Last spring, Washington state and Whatcom County were held liable for damages of more than $5 million in a DUI case. In case you have forgotten I will help you to remember: A woman was arrested for DUI, she was supposed to have an ignition interlock device in her car but did not. Due to overcrowding at the jail she was not booked and due to overturned impound cases at the Whatcom County District Court level her car was not impounded.
So as a possible solution to the problem, the arresting trooper drove her a distance of approximately nine miles to her home and told her to stay there until she sobered up. Being a repeat offender, this individual immediately got a ride back to her car from someone and drove drunk for the second time in one night. This time she hit someone head on and almost killed that person. That person was Hailey French.
There is currently no law in Washington state that requires the impoundment or hold of a vehicle after a DUI arrest. There are jails all over Washington state that are too crowded to book and hold people arrested for DUI's so what some of these people do is go right back to their car and drive it home. That is a threat to public safety.After the judgment last spring, I started working with State Rep. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale. We have written and proposed a bill to Olympia that will help prevent these occurrences from happening. It is House Bill 2565, "Hailey's Law."
The bill simply states that if you are arrested for a DUI then the vehicle you are driving will be impounded. If you are the vehicle owner then the vehicle will be held for 12 hours.
Why a 12-hour hold? Most DUI's occur in the middle of the night therefore making the vehicle available in the middle of the day during normal business hours. In addition, picking up any vehicle during normal business hours saves the vehicle owner money in "after hours" fees.
Why is the hold only for the vehicle owner? Under current state law only the vehicle owner may redeem an impounded vehicle therefore if you don't own the car there is not a threat of you redeeming it.
Why am I so involved? Yes, I am the owner of a towing company in Bellingham, but more importantly I have lived here since I was 6 years old. I went to school in the county and I am involved with many groups locally. My biggest fear as a tow operator is responding to an accident where I know the victim, let alone could have done something to help prevent it.
Must we wait until we know a victim before we work on resolve?
Please support HB 2565 "Hailey's Law' and do your part to keep Whatcom County safe.
Source
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Hailey's Law would impound Washington DUI vehicles
A bill proposed to the Washington state legislature would provide for the immediate impounding of a vehicle involved in a DUI arrest.
This is not the first such provision attempted in any state. New Mexico cities use the option at their discretion, and some cities in Arizona do the same. Utah uses a mandatory vehicle impound law called the "Not a Drop" law.
The suggested bill in Washington is named after Hailey French, who suffered life threatening injuries in a DUI accident last year. The situation is unique because French was injured by a driver who had been arrested for DUI just hours before that same evening. The driver was supposed to have an ignition interlock in her car from a previous conviction, but she did not have one.
The driver should have been taken to jail, but, since jails were overcrowded, the trooper instead had to deliver the driver to her home and ask she remain there for the evening. The driver did not follow this order, getting back into her car and eventually hitting French in a second DUI offense that night.
State Rep. Doug Erickson, R-Ferndale, is behind Hailey's Law. This law requires the vehicle of a DUI driver to be impounded for 12 hours, if the driver owns the vehicle. If the vehicle belongs to another owner, the owner may come pick up the car.
This bill aims to prevent a situation where a DUI driver could get back on the road hours after an arrest. Instead, the driver will have to wait until the next day at least to pick up the car. The fee to pick up the car can be high, which may serve as a deterrent to driving under the influence. Further, impound fees in other areas go toward combatting drunk driving through law enforcement funding.
Source
This is not the first such provision attempted in any state. New Mexico cities use the option at their discretion, and some cities in Arizona do the same. Utah uses a mandatory vehicle impound law called the "Not a Drop" law.
The suggested bill in Washington is named after Hailey French, who suffered life threatening injuries in a DUI accident last year. The situation is unique because French was injured by a driver who had been arrested for DUI just hours before that same evening. The driver was supposed to have an ignition interlock in her car from a previous conviction, but she did not have one.
The driver should have been taken to jail, but, since jails were overcrowded, the trooper instead had to deliver the driver to her home and ask she remain there for the evening. The driver did not follow this order, getting back into her car and eventually hitting French in a second DUI offense that night.
State Rep. Doug Erickson, R-Ferndale, is behind Hailey's Law. This law requires the vehicle of a DUI driver to be impounded for 12 hours, if the driver owns the vehicle. If the vehicle belongs to another owner, the owner may come pick up the car.
This bill aims to prevent a situation where a DUI driver could get back on the road hours after an arrest. Instead, the driver will have to wait until the next day at least to pick up the car. The fee to pick up the car can be high, which may serve as a deterrent to driving under the influence. Further, impound fees in other areas go toward combatting drunk driving through law enforcement funding.
Source
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Arizona DPS officer cited in Tucson for extreme DUI
An Arizona Department of Public Safety officer has been arrested on suspicion of extreme DUI.
Theodore Edwards, 44, was not on duty at the time and he was in a privately-owned vehicle, said Sgt. Fabian Pacheco, a Tucson Police Department spokesman.
Edwards was arrested Sunday after a couple noticed him having a hard time getting into his vehicle in the Park Place parking lot, Pacheco said.As Edwards was backing his vehicle out, he nearly struck the couple’s car, they told police.
The couple followed Edwards as he headed south on Wilmot Road, traveling at a high rate of speed and nearly striking a median several times, Pacheco said.
They called police when Edwards pulled into the drive through of a Taco Bell at East 22nd Street and Wilmot.
Officers responded to the Taco Bell around 9:40 p.m. and made contact with Edwards who was still in the drive through, Pacheco said.
They conducted a DUI investigation and cited Edwards on suspicion of DUI, DUI with a BAC above .08 and extreme DUI.
He was released to his DPS supervisor who was called to the scene, Pacheco said.
His vehicle — a white Ford Expedition — was impounded.
By law, the legal limit is .08. A charge of extreme DUI is imposed when a person has a BAC of .15 or greater.
Tucson police declined to release what Edwards BAC was.
Source
Theodore Edwards, 44, was not on duty at the time and he was in a privately-owned vehicle, said Sgt. Fabian Pacheco, a Tucson Police Department spokesman.
Edwards was arrested Sunday after a couple noticed him having a hard time getting into his vehicle in the Park Place parking lot, Pacheco said.As Edwards was backing his vehicle out, he nearly struck the couple’s car, they told police.
The couple followed Edwards as he headed south on Wilmot Road, traveling at a high rate of speed and nearly striking a median several times, Pacheco said.
They called police when Edwards pulled into the drive through of a Taco Bell at East 22nd Street and Wilmot.
Officers responded to the Taco Bell around 9:40 p.m. and made contact with Edwards who was still in the drive through, Pacheco said.
They conducted a DUI investigation and cited Edwards on suspicion of DUI, DUI with a BAC above .08 and extreme DUI.
He was released to his DPS supervisor who was called to the scene, Pacheco said.
His vehicle — a white Ford Expedition — was impounded.
By law, the legal limit is .08. A charge of extreme DUI is imposed when a person has a BAC of .15 or greater.
Tucson police declined to release what Edwards BAC was.
Source
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Off-duty Arizona DPS officer cited for DUI
TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) - Authorities say an Arizona Department of Public Safety officer has been arrested in Tucson on suspicion of extreme DUI.
Tucson police say 44-year-old Theodore Edwards was not on duty at the time and he was in a privately-owned vehicle.
Police say Edwards was arrested Sunday night after a couple noticed he was having a hard time getting into his vehicle in the Park Place parking lot and called police when they saw him drive erratically.
Police caught up with Edwards at a fast-food restaurant, conducted a DUI investigation and cited Edwards on suspicion of DUI, DUI with a blood-alcohol content above the state's legal limit of .08 and extreme DUI.
Police declined to release what Edwards' blood-alcohol content was but say he was released to his DPS supervisor who was called to the scene.
Source
Tucson police say 44-year-old Theodore Edwards was not on duty at the time and he was in a privately-owned vehicle.
Police say Edwards was arrested Sunday night after a couple noticed he was having a hard time getting into his vehicle in the Park Place parking lot and called police when they saw him drive erratically.
Police caught up with Edwards at a fast-food restaurant, conducted a DUI investigation and cited Edwards on suspicion of DUI, DUI with a blood-alcohol content above the state's legal limit of .08 and extreme DUI.
Police declined to release what Edwards' blood-alcohol content was but say he was released to his DPS supervisor who was called to the scene.
Source
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Arizona DUI task force update
Phoenix, AZ - As of early saturday morning the new Arizona DUI task force efforts that are scheduled to last through September 7, 2009 had netted 120 DUI arrests statewide.
Police agencies throughout Arizona, including Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tucson are participating in the efforts, which include DUI checkpoints and saturation patrols.
Throughout the state they made 700 stops. Of the 120 DUI arrests, there were 12 felony DUIs and 115 misdemeanors. There were also 13 minors arrested.
"This time of year police agencies in Arizona pool their resources towards DUI enforcement," said Arizona DUI lawyer Stewart Bergman, whose practice in Scottsdale focuses on defending people accused of DUI throughout the greater Phoenix area. "It is not unusual to see a Gilbert Police Officer patrolling in Scottsdale, or a Scottsdale Officer working in Glendale or Phoenix."
While the pooling of police resources makes it easier for law enforcement to concentrate on any given area in the state, it can create logistical problems.
"After a large task force event, you might see a DUI case charged in Scottsdale Municipal Court because the arrest was made there. But then you have a Gilbert Police Officer who made the stop and took a blood sample. Gilbert sends their blood samples to the Chandler Crime Lab for analysis. So you end up with a prosecutor's office like Scottsdale using Chandler and Gilbert city witnesses in the prosecution."
The logistical difficulties of getting several law enforcement agencies to cooperate and coordinate during a DUI prosecution can provide an advantage to the defense, especially when the DUI defense attorney is on top of the situation and make appropriate and frequent requests for discovery. Because of the administrative slowdowns, there is often times more opportunity to get favorable deals.
"It is never worth it to drink and then drive in Arizona," says Bergman, "because we see cases getting charged where the person is well under the legal limit."
Under Arizona DUI Law, the police can charge a person with being impaired to the slightest degree even if the person is well under the legal limit of 0.08 percent body alcohol concentration. And prosecutors are capable of getting convictions for DUI when the persons alcohol level is as low as a 0.06, or 75 percent of the legal limit.
"Task force events are about more than pure public safety," explained Bergman. "They are about numbers, and between and within some police departments, they may even be about competition. Because of this, even if you know you are okay to drive but have had drinks, if you can find another way to get home it is a cheap insurance plan against getting a DUI."
A first offense Arizona DUI can carry up to a minimum of 45 days in jail, depending on the alcohol level, and comes with loss of driving privileges, ignition interlock devices and heavy fines.
Source
Police agencies throughout Arizona, including Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tucson are participating in the efforts, which include DUI checkpoints and saturation patrols.
Throughout the state they made 700 stops. Of the 120 DUI arrests, there were 12 felony DUIs and 115 misdemeanors. There were also 13 minors arrested.
"This time of year police agencies in Arizona pool their resources towards DUI enforcement," said Arizona DUI lawyer Stewart Bergman, whose practice in Scottsdale focuses on defending people accused of DUI throughout the greater Phoenix area. "It is not unusual to see a Gilbert Police Officer patrolling in Scottsdale, or a Scottsdale Officer working in Glendale or Phoenix."
While the pooling of police resources makes it easier for law enforcement to concentrate on any given area in the state, it can create logistical problems.
"After a large task force event, you might see a DUI case charged in Scottsdale Municipal Court because the arrest was made there. But then you have a Gilbert Police Officer who made the stop and took a blood sample. Gilbert sends their blood samples to the Chandler Crime Lab for analysis. So you end up with a prosecutor's office like Scottsdale using Chandler and Gilbert city witnesses in the prosecution."
The logistical difficulties of getting several law enforcement agencies to cooperate and coordinate during a DUI prosecution can provide an advantage to the defense, especially when the DUI defense attorney is on top of the situation and make appropriate and frequent requests for discovery. Because of the administrative slowdowns, there is often times more opportunity to get favorable deals.
"It is never worth it to drink and then drive in Arizona," says Bergman, "because we see cases getting charged where the person is well under the legal limit."
Under Arizona DUI Law, the police can charge a person with being impaired to the slightest degree even if the person is well under the legal limit of 0.08 percent body alcohol concentration. And prosecutors are capable of getting convictions for DUI when the persons alcohol level is as low as a 0.06, or 75 percent of the legal limit.
"Task force events are about more than pure public safety," explained Bergman. "They are about numbers, and between and within some police departments, they may even be about competition. Because of this, even if you know you are okay to drive but have had drinks, if you can find another way to get home it is a cheap insurance plan against getting a DUI."
A first offense Arizona DUI can carry up to a minimum of 45 days in jail, depending on the alcohol level, and comes with loss of driving privileges, ignition interlock devices and heavy fines.
Source
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
More than 1,100 arrested in Arizona anti-DUI effort
More than 1,100 arrests were made during a statewide DUI task force that wrapped up Monday, according to the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety.
The 18-day task force began Aug. 21 and resulted in 1,136 arrests for suspicion of DUI, including 49 on Monday, according to a news release issued by the state agency.
About 34 percent arrests made during the task force for were suspicion of extreme DUI, which means the person’s blood-alcohol content was 0.15 or higher, the release said. The legal limit in Arizona is 0.08.Additionally, 375 citations were issued for underage consumption of alcohol, and another 185 DUI drug citations were issued, the release said.
Source
The 18-day task force began Aug. 21 and resulted in 1,136 arrests for suspicion of DUI, including 49 on Monday, according to a news release issued by the state agency.
About 34 percent arrests made during the task force for were suspicion of extreme DUI, which means the person’s blood-alcohol content was 0.15 or higher, the release said. The legal limit in Arizona is 0.08.Additionally, 375 citations were issued for underage consumption of alcohol, and another 185 DUI drug citations were issued, the release said.
Source
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Smoking, DUI laws reduce demand for liquor licenses
PHOENIX — Nearly five years ago, lobbyists for Arizona's liquor industry succeeded in convincing lawmakers that there was a pent-up demand for hundreds of new liquor licenses.
But in the first four years after the law passed in 2005, just 151 new licenses were issued to liquor stores, bars and restaurants, according to a state audit report. That's less than a third of the number expected.
Liquor industry officials cite a tough business climate and the ongoing recession, a recent crackdown on DUI offenders and a new statewide ban on smoking in bars and other public places.
"All these things have had an effect," said Bill Weigele, president of the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association. "The marketplace has changed."
In fact, the sales price for existing licenses has dropped in recent years, with prices for a bar license in the Phoenix area slipping from $100,000 to $85,000 or $90,000, he said.
The 2005 law included a four-tier system for allotting a total of 120 additional licenses a year to counties based on their populations. The allotments ranged from 30 annually for Maricopa County, which includes most of the Phoenix area, to three for each of seven counties with populations less than 100,000.
Arizona hadn't awarded licenses since the late 1980s before the 2005 law passed. That was largely because holders of existing licenses didn't want to diminish their resale value.
Resistance from some local governments also proved to be a factor.
"It was thought that we should put some more out there to relieve the (cost) pressure," said Jerry A. Oliver Sr., director of the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
The new allotments did help make licenses more affordable "for a little guy," partly because the state doesn't charge commissions on its sales, according to Oliver.
He said brokers began lowering prices on resale licenses in response, reducing interest in the new ones being issued by the state.
And the recession began taking its toll on overall demand.
"There was some disappointment. We thought we'd do better," Oliver acknowledged.
The new licenses were expected to produce approximately $6.3 million of new state revenue annually, according to a 2005 legislative staff memo.
However, a recent state audit report says the amount actually generated in the four fiscal years that ended June 30 totaled about $15.6 million.
The fixed annual allotments go away in 2010, replaced under the 2005 law by a formula keyed to population growth.
Weigele, a real estate broker specializing in bars and restaurants, said he doesn't expect demand for liquor licenses to increase much.
Even before the recession hit, Arizona's 2007 law requiring first-time DUI offenders to install breath-test devices on their vehicles "was a killer" that keeps many casual drinkers home, Weigele said. A voter-approved ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places took effect in 2007.
"There's not going to be the demand there was previously," he said.
"We're on the road to becoming a dinosaur. There are just too many reasons.
Oliver, who is active in an association of state liquor regulators, said Arizona "is probably in worse shape" on interest in new liquor licenses than other states because of its stringent DUI laws, the smoking ban and other factors.
"I think it's going to be a while for us to turn it around here," he said.
Source
But in the first four years after the law passed in 2005, just 151 new licenses were issued to liquor stores, bars and restaurants, according to a state audit report. That's less than a third of the number expected.
Liquor industry officials cite a tough business climate and the ongoing recession, a recent crackdown on DUI offenders and a new statewide ban on smoking in bars and other public places.
"All these things have had an effect," said Bill Weigele, president of the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association. "The marketplace has changed."
In fact, the sales price for existing licenses has dropped in recent years, with prices for a bar license in the Phoenix area slipping from $100,000 to $85,000 or $90,000, he said.
The 2005 law included a four-tier system for allotting a total of 120 additional licenses a year to counties based on their populations. The allotments ranged from 30 annually for Maricopa County, which includes most of the Phoenix area, to three for each of seven counties with populations less than 100,000.
Arizona hadn't awarded licenses since the late 1980s before the 2005 law passed. That was largely because holders of existing licenses didn't want to diminish their resale value.
Resistance from some local governments also proved to be a factor.
"It was thought that we should put some more out there to relieve the (cost) pressure," said Jerry A. Oliver Sr., director of the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
The new allotments did help make licenses more affordable "for a little guy," partly because the state doesn't charge commissions on its sales, according to Oliver.
He said brokers began lowering prices on resale licenses in response, reducing interest in the new ones being issued by the state.
And the recession began taking its toll on overall demand.
"There was some disappointment. We thought we'd do better," Oliver acknowledged.
The new licenses were expected to produce approximately $6.3 million of new state revenue annually, according to a 2005 legislative staff memo.
However, a recent state audit report says the amount actually generated in the four fiscal years that ended June 30 totaled about $15.6 million.
The fixed annual allotments go away in 2010, replaced under the 2005 law by a formula keyed to population growth.
Weigele, a real estate broker specializing in bars and restaurants, said he doesn't expect demand for liquor licenses to increase much.
Even before the recession hit, Arizona's 2007 law requiring first-time DUI offenders to install breath-test devices on their vehicles "was a killer" that keeps many casual drinkers home, Weigele said. A voter-approved ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places took effect in 2007.
"There's not going to be the demand there was previously," he said.
"We're on the road to becoming a dinosaur. There are just too many reasons.
Oliver, who is active in an association of state liquor regulators, said Arizona "is probably in worse shape" on interest in new liquor licenses than other states because of its stringent DUI laws, the smoking ban and other factors.
"I think it's going to be a while for us to turn it around here," he said.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)