• 18
  • May
    2010

Drunk driving causes tens of thousands of California car accidents every year, resulting in thousands of injuries and fatalities. State Assemblyman Jerry Hill is among those who believe that California's DUI penalties could be tougher on those convicted of drunk driving, and he is currently attempting to push forward a bill to strengthen them.

However, fears of an overpopulated prison system and the increased cost to carry out Hill's plan are threatening to put a damper on the bill's momentum. Currently, he is working with members of the Appropriations Committee to cut the bill's cost down.

There are two major changes to current law present in Hill's bill.

For one, California judges would have the ability to permanently revoke an individual's license following a third DUI conviction. Both the American Civil Liberties Union and the California DUI Lawyers Association have come out strongly against this provision, and Hill seems willing to reconsider giving judges the ability to grant drivers a second chance.

The second main tenant of Hill's plan is the removal of California's 10-year "look-back" period. Currently, authorities can only consider a driver's last 10 years worth of offenses in prosecuting or convicting him/her for a current offense. That means a driver who has had 10 DUIs, been in 6 car accidents, but only had one public intoxication charge in the past decade would only have his public intoxication charge considered in a new DUI case.

Hill would have DUIs stay on a driver's record forever, removing any sort of limit on how far authorities may look back on a driver's record.

This second provision is the one causing major headaches for California lawmakers. An analysis by state legislative consultant Geoff Long predicts that removing the look-back period would increase the prison population, which would then cost millions of dollars to accommodate.

California's prison system is already overpopulated and underfunded, and lawmakers worry that the cost to house thousands of new prisoners would be too much of a burden on tax payers. For now, then, the DUI bill remains in limbo.

Related Resources