NJSP Troopers to get daily MADD propaganda before starting their shifts

[TurboDan]

I don't know how much lawyers charge for DWI cases, but $10K seems wayyyy over the top. New Jersey's fines are about $500 for first time, but then they add a bunch of surcharges on that jacks it up to about $2-3K. In New Jersey, however, nobody walks away from a first-time offense without a license suspension. BAC .08-.10 is a 3-month suspension and above .10 is 7-month suspension. That is mandatory as it's written in the statute and there's no way anyone walks away without a suspension of some sort.

While I know a lot of people in LE may disagree with me, I don't like how some of these laws have been applied in New Jersey. We've had a number of lame DWI arrests, including people on lawn mowers who were on the sidewalk rather than their own grass, kayakers/canoers and the infamous offense of "sleeping one off" in your car and getting hooked up for DWI. I know a girl personally who was sleeping in her car after a party and got arrested. Engine was off, but she was sleeping in the driver's seat. In New Jersey, if you are in the back seat and toss the keys so they're not within reach, you'll beat the rap, but if you're in the driver's seat and have ready access, you're going to jail.

Also, we've talked about this before but... there IS a law in New Jersey that says one CAN be charged with DWI if you are drunk while sitting in a tube being pulled by a motor vehicle (a boat). According to the NJSP Marine Division Sgt. I asked about this, he knows of nobody who's ever been arrested for it, but it's on the books. In all honesty, I think I kind of alerted him to the law when I asked the question. There was probably some drunk azzwipe this summer who mouthed off to an officer while in his tube and got hauled in for it. 

[Tave]

Ahahahahahaaaa! 2-5 grand for a first offense DUI in fines only? Bullshit! A first offense DUI in my county (assuming that it isn't pled down) might run you $200-400 total...the high end being if you severely piss off the judge.

Arizona: $1,460 in fines for the first offense, plus interlock charge, plus lawyer, plus increase in insurance (plus minimum 1-10 days in jail plus 3 month-year license suspension), plus cost of probation, plus lost wages, plus anything else I'm not thinking of.

http://dui.drivinglaws.org/arizona.php

Arizona first DUI (extreme): $3,400 fine

I'd like to see where a first offense DUI will cost anybody $10,000. It wouldn't cost that for a FELONY DUI in my area!

OK

Most of the people I know who've had a DUI said it cost them a couple grand to the court alone, plus all the extra stuff.

[NomisR]

Nah - drunks don't only drink in bars; they do most of their drinking at home.

Drunks stay home?  You mean in Nagoya, there's no business culture of going to dinner and drink, and then going to bars to drink.. and then going to karoekes to drink more till late at night?   I guess it's different from the rest of Japan then..

[bing_oh]

Arizona: $1,460 in fines for the first offense, plus interlock charge, plus lawyer, plus increase in insurance (plus minimum 1-10 days in jail plus 3 month-year license suspension), plus cost of probation, plus anything else I'm not thinking of.

http://dui.drivinglaws.org/arizona.php

The interlock isn't a given, nor are the lawyer costs considering you're quoting the full cost in Arizona. And, I can say with certainty that Arizona appears to have a rather high fine rate for DUI's.

OK

Most of the people I know who've had a DUI said it cost them a couple grand to the court alone, plus all the extra stuff.

Well, I can say that it's definitely not that way in my area. I get the dispositions from all the DUI's I arrest, which include the full cost to the court, and I can't recall even seeing one over a few hundred dollars.

[bing_oh]

While I know a lot of people in LE may disagree with me, I don't like how some of these laws have been applied in New Jersey. We've had a number of lame DWI arrests, including people on lawn mowers who were on the sidewalk rather than their own grass, kayakers/canoers and the infamous offense of "sleeping one off" in your car and getting hooked up for DWI. I know a girl personally who was sleeping in her car after a party and got arrested. Engine was off, but she was sleeping in the driver's seat. In New Jersey, if you are in the back seat and toss the keys so they're not within reach, you'll beat the rap, but if you're in the driver's seat and have ready access, you're going to jail.

Ohio DUI law was rewritten awhile back to include non-motorized vehicles. While it sounds ludecrous to include bicycles and rollerblades in DUI laws, it really does make sense after you see a drunk peddling down the middle of a busy roadway doing his best to cause as many crashes as he can. I've also seen people on lawnmowers and motorized wheelchairs who were intoxicated and causing a serious hazard on the road.

As for the people "sleeping it off" in their cars, we have a separate statute for that in Ohio...physical control. The penalties aren't as strict as they are for DUI. Again, the law is there for a legitimate reason...drunks who "sleep it off" in their vehicles usually do so for a couple hours at the most, not long enough to actually be legal to drive. So, physical control is more of a preventative law to discourage people from taking a catnap in their cars after a long night of drinking and then driving away thinking that they're good to go.

[NomisR]

Ohio DUI law was rewritten awhile back to include non-motorized vehicles. While it sounds ludecrous to include bicycles and rollerblades in DUI laws, it really does make sense after you see a drunk peddling down the middle of a busy roadway doing his best to cause as many crashes as he can. I've also seen people on lawnmowers and motorized wheelchairs who were intoxicated and causing a serious hazard on the road.

As for the people "sleeping it off" in their cars, we have a separate statute for that in Ohio...physical control. The penalties aren't as strict as they are for DUI. Again, the law is there for a legitimate reason...drunks who "sleep it off" in their vehicles usually do so for a couple hours at the most, not long enough to actually be legal to drive. So, physical control is more of a preventative law to discourage people from taking a catnap in their cars after a long night of drinking and then driving away thinking that they're good to go.

But wouldn't a a few hours between the last drink typically make the person more in control compared to immediately after the drink as the body processes some of the alcohol already? 

[J86]

Ahahahahahaaaa! 2-5 grand for a first offense DUI in fines only? Bullshit! A first offense DUI in my county (assuming that it isn't pled down) might run you $200-400 total...the high end being if you severely piss off the judge.

I'd like to see where a first offense DUI will cost anybody $10,000. It wouldn't cost that for a FELONY DUI in my area!

Never looked into it, but the Ontario County Sheriff's Department (NY) ran billboards last year claiming a DUI would cost you $10 grand.  Never read the fine print...

[MaxPower]

Never looked into it, but the Ontario County Sheriff's Department (NY) ran billboards last year claiming a DUI would cost you $10 grand.  Never read the fine print...

Scare tactics aimed at idiots, unless their fines are really high.  I deal with it weekly - $500 fine plus 20% surcharge.  DUI defense is so common I'm sure its a fixed fee, and I'm guessing that it's around $5k to take it all the way through trial.  But, for most first offenses, what the hell is a lawyer really going to do for you?  Unless you're a criminal already you're probably going to get the mandatory minimum on your own.  It's a waste of money.  Cops don't screw up that often.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Scare tactics aimed at idiots, unless their fines are really high.  I deal with it weekly - $500 fine plus 20% surcharge.  DUI defense is so common I'm sure its a fixed fee, and I'm guessing that it's around $5k to take it all the way through trial.  But, for most first offenses, what the hell is a lawyer really going to do for you?  Unless you're a criminal already you're probably going to get the mandatory minimum on your own.  It's a waste of money.  Cops don't screw up that often.

Ever think of calling a cab? 

[MaxPower]

Ever think of calling a cab? 

nah, its more fun my way 

[Eye of the Tiger]

nah, its more fun my way 

[propaganda]

If you drink, guard rails will jump out in front of your car and do this:




[/propaganda]

[Tave]

Is that an Aveo?

[J86]

Scare tactics aimed at idiots, unless their fines are really high.  I deal with it weekly - $500 fine plus 20% surcharge.  DUI defense is so common I'm sure its a fixed fee, and I'm guessing that it's around $5k to take it all the way through trial.  But, for most first offenses, what the hell is a lawyer really going to do for you?  Unless you're a criminal already you're probably going to get the mandatory minimum on your own.  It's a waste of money.  Cops don't screw up that often.

I'm sure you're right, just figured they had some way to ratchet the cost up if they wanted to...

[Eye of the Tiger]

Is that an Aveo?

Not anymore 

[James Young]

[propaganda]

If you drink, guard rails will jump out in front of your car and do this:




[/propaganda]

How do we know that was not a driver who fell asleep and ran off the road?

[Eye of the Tiger]

How do we know that was not a driver who fell asleep and ran off the road?

Because the guard rail jumped out in front of them. It could have happened to anybody.

[TurboDan]

Ohio DUI law was rewritten awhile back to include non-motorized vehicles. While it sounds ludecrous to include bicycles and rollerblades in DUI laws, it really does make sense after you see a drunk peddling down the middle of a busy roadway doing his best to cause as many crashes as he can. I've also seen people on lawnmowers and motorized wheelchairs who were intoxicated and causing a serious hazard on the road.

As for the people "sleeping it off" in their cars, we have a separate statute for that in Ohio...physical control. The penalties aren't as strict as they are for DUI. Again, the law is there for a legitimate reason...drunks who "sleep it off" in their vehicles usually do so for a couple hours at the most, not long enough to actually be legal to drive. So, physical control is more of a preventative law to discourage people from taking a catnap in their cars after a long night of drinking and then driving away thinking that they're good to go.

Makes sense. I do agree on the bicycles. As long as you're not acting completely stupid, I doubt many LEOs in this area would waste their time with it. But if you're peddling down a main road and weaving in and out of lanes of traffic with cars zipping by, all bets are off. As for the lawnmowers, I'm not sure WHY one would be driving their lawnmower in a public street, but if they're causing a danger it seems reasonable to lock them up. Now... I'll never give you the "guy being pulled in a tube" one, though. 

I definitely understand the "sleeping it off" one as well. It's legit, and there's no way to tell who honestly would stay in their vehicle all night and who would take off in a few hours. Still, it must really suck to get hooked for DWI when you weren't actually driving a vehicle.  But from what I understand, if someone is in this position, laying in the back and tossing the keys somewhere outside the vehicle is the best bet.

Effectively, ALL of these problems could simply be solved by calling a cab.... but whatever.

[r0tor]

as my friend who got caught at a .09BAC... the fine was ~$300 and the ADR program was ~$1500 plus add in some lawyer fees and lost work

[bing_oh]

But wouldn't a a few hours between the last drink typically make the person more in control compared to immediately after the drink as the body processes some of the alcohol already?

That depends on how long afterwards. For a period afterwards, youd BAC actually increases as the alcohol is absorbed through the stomach and small intestines and enters the bloodstream. Eventually, your BAC will start to drop, but it drops at a pretty consistant rate of .015 BAC per hour for someone with a normal liver function. That's not a very quick drop in BAC and it could take some time to get below the legal limit, especially if the person is drunk enough to want to "sleep it off" in their vehicle before driving.

[omicron]

While I know a lot of people in LE may disagree with me, I don't like how some of these laws have been applied in New Jersey. We've had a number of lame DWI arrests, including people on lawn mowers who were on the sidewalk rather than their own grass, kayakers/canoers and the infamous offense of "sleeping one off" in your car and getting hooked up for DWI. I know a girl personally who was sleeping in her car after a party and got arrested. Engine was off, but she was sleeping in the driver's seat. In New Jersey, if you are in the back seat and toss the keys so they're not within reach, you'll beat the rap, but if you're in the driver's seat and have ready access, you're going to jail.

That does raise an interesting question as to the legal definition of 'driver'. There was a unique case here earlier in the year:

SOUTH Australian judge has grappled with legal precedents of what makes a person a driver in deciding that a passenger, found guilty by a magistrate of driving offences after an unusual car accident, should be acquitted.
Adelaide man Lee Harvey went to the Supreme Court this month to appeal against being found guilty of drink driving, driving while disqualified, driving an uninsured motor vehicle and driving an unregistered vehicle.

The court heard Mr Harvey was the front-seat passenger of a car, driven by a friend, that had stopped at a petrol station in Morphett Vale, in Adelaide's south, in May last year.

While the friend was paying for fuel, Mr Harvey, while still wearing his seat belt, leaned over to close the driver's door and tried to turn the radio on.

But he turned the key too far and the car, a Fiesta, which was in gear, jerked forward and started moving slowly, causing Mr Harvey to panic and take the wheel to try to steer away from the service station shop.

The car hit the metal frame of the console operator's window. Judge Richard White was asked to decide whether Mr Harvey was actually driving.

He said in his recently delivered judgment that while the word "drive" and related words were commonly used, "the courts have not been able to develop a single test with which to determine whether a person was driving a vehicle".

He canvassed cases that included steering a vehicle while being towed; a passenger with hands on the steering wheel and who could reach the clutch and brake; a person guiding a motorbike down a hill without its motor running while sitting side-saddle; and someone pushing a motorbike and getting on and off while trying a jump start.

Justice White said while Mr Harvey had exercised some control on the vehicle, he remained seat-belted in the passenger seat and could not operate the clutch, footbrake or accelerator: "In these circumstances it does not seem apt, using the ordinary meaning of the word 'drive', to describe the appellant as the driver of the Fiesta."

Justice White directed that Mr Harvey be acquitted of the charges

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/driver-in-passenger-seat-acquitted/story-e6frg97x-1225781382352