Plain language
Terms to know
- Remotely communicated search warrant
- A legal order for a test issued by a judge who is not in the same room as the police officer, using voice, video, or text.
- Chemical test
- A test, such as a breath, blood, or urine test, used to measure alcohol or drug levels in the body.
- Probable cause
- A reasonable belief, based on facts, that a crime has been committed or that evidence of a crime exists.
Read the official summary
Bill No.: <billno> Drafter: <drafterinit>
Bill No.:
HB0029
Drafter:
JHR
LSO No.:
11LSO-0161
Effective Date:
7/1/2011
Enrolled Act No.:
HEA0093
Chapter No.:
178
Prime Sponsor:
Representative
Gingery
Catch Title:
DUI-elimination
of right to refuse test.
Subject:
Elimination of the "implied consent
law" and the right to refuse
chemical tests to determine whether a
person was driving while under the influence of alcohol or a controlled
substance.
Summary/Major Elements:
●
Provides that a person under
arrest for driving under the influence
of alcohol or a controlled
substance who refuses a chemical test shall still be required to submit to a
chemical test upon issuance of a search warrant.
●
Creates a "remotely
communicated search warrant" which may be issued upon sworn or affirmed
testimony of the peace officer who is not in the physical presence of the
judicial officer. For issuance of a "remotely communicated search
warrant":
o
The judicial officer must be
satisfied that probable cause exists for issuance of the remotely communicated search
warrant;
o
All communication between the
judicial officer and the peace officer or prosecuting attorney must be
recorded;
o
The judicial officer may
direct the peace officer or prosecuting attorney requesting the remotely
communicated search warrant to sign the judicial officer's name on a warrant
from a remote location.
●
A remotely communicated
search warrant shall only be valid to administer a
chemical tests to
determine whether a person was driving while under the influence of alcohol or
a controlled substance after the person refuses the test.
●
Results from chemical tests
to determine blood-alcohol or controlled substance levels shall only be used to
determine whether the person was driving under the influence of alcohol or
controlled substances.
●
Repeals
the administrative penalties for refusing to submit to a chemical tests to
determine whether a person was driving while under the influence of alcohol or a
controlled substance, except for suspension of a commercial driver's license.
●
Makes
conforming amendments relating to the repeal of the right to refuse a test.
Public statements
Why lawmakers voted
Last checked Aug 9, 1:26 AM
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because it includes a judicial officer as a gatekeeper who must find probable cause before authorizing a test, even if done remotely. He believes this addresses concerns about search warrants and ensures the process is not just an officer's whim.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill as a good compromise that incorporates remote search warrants, noting that experience in other states shows people are more likely to voluntarily comply once they know a judge has reviewed and approved the probable cause.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker explains that the amendment corrects a citation error to ensure blood samples taken at hospitals cannot be used for any purpose other than DUI testing, extending this protection from just youth to all adults and CDL drivers.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because hiding DUI convictions from insurers will prevent them from assessing risk, ultimately causing insurance rates to rise for all constituents.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment by stating that statistics show drunk drivers are rarely caught on their first offense and that university students already know the consequences of DUI laws.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment as a reasonable compromise to address employability issues for those with DUI records while acknowledging that implied consent laws already limit other legal defenses.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment if there is a higher standard requiring physical evidence of intoxication before obtaining a search warrant.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because it assumes people without licenses will not drive, ignoring proven opportunities for them to continue driving.