Skip to content
Bills from the 2009–10 session

Assembly Bill 283

Operating a vehicle while intoxicated, granting rule-making authority, making an appropriation, and providing a penalty

Topics: Alcohol and other drug abuse, County, Court, Crime and criminals: Felony, Drunken driving, Fines, Forfeiture, Implied consent or alcohol concentration, Jail, Judge, Legislature: Criminal Penalties, Joint Review Committee on, Motor vehicle: Driver's license, Motor vehicle: Equipment, Parole or probation, Prison, Sentences and penalties, Transportation, Department of: Vehicles, Winnebago County

Passed the Assembly, then stopped

The Assembly passed it on Sep 17, 2009, but the Senate never voted on it. A bill has to ⁠. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    May 27, 2009

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed Sep 17, 2009

  4. Senate vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The Senate never voted on it.

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 28, 2010: “Failed to concur in pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

This bill makes a number of changes relating to operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant (OWI-related offense), including the following:

1. Under current law, if a person is convicted of a second OWI-related offense, a judge may immobilize the person's motor vehicles or require that the person's operating privilege be limited to operating vehicles that are equipped with an ignition interlock device. If a person is convicted of a third or subsequent OWI-related offense within five years, a judge must limit the person's operating privilege to operating vehicles that are equipped with an ignition interlock device unless the judge orders that the person's motor vehicles be immobilized or seized and sold at auction.

Read the full summary

Current law requires the person to pay for the costs of installing and monitoring the ignition interlock device on every motor vehicle he or she owns. If the judge determines that this would work a hardship to the person, current law allows the judge to require an ignition interlock device on some, but not all, of the person's motor vehicles.

Under current law, no one may remove, disconnect, tamper with, or otherwise circumvent the operation of an ignition interlock device. A person who does so may be required to forfeit not less than $150 nor more than $600 for the first offense and, for a second or subsequent offense within five years, may be fined not less than $300 nor more than $1,000, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.

This bill eliminates the option of ordering the person's vehicle to be immobilized or seized and sold at auction. The bill makes it mandatory for a judge to require that the person's operating privilege be limited, for a minimum of one year, to operating vehicles that are equipped with an ignition interlock device if either of the following are true: 1) the person commits a first OWI-related offense with an alcohol concentration of 0.15 or more; or 2) the person commits a second OWI-related offense.

Under the bill, the judge must order that every motor vehicle the person owns be equipped with an ignition interlock device. If the judge determines that the person's income is at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty level, the person is required to pay a $50 surcharge upon the installation of the first ignition interlock device and, for each ignition interlock device, half of the installation cost, and one-half of the cost per day toward the cost of monitoring the ignition interlock device. A person whose income is above 150 percent of the federal poverty level is required to pay the surcharge and assume the full cost of installing and monitoring each ignition interlock device. Under the bill, if a person who is ordered to do so fails to pay the surcharge or fails to have an ignition interlock device installed, he or she may not obtain an occupational license.

Under the bill, a court may order a person who removes, disconnects, tampers with, or otherwise circumvents the operation of an ignition interlock device to be imprisoned for not more than six months for a first offense. The bill also subjects a person who fails to have an ignition interlock device installed as ordered by the court to the same penalties as a person who removes, disconnects, tampers with, or otherwise circumvents the operation of an ignition interlock device.

2. Current law defines a "prohibited alcohol concentration" as an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more if the person has two or fewer prior OWI-related convictions, suspensions, or revocations. If the person has three or more prior OWI-related convictions, suspensions, or revocations, the prohibited alcohol concentration is defined as an alcohol concentration of more than 0.02.

This bill adds a definition of a prohibited alcohol concentration as an alcohol concentration of more than 0.02 for the two-year period after a person has committed an OWI offense.

3. Under current law, a person who is subject to a forfeiture or a fine for violating most state laws or local ordinances is also liable for a variety of penalty surcharges and court fees. In addition, a person who commits an OWI-related offense is liable for a penalty surcharge for driver improvement programs and is required to comply with an alcohol and other drug assessment before he or she is eligible for reinstatement of his or her driving privileges.

Currently, a person who commits his or her first OWI-related offense and who has a blood alcohol concentration between 0.08 and 0.099 at the time of the offense is not liable for the surcharges or fees and does not need to comply with an alcohol or other drug assessment program. Further, the Department of Transportation (DOT) must purge its records of a first offense related to driving while intoxicated after ten years; the department keeps all other records of offenses related to driving while intoxicated permanently.

Under this bill, a person who commits his or her first OWI-related offense and who has a blood alcohol concentration between 0.08 and 0.099 at the time of the violation is liable for the surcharges or fees and must comply with an alcohol or other drug assessment program before his or her driving privileges may be reinstated.

Under this bill, DOT must keep a record of this offense permanently.

4. Under current law, a person who commits an OWI-related offense is subject to a forfeiture or fine and, for a second or subsequent offense, a period of imprisonment. Currently, a person who commits a second OWI-related offense is subject to a fine between $350 and $1,100 and may be imprisoned for not less than five days nor more than six months, a person who commits a third offense is subject to a fine between $600 and $2,000 and may be imprisoned for not less than 30 days nor more than one year, a person who commits a fourth offense may be fined between $600 and $2,000 and may be imprisoned for not less than 60 days nor more than one year.

Upon committing a fifth or sixth OWI-related offense, a person is guilty of a Class H felony, and is subject to a minimum fine of $600, a six-month minimum term of imprisonment, and a maximum term of imprisonment of six years. A seventh, eighth, or ninth OWI-related offense is a Class G felony, and the person is subject to a maximum fine of $25,000 and a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years.

A tenth or subsequent OWI-related offense is a Class F felony, and the person is subject to a maximum fine of $25,000, and a maximum term of imprisonment of 12 years and six months.

Under current law, a person who is sentenced for a felony is sentenced to a bifurcated sentence, and the person serves a portion of his or her sentence confined in a prison and a portion under extended supervision outside of prison.

This bill makes a fourth OWI-related offense committed within five years of a prior offense a Class H felony and requires a person who commits a fourth, fifth, or sixth OWI-related offense to serve a minimum of two years in prison under a bifurcated sentence. The bill requires a person who commits a seventh, eighth, or ninth OWI-related offense to serve a minimum of three years in prison under a bifurcated sentence and a person who commits a tenth or subsequent OWI-related offense to serve a minimum of four years in prison under a bifurcated sentence.

5. Under current law, a person who commits an OWI-related offense and causes injury to another is subject to a fine of not less than $300 nor more than $2,000, imprisonment for not less than 30 days nor more than one year, or both.

Under this bill, a person who commits a second or subsequent OWI-related offense and causes injury to another person is guilty of a Class H felony, and is subject to a fine up to $10,000, imprisonment for not more than six years, or both.

6.

2005 Wisconsin Act 389 created a pilot program for sentencing persons in Winnebago County who are convicted of certain second or third OWI-related offenses. Under that act, the period of imprisonment for an OWI-related offense in Winnebago County may be reduced if the violator successfully completes a period of probation that includes alcohol and other drug treatment. A person may complete a treatment program and receive a reduced period of imprisonment only once.

This bill expands the sentencing option to any county that opts to allow a violator to successfully complete a period of probation that includes alcohol and other drug treatment in exchange for a shorter period of imprisonment.

7. Under current law, a person who commits an OWI-related offense has his or her operating privileges revoked for a specified period. The period of revocation lengthens with each subsequent OWI-related offense, and generally begins on the date on which the person commits the OWI-related offense.

Under this bill, the period of revocation begins on the date on which the person commits the OWI-related offense, but is tolled for any time period that the person spends in jail or in prison. The bill makes the person whose operating privileges are revoked responsible for notifying DOT that he or she has been released from jail or prison.

8. Under current law, after a person is convicted of most crimes, the trial court may withhold the person's sentence, or impose a sentence of imprisonment but stay the imposition of imprisonment, and place the person on probation for a period of time. If the crime carries a mandatory minimum period of incarceration of one year or less, the person must be incarcerated for at least the mandatory minimum period as a condition of his or her probation.

Under current law, a trial court may not place a person on probation if the person has committed a second or third OWI-related offense or three or fewer offenses related to operating a commercial vehicle or causing injury while operating a vehicle while intoxicated or with a prohibited alcohol concentration. A trial court may place a person who commits more than three of these offenses on probation under current law.

Under this bill, a trial court may place a person who commits any of those offenses on probation. Under the bill, a person who commits an offense that carries a mandatory minimum period of incarceration of one year or less must be incarcerated for at least the mandatory minimum period as a condition of his or her probation.

Because this bill creates a new crime or revises a penalty for an existing crime, the Joint Review Committee on Criminal Penalties may be requested to prepare a report concerning the proposed penalty and the costs or savings that are likely to result if the bill is enacted.

Who's behind it

14 lawmakers are its ⁠. All 14 are Democrats.

7 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 21 names

Authors (14)

Signed on in support (7)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There were 4 votes on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Public Safety vote on an amendment

Passed, 7 to 0 · Jun 30, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 80 to 15 · Sep 17, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 3 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 80, Noes 15”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote on an amendment

Passed, 57 to 39 · Sep 17, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Assembly amendment 6 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 57, Noes 39”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote to pass it

Passed, 95 to 0 · Sep 17, 2009

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Read a third time and passed, Ayes 95, Noes 0, Paired 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Apr 28, 2010

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Nov 5, 2009

    “Report of joint review committee on Criminal Penalties received” (the official wording)

  3. Oct 15, 2009

    “Report of joint review committee on Criminal Penalties requested pursuant to s. 13.525 (5) Wisconsin Statutes” (the official wording)

  4. Sep 24, 2009

    1 more senator signed on in support.

  5. Sep 23, 2009

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Corrections, Insurance, Campaign Finance Reform, and Housing.

  6. Sep 23, 2009

    “Printed engrossed by the direction of the Senate Chief Clerk.” (the official wording)

  7. Sep 18, 2009

    The Senate received it.

  8. Sep 17, 2009

    The Assembly passed it, 95 to 0.

  9. Sep 17, 2009

    The Assembly adopted it.

  10. Sep 4, 2009 to Sep 17, 2009

    9 more representatives signed on in support.

  11. Jun 30, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  12. Jun 30, 2009

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 7 to 0.

  13. Jun 23, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  14. Jun 18, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  15. Jun 10, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  16. Jun 8, 2009

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  17. Jun 2, 2009

    The committee held a public hearing.

  18. May 27, 2009

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  19. May 27, 2009

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Public Safety.

  20. May 27, 2009

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. May 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Staskunas, Zepnick, Smith, Zigmunt, Hintz, Sheridan, Black, Turner, Clark, Mason, Nelson, Hixson, Hebl and Berceau;Cosponsored by Senator Carpenter

  2. May 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Public Safety

  3. May 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Bies added as a coauthor

  4. Jun 2, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  5. Jun 8, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  6. Jun 10, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  7. Jun 10, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  8. Jun 10, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  9. Jun 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  10. Jun 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by committee on Public Safety

  11. Jun 18, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  12. Jun 23, 2009 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  13. Jun 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  14. Jun 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  15. Jun 30, 2009 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  16. Sep 4, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Jorgensen added as a coauthor

  17. Sep 11, 2009 · Assembly

    Representative Steinbrink added as a coauthor

  18. Sep 15, 2009 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 9-17-2009 by committee on Rules

  19. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Staskunas, J. Ott, Jorgensen, Vukmir, Nelson, Hixson, Bies, Pope-Roberts, Berceau, A. Ott, Lothian and Molepske Jr.

  20. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Representatives Van Akkeren, Soletski, Sinicki, Pope-Roberts and Spanbauer added as coauthors

  21. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Representatives Pasch and Gottlieb added as coauthors

  22. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  23. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Gundrum

  24. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 placed after Assembly amendment 6 to Assembly substitute amendment 1

  25. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Staskunas

  26. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 adopted

  27. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Kessler

  28. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 3 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 80, Noes 15

  29. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Kessler

  30. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 4 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 withdrawn and returned to author

  31. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 5 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Hubler, Hebl, Vruwink, Roys, Pasch, Bernard Schaber, Clark, Kessler, Sherman, Pope-Roberts, Hilgenberg, Young, Zigmunt, Soletski, Danou, Pocan, Dexter, Toles, Seidel, Hraychuck, Bies and Nelson

  32. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 5 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 adopted

  33. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 6 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representatives Hubler, Hebl, Vruwink, Toles, Hilgenberg, Schneider, Hraychuck, Garthwaite, Soletski and Dexter

  34. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 6 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 laid on table, Ayes 57, Noes 39

  35. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 7 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 offered by Representative Kessler

  36. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 7 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 withdrawn and returned to author

  37. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 to Assembly substitute amendment 1 withdrawn and returned to author

  38. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Assembly substitute amendment 1 adopted

  39. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  40. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  41. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 95, Noes 0, Paired 2

  42. Sep 17, 2009 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  43. Sep 18, 2009 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  44. Sep 23, 2009 · Senate

    Printed engrossed by the direction of the Senate Chief Clerk.

  45. Sep 23, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary, Corrections, Insurance, Campaign Finance Reform, and Housing

  46. Sep 24, 2009 · Senate

    Senator Taylor added as a cosponsor

  47. Sep 28, 2009 · Senate

    LRB correction (Assembly Amendment 2 to Assembly Substitute Amendment 1)

  48. Oct 15, 2009 · Senate

    Report of joint review committee on Criminal Penalties requested pursuant to s. 13.525 (5) Wisconsin Statutes

  49. Nov 5, 2009 · Senate

    Report of joint review committee on Criminal Penalties received

  50. Apr 28, 2010 · Senate

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Second chamber's vote

A bill has to pass both the Assembly and the Senate in the same form before it goes to the governor.

Official term: Concurrence. More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Second chamber's vote

A bill has to pass both the Assembly and the Senate in the same form before it goes to the governor.

Official term: Concurrence

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote