Skip to content

Bills · 2013-2014 Regular Session

AB 467

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: court orders regarding the installation of an ignition interlock device. (FE)

Drunken driving Legislature — Criminal penalties, joint review committee on Motor vehicle — Equipment

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Under current law, a court is required to order that a person's motor vehicle

operating privilege be restricted to operating vehicles that are equipped with an

ignition interlock device if a person commits a second or subsequent offense related

to operating a vehicle while intoxicated or a first offense while his or her alcohol

concentration is 0.15 or greater, refuses to take a test for intoxication, or injures or

kills a person while operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Under current law, the

operating privilege restriction begins on the date the Department of Transportation

issues an operator's license and stays in place for not less than one year nor more

than the maximum operating privilege revocation period permitted for the refusal

or violation. A person who violates the operating privilege restriction by failing to

install, removing, disconnecting, or otherwise tampering with the ignition interlock

device may be fined not less than $150 nor more than $600, imprisoned for not more

than six months, or both, for the first offense, and may be fined not less than $300

nor more than $1,000, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both, for a

second or subsequent offense.

Currently, the court may order that the ignition interlock device be installed

immediately upon issuing the order that the person's operating privilege be

restricted to operating a vehicle with an ignition interlock device installed.

Under this bill, when a court orders that the person's operating privilege be

restricted to operating a vehicle with an ignition interlock device, the court must

order that the device be installed within 3 working days of the order restricting the

person's operating privilege. Also under this bill, the operating privilege restriction

takes effect immediately upon the issuing of the order restricting the person's

operating privilege. The operating privilege restriction remains in place for not less

than one year after DOT issues an operator's license nor more than the maximum

operating privilege revocation period after DOT issues an operator's license. A

violation of the operating privilege restriction is subject to the same penalty provided

for failing to install, removing, disconnecting, or otherwise tampering with the

ignition interlock device.

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.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Berceau (D) , Brooks (R) , J. Ott (R) , Kerkman (R) , Kolste (D) , Nass (R) , Richards (D) , Thiesfeldt (R) , Zepnick (D)

5 cosponsors

Barca and Ohnstad , Carpenter (D) , Cowles (R) , L. Taylor (D) , Lehman (D)

Votes

Assembly: Report passage recommended by Committee on Judiciary, Ayes 5, Noes 3

Passed 5–3 Oct 31, 2013 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Oct 28, 2013 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives J. Ott, Richards, Thiesfeldt, Kolste, Nass, Brooks, Berceau, Zepnick and Kerkman; cosponsored by Senators Cowles, L. Taylor and Lehman

  2. Oct 28, 2013 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary

  3. Oct 29, 2013 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Oct 29, 2013 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Oct 29, 2013 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  6. Oct 31, 2013 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  7. Oct 31, 2013 · Assembly

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Judiciary, Ayes 5, Noes 3

  8. Oct 31, 2013 · Assembly

    Referred to Committee on Rules

  9. Oct 31, 2013 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 11-5-2013 by Committee on Rules

  10. Oct 31, 2013 · Assembly

    Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Representatives J. Ott, Goyke, Wachs and Hebl

  11. Nov 4, 2013 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  12. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  13. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 adopted

  14. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  15. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  16. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed

  17. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Representatives Barca and Ohnstad added as coauthors

  18. Nov 5, 2013 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  19. Nov 6, 2013 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  20. Nov 6, 2013 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary and Labor

  21. Jan 3, 2014 · Senate

    Senator Carpenter added as a cosponsor

  22. Jan 7, 2014 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  23. Apr 8, 2014 · Senate

    Failed to concur in pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1