A revision, dubbed "Ricci's Law," to the current DWI statute revises ignition interlock device requirements for certain offenders. This law has passed the legislature and is awaiting the signature of Governor Corzine.
Ricci Branca was a south Jersey teen who was riding his bicycle with friends when he was struck and killed by a drunk driver. Two of the other cyclists were injured. The drunk driver, who'd had at least 10 drinks before getting behind the wheel and who had a BAC of over .30, is now serving a 16-year sentence for aggravated manslaughter and related charges.
An ignition interlock device is a mechanism installed into a vehicle's dashboard. It works like a breathalyzer, and prevents the vehicle from starting if a BAC (blood alcohol concentration), usually between .02 and .04 is registered. Many studies have shown that interlock devices assist to prevent drunk driving and are effective in combating repeat offenses of DWI. I am not going to dispute those studies, although the device is not foolproof and requires maintenance.
The DWI statute in NJ, as it stands now, provides that a judge may order the installation of an ignition interlock device for six to twelve months for first offenses. For second, third, and subsequent offenses, judges must order the installation of an interlock device for one to three years or suspend all license plates and registration certificates for two years (for a second offense) or ten years (for a third or subsequent offense).
Those registration suspensions run concurrently with the required license suspension of the offender; two years for a second offense, and ten years for a third, and affect only vehicles owned by the defendant or registered to him. They are a current alternative to the installation of the interlock device.
With the revision, the bottom first-offense tier would not be altered. A person convicted of DWI with a BAC of at least .08 but less than .10 would be subject to the same penalties as previously.
However, a first-offense DWI conviction with a BAC of .10 or higher would now require the installation of an interlock device in the vehicle principally operated by the offender, no matter who the owner.* The installation would be required for six to twelve months after the period of drivers license suspension expires.
A first-offence DWI conviction with a BAC of .15 or higher has the same requirement, except that the installation must occur during the period of license suspension and extend six to twelve months thereafter.
For a second DWI conviction, the judge's option to suspend a person's registration for two years concurrent with the required license suspension would be eliminated, and the interlock installation during the two-year period of license suspension and for one to three years thereafter would be required.
For a third DWI conviction, the judge's option to suspend a person's registration for ten years concurrent with the required license suspension would be eliminated, and the interlock installation for the ten-year period of suspension and for one to three years thereafter would be mandatory.
Note: This new interlock requirement will also apply to convictions for refusal to submit to a breath test.
*This means that if a vehicle you own and which is registered to you and used by you is also the principal vehicle of your spouse, parent, child, sibling, roommate, friend, partner, girlfriend, or boyfriend your vehicle will require the installation of the device and you will be required to use the device to start your ignition for the entirety of the period of installation, anywhere from six months to thirteen years. Be careful! This means that the vehicle may not start if you (the non-offender owner or driver of the vehicle) are using it and have a glass of wine or a beer with dinner. These interlock devices are sensitive and will also register a BAC if you have recently (within the past 15-20 minutes) used mouthwash or a breath spray containing alcohol.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm for any device, etc. that might prevent people from getting behind the wheel after drinking. This is pretty cool idea.
ReplyDeleteI don't drink much but I do drive late at night when I'm really tired. (Coming home from a gig.) I know I'm not as good of a driver when I'm really tired and that's a lot like driving drunk.
I don't late gigs anymore for that reason. Or I drink a ton of coffee before I get in my car!
I agree. I just have an issue with how it imposes on the other members of the household.
ReplyDeleteI don't drive drunk, and in fact was a member of SADD in college. I've never had a DWI. However, when I lived with my parents post-law school, I was still driving the car registered in my father's name, insured by my father, and shared with my sister. She was away at college, but imagine if she was home for the summer after her junior year, and we were truly sharing the car on a daily basis. She'd be 21.
Let's say I got a DWI, and this statute was in effect. Let's say she took the car to go out with friends, and wanted to have a glass of wine with dinner. The device registers - and will not start with - a BAC of .02 to .04. That's .06 to .04 BELOW the legal limit. She wouldn't be able to start the car to drive home.
That's the problem I have with it.