Monthly Archives: October 2012

Santa Fe Makes Profit on Vehicles Forfeited for DWI

Posted on by
Santa Fe’s DWI Forfeiture Ordinance benefited from the unexpected consequence of accruing $231,000 in revenue since the inception of the program in 2009. The city started the DWI Forfeiture Ordinance to keep chronic drunk drivers off the road. The $231,000 does not take into account the money owed to towing companies.

In 2012 alone, 64 vehicles have been seized under the DWI ordinance. The city’s ordinance states that the city has the right to forfeit any vehicle that is driven by a someone with a previous DWI conviction. The ordinance also extends to a vehicle that is knowingly being lent to a driver with a previous DWI conviction.

There are 46 vehicles and their owners and lien holders currently in legal dispute.

The city holds 129 vehicles in two different impound lots. The charge is $10 a day for storage.

City Attorney Alfred Walker says, “People are obviously not happy when they lose their car, but we try to make them feel like they’ve been heard through the process, and people usually respect that.”

When a car is seized, a person has 30 days to request an administrative hearing to either request an administrative hearing with the city or file an innocent-owner affidavit, which would state that the owner of the vehicle had no knowledge of the driver’s previous DWI offenses.

A hearing is set with an independent hearing officer to determine if police had probably cause to seize the vehicle. In just the month of October, there are already 50 hearings scheduled.

The vehicle is returned with no fees if the owner wins the hearing. The fees that are paid mount up quickly and substantially. There is a $200 administrative fee, a $70 a week fee to hold the car in addition to the $10 daily fee, a $150 boot fee, a $250 interlock tracking fee, and the towing fee which is variable.

If the hearing officer find that police did have probably cause to seize the vehicle, then the case is forwarded to a District Court where a judge decides whether to return the car to the owner, or hand the title over to the city of Santa Fe.

DWI Forfeiture Program Administrator Amanda Katz said that a majority of the vehicles that come to the impound lot are abandoned and never claimed.

Santa Fe has sold 40 vehicles in three auctions since 2009. The auctions made just over $42,000 in sales. A Ford Ranchero with just 21,368 miles on it sold for just $4,500, but most of the vehicles sold for less than $1,000.

The state Department of Transportation granted Santa Fe $320,000 over the last three years to get this forfeiture program off the ground and 2012 is the last year that Santa Fe will be aided by the grant.

NY Grant Funds DWI Checkpoints in Broome County

Posted on by

Broome County law enforcement has received a grant to help fund extra patrols for DWI checkpoints for the remainder of this year and into 2013. The grant for $23,712 came from the National Highway Traffic Safety Association and will find seven overtime patrols and DWI checkpoints.

The first DWI checkpoint is planned for the Halloween weekend. The grant is going to be divided between State Police, the Sheriff’s Office, and other municipal police departments. In Broome County, an impressive half of DWI arrests are made at these checkpoints, according to Chris Marion, the STOP-DWI coordinator for Broome County.

In New York, a driver can be charged with a traffic infraction known as DWAI (Driving While Ability Impaired) if their BAC is below the limit .08. A BAC greater than .05 and less than .08 can be charged with DWI per se, and a driver refusing a chemical test can be charged with DWI, even without any evidence.

Broome County Executive Debbie Preston said, “I take DWI offenses very seriously. My Aunt was killed by a drunk driver and my mother was critically injured by a drunk driver, causing years of recovery. I’ve seen first-hand what the actions of drunk drivers can do to victims and their families. This Grant will help us continue to crack down on these serious offenses. Anyone who plans to drink and get behind the wheel in Broome County needs to reconsider their plans.”

In 2011 alone, 641 DWI arrests were made throughout Broome County.

“The officers at these checkpoints get a good idea from talking to you if there evidence of alcohol use,” said Broome County Sheriff David Harder. “Most of the time it’s going to be on the driver’s breath or their speech could be slurred.”

Marion said that so far this year, there have been no fatalities linked to drunk driving in Broome County. In May 2011, three people were killed when a drunk driver crashed into the Chenango River off Interstate 88 in Port Crane.

Sheriff David Harder said, “Cracking down on DWI offenses is a top priority of the Sheriff’s Office. We will continue to vigorously enforce the law and hope that the public is aware that they will be caught and arrested if they choose to drive drunk. The Grant will help us patrol the County through the upcoming Holidays, when statistically DWI arrests are on the rise.”

DUI Checkpoint Scheduled for Pinellas County

Posted on by
Pinellas County has very tough penalties for DUI, and tougher penalties can apply depending on your level of blood alcohol content. If your BAC is above .15%, you can be fined $1,500 for just a first offense, and you can face up to nine months in jail.

Law enforcement officials this weekend will be on patrol for drunk drivers. A DUI checkpoint is commencing today, Friday, October 19, starting at 10p.m. and lasting until 3a.m. Saturday at National Aviation Academy, 6225 Ulmerton Road.

Throughout Pinellas County, the sheriff’s office will set up monthly checkpoints which includes the use of patrol, community policing, K-9, and narcotics deputies. In addition to drivers impaired by alcohol and narcotics, law enforcement will be looking for driver license, registration, insurance, and equipment violations.

Mississippi Bill Creates DUI Child Endangerment Law

Posted on by

In July 2012, Mississippi passed a DUI child endangerment law which created a separate offense for driving under the influence with a passenger under the age of 16.

If the offense does not include serious injury or death to the child involved, and if it is the first conviction for DUI, then the driver will charged with a misdemeanor, be fined no more than $1,000 and can be imprisoned for up to twelve months.

A second conviction that does not result in serious death or injury to the child will also be a misdemeanor offense, and the fines will be at least $1,000 and no more than $5,000. The offender can also be jailed for up to one year.

A third or subsequent conviction not involving injury or death to the child is a felony, and fines go up to $10,000 and the offender can be imprisoned for up to 25 years.

A first offense with injury or death to the child can be charged as a felony, and fines could go up to $10,000 and the offender can face up to 25 years in prison.

Up until this year, Mississippi was one of the only states that did not have a DUI child endangerment law. In 2011, a child endangerment bill died in session when no motion was made to table the motion to reconsider, and a similar bill met the same fate in 2010.

In September, a driver with five children in the vehicle crashed, resulting in a rollover. He faced five counts of endangering a child by DUI.

New Bill Deletes Options for CA Drivers Arrested for DUI

Posted on by
California drivers no longer have the option to choose which chemical test they may take when arrested for driving under the influence. The old law allowed a driver to decide whether they submit to a blood, breath, or urine test. Sometimes, the driver who submitted to a breath test would also be request to take either a urine or blood test, again one of their choosing.Revisions to this law prohibits the arrestee’s option of choosing a urine test, and instead requires that if a blood test is unavailable then they have automatically consented to giving a urine test. The new law states that a person only has the choice of a breath or blood test. If a person is unable to give a blood test and is exempted from doing so, then they must give a urine test.

California’s new bill was approved by the Governor on August 27. Under California law, an arresting officer must tell a driver the consequences of refusing a chemical test, which can include a one-year driver’s license suspension for a first DUI offense.

Butte is Booting Drunk Drivers Driving on Suspended or Revoked Licenses

Posted on by
Butte’s DUI task force met this week to discuss new ideas for DUI prevention in the county. DUI preventions present in Butte include the 24/7 Sober Program, Mariah’s Challenge, and a Butte DUI Court which started last October.

The task force would like to do more to prevent drunk drivers from re-offending, and today are discussing booting the cars of drivers who have a suspended license for DUI, and are caught driving again. If a person driving on a suspended or revoked license is found to be driving again, the county attorney of Butte will recommend to the judge that a boot be placed on the driver’s vehicle. The judge can make a decision on whether to use the boot as part of the sentence.

Police have booted vehicles of DUI offenders since 2010, but have only booted three cars since due to limited resources and working out the kinks of proper protocol for booting vehicles.

Two cars have been booted since last Friday. All the boots are donated, and 8 of which have been donated by Mariah’s Challenge, a nonprofit that shines awareness on underage drinking and driving.

The boot can be placed on vehicles for 30 days, for a total of $3 a day.

NY Lawmakers Want Ignition Interlock Devices in All Buses After String of DWI Incidents

Posted on by

A third bus driver has been charged with DWI this month in New York, after crashing into a tree while children were on board. In response to the string of dangerous drunk driving antics, New York lawmakers State Senator Charles Fuschillo and Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice immediately called for new legislation requiring an ignition interlock device in all buses, which would prevent a person with alcohol in their system to start the bus.

The legislation, which is co-sponsored by Fuschillo and supported by Rice and Assemblyman David McDonough, would require all New York buses manufactured after July 1, 2013 to be equipped with an ignition interlock device. The estimated costs for these devices, as estimated by the lawmakers, would cost between $750-$1,500 per bus.

In just one month, there have been three incidents involving school bus drivers allegedly driving drunk. The October 3 incident involved a Long Island bus driver who was transporting five children home when he crashed his bus into a residential home.

In the latest incident, school bus driver Robert Stundis was pulled over when his mini-bus swerved due to a blown front tire. He was pulled over by police, and a half empty bottle of vodka was found in the bus, and his BAC registered at .23, almost three times the legal limit. He had made his last stop less than an hour before he was stopped by police. If the law passes, New York would be the first state in the nation to require the use of ignition interlock devices on school buses.

MADD Responds to Increase in Traffic Fatalities in 2012

Posted on by

Traffic deaths rose 9% in the first half of 2012, an increase that broke a 5-year downward trend of automobile fatalities in the United States. The preliminary data cannot yet be explained by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, who said the report had not examined the causes.

MADD responded to the report by reiterating their belief that all convicted drunk drivers should use an ignition interlock device, MADD National President Jan Withers said, “MADD has a plan to eliminate drunk driving once and for all and states must do their part by passing all-offender ignition interlock laws.”

Withers pointed to the data that ignition interlocks work to prevent drunk driving, she said, “There is no longer a debate on interlock effectiveness. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and 15 other peer-reviewed studies, have confirmed that interlocks reduce repeat drunk driving by two-thirds.”

Congress funded a $20 million ignition interlock incentive grant program last July as part of MAP-21. States can receive special funding for interlock programs if they have legislation that requires all convicted drunk drivers to get an interlock device.

Because offenders and not the states pay for the interlock program, Withers says “there are no more excuses for states” to not implement this legislation.

Winnebago County, WI receives grant for OWI Task Force

Posted on by

Winnebago County, Wisconsin received a $75,000 grant from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Safety in order to put together an OWI (operating while intoxicated) task force that will work through late 2013 to combat OWI during special events and weekends. The grant is going to be used to cover the wages and benefits of the officers who will be assigned to the task force. The OWI enforcement will include bi-montly patrols using 10-squad cars per detail, according to Winnebago County Sheriff John Matz.

Matz said, “We’re not trying to prohibit the consumption of alcohol. We’re trying to make our highways safer through responsible alcohol consumption.” A similar task force with a focus on drunk driving has been implemented in Brown, Outagamie, Marinette, and Sheboygan counties. Task forces in Winnebago and Manitowoc counties are set to begin operation in November, according to Michael Panosh, the regional program manager for the Bureau of Transportation Safety.

These Northeast Wisconsin task forces work together, and do not stay within jurisdictions. During deployments officers in one community can work in another. Panosh said, “The days of the corner bar are really over. People are driving between communities and counties.”

Only 3 out of 10 Convicted DWI Offenders in New York Install Mandatory Ignition Interlock Device

Posted on by
Since 2010, all drivers convicted of DWI in New York must use an ignition interlock device on their vehicle for a minimum of six months. The device will not allow the car to start if alcohol, which can be as low as .025%, is detected in the driver’s breath. This zero tolerance policy started as a provision under New York’s “Leandra’s Law”, also known as the Child Passenger Protection Act.

State government records are showing that many convicted DWI offenders are evading the issue of installing an ignition interlock device on their vehicle, and a review of the records since the law was implemented two years ago show that as many as 23,000 motorists have avoided the installation of the device, often by simply selling their car or signing ownership over to a family member.

But convicted DWI offenders are still operating vehicles without the device, and in some cases while they are intoxicated. Some are still driving their original vehicle and some are being caught driving their friends’ cars.

Case in point: Nicholas Santaniello of West Seneca was convicted of DWI and complied with the law by having the ignition interlock device installed in his vehicle. The device requires monthly calibrations to check proper operation and to document any ‘fails’ on the device. For one of these calibrations, Santaniello arrived in his friend’s car, and Santaniello’s car was driven by his friend. Law enforcement was tipped off and when they arrived and tested Santaniello for alcohol, they discovered he had enough alcohol in his system to prevent his car from starting through the device. He was charged with operating a vehicle without an interlock device and operating a vehicle in violation of a restricted license. The friend was charged with facilitating operation to a person court-ordered to use an interlock device and operating without a license.

The compliance with the new ignition interlock device law has been just 30%. Each county in New York has an agency which monitors compliance and informs judges about the drivers who refuse to abide by the rules, or drivers who have failed to start their vehicle with the device.

State lawmakers are considering options on how to address the loophole with the law. Long Island Republican Charles J. Fuschillo Jr. has suggested that offenders who do not participate in the interlock device program wear “transdermal alcohol monitoring devices” such as the ankle bracelet.

Gov. Cuomo has successfully pushed for tougher drunk driving legislation recently, and tighter restrictions on licensing is a way the administration is handling repeat offenders.

New, innovative technology, such as SmartStart’s ignition interlock devices with Photo ID modules, can be a way to skirt the issue of friends helping friends bypass the device nefariously.