House Bill 1789, which broadens the prosecution of felony DUI defendants, was passed by the state Legislature with unanimous votes in both the House and Senate. Gov. Chris Gregoire should sign it into law.
Washington state has a DUI problem, as reflected in the number of people dying in DUI-related traffic accidents.
In 2009, 491 people died on Washington highways. That was the lowest number of traffic fatalities since 1955. Last year, the number of traffic deaths dropped even further — to 458. That’s the lowest number since the state began keeping records.
While the downward trend is encouraging, one related statistic is especially troubling. Of those 458 deaths, 41 percent involved drivers under the influence of intoxicants. That is far ahead of the national average of 32 percent.
Washington State Patrol Chief John Batiste has maintained that the state could reduce the number of DUI-related fatalities if officers were allowed to conduct DUI checkpoints.
Many states allow police to stop every driver going through a checkpoint to determine whether the driver is operating a motor vehicle under the influence. Civil rights advocates have successfully prevented Washington state from legalizing DUI checkpoints.
House Bill 1789 does not give the chief the checkpoints he wants, but it does call for stiffer sentences and broader use of ignition interlock devices.
The legislation:
• Makes any subsequent DUI conviction a felony if the offender has a prior felony DUI conviction. A felony DUI currently requires four or more prior DUIs within 10 years, or a vehicular homicide or vehicular assault conviction involving DUI. Under the bill, “Once you’re a felony DUI, you’re always a felony DUI,” said King County deputy prosecutor Amy Freedheim.
• Expands prior offenses to include all vehicular assault or vehicular homicide convictions, as long as the original charge was based on driving under the influence.
• Requires any sentencing enhancement for DUI vehicular homicide to be served in full. Current law allows inmates to slice time off their sentences – including enhancements — by up to one-third if they are credited with good behavior in prison.
• Requires a person convicted of alcohol-related reckless driving or first-degree negligent driving to install an ignition interlock device, under certain circumstances. An ignition interlock device prevents a vehicle from starting if alcohol is detected. The driver must blow into the device, which measures the breath-alcohol content. The driver can start the vehicle only if the reading is under 0.025.
The legislation is the outcome of an Impaired Driving Work Group that included representatives from police, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The work group found that of the 40,000 DUI arrests a year in Washington state, almost 9,000 result in a plea bargain or conviction of the lesser crime of negligent driving. Those convicted of negligent driving face far less severe punishment. They are fined, but there is generally no jail time, no ignition interlock requirement, and no alcohol monitoring.
Advocates for enhanced penalties successfully argued that people convicted of negligent driving be held accountable by installing the ignition devices.
In addition to allowing cities and counties to operate DUI courts — much like drug courts — the legislation also encourages the Washington Traffic Safety Commission to develop and maintain a registry of qualified Victim Impact Panels. Such panels are made up of victims of DUI offences. Sometimes it’s a person who has survived a DUI accident, and sometimes it’s a family member who has lost a loved one in a DUI-related crash.
DUI defendants who are ordered to attend a panel meeting as part of their sentences hear the stories of heartache caused by drivers like themselves who have gotten behind the wheel while under the influence. It’s an emotional meeting where DUI defendants can’t help but feel compassion for the victims whose lives have been transformed.
The legislation on the governor’s desk is not the DUI checkpoints that Chief Batiste thinks would reduce the number of fatal accidents in this state. But it would hold criminal defendants accountable for their crime of driving under the influence of alcohol.
