How Does It Work?

Electronic monitoring involves having the DUI offender wear an ankle or wrist bracelet that electronically monitors the individual’s whereabouts while under some form of house arrest. The device sends a signal to a computer either at the probation office or to a monitoring contractor. The signal indicates whether or not the DUI offender is in compliance with the terms of the probation.

Some electronic monitoring alternatives require DUI offenders to respond to periodic phone calls in order to insure that they are in compliance with the house arrest.  Other alternatives sometimes involve the use of global positioning systems (GPS) that monitor and record whether or not the individual stays within permitted areas.

Generally, DUI offenders are allowed to continue to go to work, attend school, go grocery shopping, attend court-order alcohol programs, etc., typically during the day, with the requirement that they are at home during the evening when most drunk-driving arrests occur.

If DUI defendants deviate from these specific restrictions, then it is a violation of the terms of their probation, and they will likely have to serve jail time.

Who Is Eligible?

This option is generally offered as a condition of probation and allows those convicted of a drunk driving offense to avoid jail by limiting when and where they can go.

Since only certain drunk-driving offenders are eligible for this alternative, it is imperative to consult with an experienced DUI defense attorney who will explore all of the sentencing alternatives that may be available in a specific case.

Further information about California DUI laws can be found at the California DUI Guide website. Drivers facing a California DUI arrest are also encouraged to contact experienced DUI defense attorney Thomas Wallin for a free consultation.

In fact, an estimated 2.5 million adult drivers with children living in their households reported that they had recently driven while under the influence of alcohol.

This helps explain why more children in the United States are killed in motor vehicle crashes annually than by any other cause, with nearly a quarter of these deaths involving alcohol.

The study, published in the journal Family and Community Health, suggests that many children live with adults who engage in alcohol-impaired driving. According to the CDC, the findings highlight the need for increased use of proven, evidence-based strategies to reduce the number of alcohol-impaired drivers on the roads, including mass media campaigns and sobriety checkpoints.

As evidenced by this study, it is important for adults who transport children to not get behind the wheel if they have been drinking. In addition to the risks of endangering your children and yourself in a DUI-related accident, any driver who is arrested for driving under the influence with children in the car faces enhanced DUI penalties.

Further information about California DUI laws can be found at the California DUI Guide website. Drivers facing a California DUI arrest are also encouraged to contact experienced DUI defense attorney Thomas Wallin for a free consultation.

Statistics confirm that despite a steady decline in fatalities over the past decade, DUI is still prevalent among underage drivers. In 2008, 12 percent of all drivers involved in fatal crashes were young drivers age 15 to 20 years old. More specifically, 5,864 15- to 20-year old drivers were involved in fatal crashes, including 2,739 driver fatalities. Among 15- to 20-year old drivers involved in fatal crashes, 31% of the drivers who were killed had been drinking and 25% who were killed in crashes had a BAC of .08 or higher.

But is lowering the legal drinking age the answer? According to research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the answer is no. The CDC points to two systematic reviews conducted on behalf of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services that provide evidence to refute such claims.

One review assessed the effect of both raising and lowering the drinking age on fatal and nonfatal crashes. Raising the legal drinking age reduced crashes among 18-20 year old drivers by a median of 16%, while lowering the legal drinking age increased crashes among the targeted group by a median of 10%.

Meanwhile, another study assessed the effect of programs to increase enforcement of laws prohibiting the sale of alcohol to minors through the use of retailer compliance checks. As detailed by the CDC, these enhanced enforcement programs reduced sales to underage or youthful-looking decoys by a median of 42%, in both bars and liquor stores.

On the basis of these studies, officials state that enhanced enforcement of laws prohibiting sale of alcohol to minors is really the key to stopping teens from drinking and driving.

Regardless of where you stand on lowering the legal drinking age, most of us can agree that a DUI arrest or DUI-related accident can dramatically impact the future of a young person. Therefore, if your child is facing a DUI conviction, it is imperative to contact an experienced DUI defense attorney as soon as possible.

Further information about California DUI laws affecting underage drivers can be found at the California DUI Guide website. Drivers are also encouraged to contact experienced DUI defense attorney Thomas Wallin for a free consultation.

Below is a brief summary of each test and its reliability.

Breath Testing

Breath testing, generally using a Breathalyzer machine, is by far the most common methods of testing a suspected DUI offender’s BAC. These machines determine a driver’s BAC by analyzing the alcohol content in exhaled vapor. Because Breathalyzers are subject to a number of problems including accuracy, calibration, and maintenance an experienced California DUI defense attorney can often challenge the results in court.

Blood Testing

Blood tests typically provide a more reliable measure of BAC than both breath testing and urine testing.

However, they are not foolproof. In fact, toxicologists will concede that there is a variance of 3 to 10 percent within which one’s actual BAC would likely fall.  This means that if an individual’s BAC is tested at .08%, it could actually have been .05% at the time the individual was driving. Additionally, like all of the other testing procedures, errors often occur during test administration.

Urine Testing

Urine tests are generally only given as an option to those who are suspected of drunk driving when neither the breath nor blood test is available.  The urine test is, however, an option available to the individual who is arrested for driving under the influence of drugs or driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

Urine tests routinely challenged in court due to the wide array of problems associated with them. In general, they are considered the least reliable of the three types of BAC chemical tests used by the police.

Even though urine tests are scientifically based, they are prone to human error and, in administering such tests, strict procedures must be followed. Routinely, police and technicians fail to follow proper procedures, making the test results easily challengeable by California DUI attorneys.

Further information about California DUI laws can be found at the California DUI Guide website. Drivers are also encouraged to contact experienced DUI defense attorney Thomas Wallin for a free consultation.

This is primarily because punishments for driving under the influence vary widely from county to county and state to state. As USA Today notes, “Drunken driving penalties are a lot like real estate values; they depend on location, location, location.”

Here’s a brief look at DUI penalties across the country:

• Alaska, Tennessee and Georgia are among the states that require mandatory jail time for first offenders, locking up first-time DUI offenders for three, two and one day respectively.
• California, Connecticut, and Indiana don’t require jail for first-time DUI offenders.
• In Wisconsin, first-offense drunken driving isn’t even a crime. Rather, it is a civil infraction that results in a ticket.

“There are no set guidelines on this. There’s no national standard on this,” Alex R. Piquero, a criminology professor at the University of Texas-Dallas, told USA Today. “There is a lot of discretion. It’s like a ref on the football field. Everyone holds on every play. Which one is the most egregious of the offense?”

As we noted in an earlier post, research suggests that jail time is not generally the best punishment for first-time offenders convicted of driving under the influence, primarily it hasn’t been shown to be effective in preventing future DUI arrests.

Further information about California DUI penalties can be found at the California DUI Guide website. Drivers are also encouraged to contact experienced DUI defense attorney Thomas Wallin for a free consultation.