By Mannix Porterfield
CHARLESTON — Hoping to rid West Virginia highways of killer drunken drivers, a legislative panel Monday agreed to create a new “aggravated DUI” law for motorists blowing as much as .15 in blood alcohol tests.
In the same package, Judiciary Subcommittee C members decided to abolish the mandatory, 24-hour jail term for first-time offenders under .15 to trim the regional jail costs that are driving some counties to the brink.
And, in a separate bill, pushed by Delegate John Overington, R-Berkeley, the panel agreed to shorten the hours one may imbibe in a West Virginia private club from 3 a.m. to 2 a.m., an attempt to keep out-of-staters — largely from Maryland and Virginia — from driving across the state line to take advantage of longer hours and exacerbating the DUI problem.
“We’re going to make a significant dent in the first-time offenders at regional jails,” suggested one panelist, Sen. Mike Green, D-Raleigh.
Based on his experience as a former Beckley police officer, Green said 63 percent of those busted the first time for DUI have a blood alcohol reading below .15.
Counties have complained of being stuck with two days of jail costs for DUI offenders who are booked a few hours initially, then sent back to jail to complete a mandatory 24-hour term.
Lawmakers and safety advocates alike applauded the bill, which cleared the panel without dissent.
“This is going to make a big difference,” opined Donna Hawkins, executive director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and a key figure in a special task force that has examined West Virginia’s laws over the past few months. “This is the first step. Obviously, we have a long way to go with the legislative session ahead of us. We believe this is a very positive step.”
Last year, drunken motorists were blamed in 129 deaths and 2,600 nonfatal injuries.
Under the proposal, motorists with a BAC of .15 or higher would fall into a new statute known as “aggravated DUI,” and could face a jail term of two days to six months and be fined between $200 and $1,000. Additionally, the bill contains another key element — stricter revocation periods for anyone in that category.
West Virginia is one of a dozen states without such an “aggravated” statute, Hawkins pointed out.
“Our legislators are to be commended for the job that they’re doing to get drunk drivers off the road,” Hawkins said. “That’s the ultimate goal.”
Sen. Evan Jenkins, D-Cabell, applauded the work of MADD in taking the lead to tweak West Virginia’s laws and add an entirely new category of DUI offenders to make roads safer.
“They’re focused on true prevention,” Jenkins said. “This is an emotionally charged issue.”
Gov. Joe Manchin has said his staff has been exploring the ideas advanced by MADD’s task force and vowed to back any measure that can effectively get inebriants off the highways.
What’s more, the proposal seeks to provide first-time offenders with the incentive for using Interlocks — devices that keep a vehicle from starting if the driver’s breath, blown into them, shows too much alcohol in the blood stream.
Sen. Erik Wells, D-Kanawha, however, wondered what would happen to a tipsy motorist who used a friend to get an acceptable reading, then crashed and either hurt or killed someone before the next test surfaced within the customary 20-minute period.
“There would be criminal sanctions,” counsel Brian Skinner advised him. “The question is, how are you going to know this, unless someone ’fesses up?”
As incentives, the bill offers first-time offenders the choice of attaching an Interlock within 15 days of conviction and using it for a four-month period, or refusing the instrument and being denied driving privileges for three months. Initially, the task force looked at mandatory Interlocks for all first-time offenders.
Another panelist, Sen. Jon Blair Hunter, D-Monongalia, possibly will attempt to amend it at a later stage to deal with the nearly 50 percent of offenders who aren’t taking part in a treatment program.
“If they don’t complete the program, I think they ought to stay on the Interlock,” Hunter said.
Jill Dunn, legal counsel for the Division of Motor Vehicles, emphasized that an Interlock must be attached to any vehicle a convicted driver uses if he is obligated to be tested before hitting the road.
The next step is consideration today by the full Joint Standing Committee on the Judiciary, and, if it clears that one, the bill likely faces some intense questioning and likely tinkering in the months ahead.
“Some things may need to be tightened up or addressed,” said Sen. Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, a co-chairman of the panel.
For now, however, MADD is pleased with the matter.
“Right now, we’re actually putting into the law some more teeth,” Hawkins said.
— E-mail:
mannix@register-herald.com
