DUI enforcement and laws - why no standardization? (insurance, biggest, drivers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was arrested and charged with DUI last September. I probably had eight to ten beers over a six or seven hour period. I was pulled over at a service station at 1:00 AM while trying to get gas for going in the "truck" entrance instead of the main passenger car entrance. There were no signs prohibiting passenger car entry on that side of the station, and the car entrance is off a side street that is difficult to see. Refused FSTs, was taken for a blood draw (no breathalyzer), then hauled to the county jail. It was probably two to three hours between my last drink and the blood draw. I posted bond and got my car about twelve hours later.
TN assesses a $250 fee against those convicted of DUI. A case was filed against the state that the fee basically amounts to the state having a direct financial interest in convicting the accused. The criminal court of appeals says the fee is unconstitutional due to the apparent financial interest, and the state appealed to the Supreme Court. The outcome is TBD.
I went to my third court appearance after arraignment yesterday. My attorney was able to get my case, and three similar DUI cases he was representing, dismissed with prejudice. I still have no idea what my BAC even was.
After three rounds of general sessions and probably seeing several dozen DUI-related pleas, I don't remember anyone getting more than an absolute minimum sentence, and that's if they pled to DUI to begin with. The DA and judge accepted a disorderly conduct plea yesterday from a DUI charge. $20 fine plus costs. Some short period of unsupervised probation. A kid that got a DUI over the weekend and was there for arraignment just resolved it with a guilty plea to DUI, signed up for probation, got minimums, and was out of there in two hours. If you have an attorney, you're probably getting it pled down to reckless driving. It looked like people using the public defender were also mostly getting wet reckless. I never saw the judge turn down any alcohol plea. The judge/county don't seem to take DUIs or alcohol infractions seriously at all. Someone got a public intoxication and was fined $10.
Keep in mind this is a very conservative, rural county with an absolutely massive drug and identity theft problem. They apparently don't publicly publish mugshots. Even if you Google "<my name> DUI" - you won't find a mugshot or even the docket. If you throw the county name in there, you get the name on the docket, but no mugshot. I thought they would be extremely tough. What was actually getting doled out were as follows. I'm assuming no injury or significant property damage.
$350 fine plus costs. Close to $1,000 total.
48 hour jail time less time served. It's a weekend deal and they give you a month to report in. You select the weekend.
License "suspension" for a year. The truth is that you get an interlock, the judge rubberstamps it, and you're free to drive that interlocked car anywhere. The interlock is about $1,000 for a year. You could do no interlock with restrictions to work and court. I didn't see anyone interested in that.
Probation for a year. Supervised until you pay fines and court costs. Unsupervised after that. You could probably pay for it then and there and never be on supervised probation.
Chattanooga is pretty relaxed on DUIs. Most get pled down to wet reckless from what I hear. Cross the line into GA, and that first DUI is a minimum of ten days.
TN is middle of the road in terms of enforcement. GA is rough. A friend of mine got a DUI in our home county, and really screwed him up for awhile, though he had other charges in the incident as well. You could get a lenient judge like I did, or a hard ass throwing the books at people. So much of the outcome seems to be largely out of the control of the accused.
Shouldn't there be more standardization of these laws?
I was arrested and charged with DUI last September. I probably had eight to ten beers over a six or seven hour period. I was pulled over at a service station at 1:00 AM while trying to get gas for going in the "truck" entrance instead of the main passenger car entrance. There were no signs prohibiting passenger car entry on that side of the station, and the car entrance is off a side street that is difficult to see. Refused FSTs, was taken for a blood draw (no breathalyzer), then hauled to the county jail. It was probably two to three hours between my last drink and the blood draw. I posted bond and got my car about twelve hours later.
TN assesses a $250 fee against those convicted of DUI. A case was filed against the state that the fee basically amounts to the state having a direct financial interest in convicting the accused. The criminal court of appeals says the fee is unconstitutional due to the apparent financial interest, and the state appealed to the Supreme Court. The outcome is TBD.
I went to my third court appearance after arraignment yesterday. My attorney was able to get my case, and three similar DUI cases he was representing, dismissed with prejudice. I still have no idea what my BAC even was.
After three rounds of general sessions and probably seeing several dozen DUI-related pleas, I don't remember anyone getting more than an absolute minimum sentence, and that's if they pled to DUI to begin with. The DA and judge accepted a disorderly conduct plea yesterday from a DUI charge. $20 fine plus costs. Some short period of unsupervised probation. A kid that got a DUI over the weekend and was there for arraignment just resolved it with a guilty plea to DUI, signed up for probation, got minimums, and was out of there in two hours. If you have an attorney, you're probably getting it pled down to reckless driving. It looked like people using the public defender were also mostly getting wet reckless. I never saw the judge turn down any alcohol plea. The judge/county don't seem to take DUIs or alcohol infractions seriously at all. Someone got a public intoxication and was fined $10.
Keep in mind this is a very conservative, rural county with an absolutely massive drug and identity theft problem. They apparently don't publicly publish mugshots. Even if you Google "<my name> DUI" - you won't find a mugshot or even the docket. If you throw the county name in there, you get the name on the docket, but no mugshot. I thought they would be extremely tough. What was actually getting doled out were as follows. I'm assuming no injury or significant property damage.
$350 fine plus costs. Close to $1,000 total.
48 hour jail time less time served. It's a weekend deal and they give you a month to report in. You select the weekend.
License "suspension" for a year. The truth is that you get an interlock, the judge rubberstamps it, and you're free to drive that interlocked car anywhere. The interlock is about $1,000 for a year. You could do no interlock with restrictions to work and court. I didn't see anyone interested in that.
Probation for a year. Supervised until you pay fines and court costs. Unsupervised after that. You could probably pay for it then and there and never be on supervised probation.
Chattanooga is pretty relaxed on DUIs. Most get pled down to wet reckless from what I hear. Cross the line into GA, and that first DUI is a minimum of ten days.
TN is middle of the road in terms of enforcement. GA is rough. A friend of mine got a DUI in our home county, and really screwed him up for awhile, though he had other charges in the incident as well. You could get a lenient judge like I did, or a hard ass throwing the books at people. So much of the outcome seems to be largely out of the control of the accused.
Shouldn't there be more standardization of these laws?
I don't think so. It's one of those things that American's dislike, the federal government sticking their nose into local matters.
Heck, even some counties within states vary widely. It depends what the priorities and scourges are in the area, and they vary a lot, too.
People on the internet like to paint in black and white. But, the truth is that someone that drives drunk in Atlanta vs someone that drives drunk in the Dakota's where there is no one around, takes a different level of risk.
Federal government really has no constitutional right to make laws like that... although they could find a way around it if they wanted to badly enough, just like they did with the 55 mph speed limit, just like they did with age 21 being the minimum for legally drinking, or 18 the minimum for tobacco use, etc., etc.
Truth is, insurance rates and possible of loss of driver's license is the biggest deterrent. Shouldn't be. The chance of killing someone, what the laws are made to prevent, should be deterrent enough.
I dont like how the state puts out public announcements about drinking and driving, the last one i saw, had a bunch of young people out partying and then walking toward their car, the cop was sort of cloaked in the background, the idea was they will see you before you see them if you drink drive.
They try to make everyone think they doing this for OUR safety, to protect US on the roads, but thats not true at all!!! If they were THAT concerned about DUIs, they would target access to alcohol and enact very tough laws on its distribution and sale.
Its strange we dont hear much from MADD or SADD these days, they had a a pretty strong voice a few years back, Im not sure if they are still around, but its strange they never targeted the alcohol companies, and/or access to alcohol, whenever a substance starts causing problems or impacting health and safety, usually Govt targets access right off the bat...some years ago, people started overdosing on opioid drugs, and going to the ER, govt came right in and targeted access, so they were tough to obtain legally, not sure why they would use this tactic with one substance but not another?
Federal government really has no constitutional right to make laws like that... although they could find a way around it if they wanted to badly enough, just like they did with the 55 mph speed limit, just like they did with age 21 being the minimum for legally drinking, or 18 the minimum for tobacco use, etc., etc.
Truth is, insurance rates and possible of loss of driver's license is the biggest deterrent. Shouldn't be. The chance of killing someone, what the laws are made to prevent, should be deterrent enough.
the 55mph speed limit was not really a federal law. they forced the states to institute the speed limit or lose federal highway funds. so the feds strong armed the states into setting a55mph speed limit.
same with the drinking age and smoking age as well. they are all state laws, not federal. thus the feds did not violate the constitution.
Shouldn't there be more standardization of these laws?
Yes. Every person who drinks and drives should be jailed, period. No trial, no lawyers, no nothing. Automatic jail time. AFAIC, they should be made to visit the graves of those killed by drunk drivers and keep them maintained. Drunk drivers are the scum of the earth on my opinion.
Last edited by UpstateJohn; 07-30-2018 at 05:33 AM..
Yes. Every person who drinks and drives should be jailed, period. No trial, no lawyers, no nothing. Automatic jail time. AFAIC, they should be made to visit the graves of those killed by drunk drivers and keep them maintained. Drunk drivers are the scum of the earth on my opinion.
While I agree with you, keep in mind the "system" is exactly as the OP states......a money grab. So I don't support DD but at the same time I certainly don't support a flawed system either.
If the OP is 250 lbs and had 8 light beers over 6-7 hours, then a 3 hour break then there is little chance he/she was intoxicated. The tests are designed for you to fail. 9am right now, go out and try to walk a straight line heel/toe with your arms outstretched, then recite the alphabet backwards......bet you fail atleast one if not both of those tests. The OP was out at 1 am (strike one), turned into the gas station through the wrong entrance (strike 2) and the cop was looking to arrest someone (strike 3). Remove the first two situations and the OP would have gone home that night.
A good friend has gotten 4 DUI's over about a 25 yr period. First 2 were in the 80's when the DUI stops were less than uniform. He grew up in a small town where the local cops would make you pour out your beers and let you get a ride home. Laws changed (his behavior didn't) so the arrests followed. Next up was a Ft Lauderdale arrest 8-10 years later after a parallel parked car pulled out in front of him (parked car driver got a ticket for causing the accident, my buddy got arrested). Ten years later he got into another accident (he was cited), I didn't get all the details but he did 30 days in county jail, no license for 5 years. After the 3rd arrest he attended DUI school, they basically tell you the system is designed for you to fail, it feeds money to the local govts, the lawyers get paid.......They stand in the front of the class room and scream: "SYSTEM IS DESIGNED FOR YOU TO FAIL, SO TO WIN.....DONT PLAY THE GAME!" I got enough out of hearing about that speech that I choose not to play the game.
My buddy is a nice guy, but he is a bar patron who will sit and drink beer for 3-4-5 hours. I am not a bar patron, I don't socialize in that setting regularly. Literally everyone that is sitting or working in that bar setting for long periods is probably driving home DUI. The cops could literally set up out front and arrest everyone. So if safer roads were the goal, why don't the cops do that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
