes were bloodshot, his eyelids droopy and his speech mumbled. A blood sample from the driver tested positive for the presence of prescription drugs.

"The jury heard all of that and could not conclude that he was DUI with drugs beyond reasonable doubt," Parker said.

The jury acquitted the driver of the DUI charges in August.

A DUI charge is the same whether the suspect is accused of driving while influenced by alcohol or drugs.

In Florida, the charge can be proved in two ways: a blood alcohol content of .08 or higher, or if the driver demonstrates he is under the influence of alcohol or a drug that impairs his normal faculties.

The second is not so cut and dried.

Law enforcement has limited means to prove impairment. Field sobriety tests are one tool. The state also sometimes relies on drug recognition experts (DREs), police officers who have completed specialized training in detecting impairment due to drugs.

Michelle Perlman, misdemeanor division chief for the Brevard State Attorney's office, said her office recommends law enforcement agencies get a DRE to the scene as soon as possible if a suspected DUI involves drugs.

"This cannot usually be conclusively diagnosed by the average police officer," she said.

There are about a dozen DREs in Brevard, where more than 2,000 people were charged with operating a vehicle under the influence in 2009. As is common around the country, Brevard does not separately track DUIs involving drugs.

Cpl. Wendy Wheeler, who heads the DUI unit at the Brevard County Sheriff's Office and who is a certified expert, said it can take three to six months for an officer to become a DRE.

"The program is real intense," she said.

Another important tool is a patrol car dashboard camera that can record impaired drivers. But not all police vehicles have them.

When cases go to trial, a lot is up to the officer and the attorney, Perlman said.

"I do think that we see more difficulty in obtaining guilty verdicts on drug DUIs and that is probably because we are unable to prove the amount of drug in the person's system or the precise time when it was consumed," Perlman said. "I think if we can show a quantitative analysis, we will get a lot more plea deals."

Florida law does not require reporting the quantity of a drug in a driver's body in DUIs. But the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has started to conduct quantitative tests for drugs like cannabis and prescribed drugs like Xanax, Valium and Ativan and the date-rape drug GHB.

"We will continue to add quantitative tests for additional drugs," said Heather Smith, an FDLE spokeswoman.

She said law enforcement agencies also have the option to seek similar testing done by private labs "if the drug is one that FDLE does not currently quantify."

Defense Attorney Steve Casanova, who handles scores of local DUI cases, said traces of some drugs can stay in a person's system for as long as 30 days.

"How do you prove it was affecting him at the time of the arrest?" Casanova said.

In other cases, the suspect may have been prescribed the drug legally.

One state quantifying drug usage in DUI cases is Nevada, where the statute mentions specific quantities of some drugs that have to be present in a person's blood or urine.

But even when the presence of drugs can be quantified, the effects they have on different people may not be the same, said Joanne Michaels, program director for the National Traffic Law Center in Virginia.

"What they do in different amounts in different people is still being studied," she said. "Toxicologists are raising concerns because it can be an issue."

For more on the story click here:  http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-10-17-dui-drugs_N.htm

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

 

Skagit DUI/Snohomish DUI News: Can an Officer Stop a Driver based on a 911 call?

Presently I have a few DUI cases that involve a citizen calling 911 to report a possible DUI driver.  In every one of these cases the officer then contacts my client and ultimately, according to script, arrests my client for DUI.  Sounds relatively normal, doesn't it?  Yes and no.  While it is true that the law allows (and encourages) citizens to report possible DUI drivers the law demands that details be reported if the officer bases the stop or contact of the driver based on the phone call only.  In situations such as this the case Campbell v. DOL, 31 Wn. App. 833, 644 P.2d 1219 (1983) proves very helpful.  In a nutshell, when an office stops or contacts a driver based solely on the report from a citizen then officer must corroborate the information.  This means, essentially, that the officer must first possess a well-founded suspicion based on articulable facts that such a violation has been committed or is presently being committed.  General information from an anonymous call will simply not suffice. 

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

DUI History: DUI LAWS 1990-PRESENT

From "The DUI App," available from iTunes

In 1990 the United States Supreme Court leapt into action by ruling that "sobriety checkpoints" did not violate the United States Constitution's Fourth Amendment.  An individual state was still permitted to protect its citizens from random searches and seizures under their state's constitution, but this was still a huge victory for advocates of roadblocks. 

In the fall of 1992, the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a report that recommended each state adopt a 0.08% BAC per se statute.  The DOT Report concluded, among other things, that "[1]owering the BAC is likely to reduce fatalities....There is also evidence that lowering BACs, and publicizing the effort, can reduce alcohol related deaths at all BACs." In this regard, the Report notes that 80% of the 22,086 alcohol related fatalities in 1990 involved BACs in excess of 0.10%. 

In 1995 President Bill Clinton announced that all states needed to adopt the 0.08% per se BAC.  Federal legislation was subsequently adopted in October 2000 which threatened to withhold billions of additional federal dollars from states that did not enact new laws implementing the 0.08% per se BAC standard.  Most states complied within the next two legislative sessions and in 2005 Minnesota became the final state to pass the law.

In 1998 Congress amended the alcohol-impaired driving incentive grant program which provided extra funding for states that meet certain legislative enactment criteria.  In passing TEA-21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st Century) a state could qualify for a federal grant by meeting five of seven criteria.  The criteria for the basic grant included a program targeting drivers with high BAC levels.

To qualify under the high-BAC criteria states must demonstrate the establishment of a graduated sanctioning system that provides enhanced or additional sanctions (punishments) to drivers convicted of DUI if they were found to have a high BAC.  Further, the enhanced sanctions must be mandatory, must apply to the first (and subsequent) DUI offense, and may include longer terms of license suspensions, increased fines and treatment for substance abuse where appropriate.

In the last couple of decades drug DUI cases have been growing in number.  More and more American motorists are taking prescribed or over-the-counter medications that cause negative and potentially dangerous effects on the driver.  Furthermore, in the last 10 years or so, police officers have been trained on "drug recognition" techniques that assist them in identifying drivers who have taken drugs that impair motor skills. 

Use of common non-prescription medicine such as aspirin, ibuprophen or acetaminophen can have an additive effect to a person's impairment from alcohol while many non-prescription drugs (ie. antihistamines) can impair a person who later consumes alcohol.  This "combination" of alcohol and many types of medications, including prescription and illegal drugs, can drastically increase the impairment effects on a driver.  In 2003, Nevada became the first state to pass DUI drugs laws setting presumptive impairment levels for a variety of contraband substances such as marijuana, followed in 2005 by a similar law in Virginia.

The criminalization of a DUI charge is now taking a different road by making a DUI offense a felony.  Currently, thirty-seven states have DUI statutes that incorporate a felony charge if the driver has prior DUI convictions. 

Although these statutes differ among states, there are some similarities, those being that states use two major factors to determine if the DUI will result in a felony.   The first factor, used by all of the felony DUI states, is the number of prior DUI convictions at the time of the offense. The number required to raise a DUI to a felony ranges from the second to the fifth conviction, with the majority of states setting the limit at the third or fourth DUI conviction.  The second factor, required by thirty states, is the DUI offender must have a specific number of prior convictions within a certain period of years before the current DUI conviction will be a felony. These time periods range from three to twelve years with the majority of states having either a five or ten year limit.  Two states, Idaho and Kentucky, incorporate a third factor in the felony DUI determination. Both states use the BAC level of the driver at the time of the offense to define a felony threshold.  These felony convictions also increase the potential jail time facing the individual accused of DUI.

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com

DUI History: DUI LAWS 1970-1990

From "The DUI App," available from iTunes

In 1970 the federal government decided to solicit bids for research scientists in an attempt to develop a system of standardized "field sobriety tests."  The idea behind the government's proposal was to provide police officers tools which would assist in their identification of DUI suspects and their subsequent arrest for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol.  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a division of the United States Department of Transportation, eventually supported a group of scientists at the Southern California Research Institute (SCRI).  Dr. Marcelline Burns, and Dr. Herbert Moskowitz, were the primary authors of the study and the final product, completed in 1983, resulted in NHTSA's "Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs)."

The original "SFST Manual" was published in 1984 and was very short and received little attention.   Subsequently the NHTSA manuals have been updated over the years with new publications produced in 1987, 1989, 192, 1995, 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2007.  These standardized field sobriety tests remain the subject of great debate regarding their validity and the manner in which they are conducted, nevertheless their role in the investigation of DUIs remains an important one.

In the 1960s and 1970s the public's view of drinking and driving was not, arguable, as harsh as it is now.  The late Dr. Patricia Waller, a well known advocate for public safety and researcher in the area of drinking and driving, stated that in the past "[d]runk driving was considered more or less a "folk crime," almost a rite of passage for young males.  Most adults in the United States used alcohol, and most of them, at some point, drove after doing so. This is not to say that they drove drunk, but many of them undoubtedly drove when they were somewhat impaired."

The laws over the years continued to evolve and the pressure on law makers to make DUI laws stricter was too much to ignore.  In 1972, Nebraska and New York passed the first laws making driving with a 0.10 blood alcohol content "illegal per se."   With this type of law the prosecution need not present any evidence of the driver's impaired ability to drive to support a conviction.  These laws were instituted for "public safety" reasons and based on some studies that suggested that drivers were significantly less capable of operating a motor vehicle at this level.  By the end of the decade, twelve states had set an illegal per se limit, all of them at 0.10% except New Hampshire which set that state's per se limit at 0.15%.  Internationally, other countries enacted per se laws well before the United States.  Such laws were introduced in Norway in 1936, Sweden in 1941, Australia (1966), Great Britain in 1967, and Canada in 1969. 

A new component to DUI arrests was the "Administrative License Revocation" (also referred to as an "Administrative License Suspension") law and in 1976 Minnesota became the first state to enact such a law.  This law had been previously recommended by NHTSA as a manner of suspending or revoking an accused DUI driver's driving privileges regardless of whether the accused had been charged criminally.   The idea behind these administrative license suspension laws was that any driver who submitted to a breath test which resulted in a level equal to or greater than the state's presumed "impairment" level would be summarily suspended or revoked for a period of time.  Typically the penalties for refusing the breath test were equal to or greater than the penalties imposed if the driver did take the breath test.  These laws were civil or administrative in nature in order to avoid any double jeopardy issues.          

In 1982 Congress looked to focus some of their attention on the perceived drunk driving problem by passing legislation designed to allocate $125 million to states over a three-year period.  The bill was signed into law in December of 1982 and allowed for incentive grants to the states if they adopted the following three legislatively mandated provisions in 23 U.S.C. §101: 1) a 0.10% per se statute; 2) a 90-day license suspension upon probable cause for first-time DUI offenders or those who refuse to take a chemical sobriety test, and 3) a minimum 48 consecutive hours in jail or 10 days community service for subsequent DUI offenses within a five year period.

In addition to the three requirements the states were also mandated to provide increased law enforcement and education efforts designed at eliminating drunk driving.  States were also eligible for supplemental funds if they met additional requirements in addition to the basic incentive grants.  Although the specific criteria for funding would be determined by federal and state rules, the suggested requirements were that there be: adequate statewide record-keeping regarding drunk driving convictions and license suspensions, alcohol rehabilitation and treatment programs, vehicle impoundment for any person convicted of drunk driving, alcohol safety programs which are financially self-sufficient and locally coordinated, sentence-screening authority by courts, adoption of a 21-year minimum drinking age, and adoption of the recommendations made by the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving.

Due to intense public pressure President Reagon appointed a National Commission on Drunk Driving, which issued a report recommending a number of ways to enhance the effectiveness of a national anti-drunk driving program.  The most significant recommendations of the Commission included selective enforcement and judicially approved roadblocks; the abolition of plea bargaining; victim assistance and restitution programs; administrative per se license suspension; per se statutes; mandatory sentencing; the abolition of pre-conviction diversion; the strengthening of implied consent laws; and   increased efficiency in court administration relating to DUI charges.

In 1984 the "Age 21 National Driving Age Law" was enacted to force states to increase the drinking age to 21.  Failure to comply would cost those states millions in federal funds.  Several states did initially resist but by 1986 all of the states had complied (Louisiana being the last state to comply).

In 1986 the American Bar Association (ABA) got into the act and formed a national committee to study how to deal effectively, legally and fairly with the drunk driving problem.  The ABA National Committee on Drunk Driving was initially focused on the effectiveness, appropriateness and legality of the innovative sanctions and techniques proposed by the Presidential Commission, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the insurance industry and other influencial parties.  A special Drunk Driving Advisory Project was also formed to evaluate enforcement techniques and alcohol related traffic offenses. The Advisory Project compiled a report entitled, Drunk Driving Laws & Enforcement: An Assessment of Effectiveness (1986). 

Areas that were examined by the Project Advisory Board included roadblocks, per se legislation, preservation of scientific evidence, mandatory jail sentencing and license suspensions, abolition of plea bargaining, a national means to track license suspensions, insurance industry problems, and preservation of due process guarantees in the trial of alleged drunk drivers.

Also in 1986 MADD began its first training of volunteers to support victims of drunk drivers and to serve as "victim advocates" in court proceedings and began to use their influence on a federal level.  MADD was founded in 1980 by Candice Lightner after her own personal tragedy of losing her daughter to a DUI accident.  MADD supports education, advocacy and victim assistance in the DUI legal realm and are strong advocates of maintaining the per se blood alcohol content level of .08%, stronger sanctions for DUI offenders, including mandatory jail sentences, treatment for alcoholism and drug dependency issues, the installation of an ignition interlock devices, attendance at a victim impact panels (VIP), license suspensions, "sobriety checkpoints" and "saturation patrols," maintaining the legal age of drinking in the United States at 21 years of age, additional taxes on the purchase of beer, and even for lowering the per se BAC limit again to a figure less than the current and accepted limit of 0.08.  Without question MADD has been a significant player on the DUI stage, although not without controversy and criticism. 

In 1986 the American Medical Association (AMA), who four decades earlier supported per se BAC levels of 0.15%, publicly supported a per se BAC level in the United States of 0.05%. 

The "Drunk Driving Prevention Act of 1988" was then introduced in 1988 and authorized the Secretary of Transportation, over a period of three fiscal years, to award certain monetary grants to individual states "to improve the effectiveness of the enforcement of laws to prevent drunk driving". 23 USC 410 Under this act if a state adopted an enforcement program, it received a grant equal to 75% of the cost of implementation and enforcement for the first fiscal year, followed by 50% for the second fiscal year and 25% for the third fiscal year.  To be eligible for the federal grant, certain conditions were required including, "an expedited driver's license suspension or revocation system" and "a self sustaining drunk driving prevention program".

For information on your Washington State DUI please contact our Snohomish County DUI attorneys, Whatcom County DUI attorneys, King County DUI attorneys, Whatcom Island County DUI attorneys, Island County DUI attorneys, or Skagit County DUI attorneys at 425-493-1115 or check out our website at http://www.washdui.com