BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON Public Safety
Senator Bruce McPherson, Chair A
2001-2002 Regular Session B
1
6
8
AB 1685 (Thomson) 5
As Amended on August 5, 2002
Hearing date: August 6, 2002
Vehicle Code
MK/SH:br
VEHICLE OFFENSES - DUI/SEATBELT -
INCREASED FINES
HISTORY
Source: Author
Prior Legislation: SB 776 (Torlakson) - Chapter 857, Stats. 2001
(DUI - see AB 2074 analysis for August 6, 2002,
hearing in this Committee for lengthy list of
previous DUI bills)
AB 338 (Brown) - Chapter 122, Stats. 1992
(seatbelts)
AB 1400 (Brown) - Chapter 365, Stats. 1995
(seatbelts)
Support: Unknown
Opposition:California State Automobile Association; Automobile
Club of Southern California; California Teamsters
Public Affairs Council
Assembly Floor Vote: No longer relevant
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 2
KEY ISSUES
SHOULD THE MINIMUM FINE FOR A FIRST DUI OFFENSE BE INCREASED
FROM $390 TO $440 (LEAVING THE MAXIMUM FINE FOR A FIRST OFFENSE
AT THE EXISTING LIMIT OF $1,000)?
(CONTINUED)
SHOULD THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE MANDATORY SEATBELT LAW BE
INCREASED FROM $20 - PLUS A $2 PENALTY ASSESSMENT - TO $70 - PLUS
THE ASSESSMENT - FOR A FIRST OFFENSE AND FROM $50 - PLUS A $5
PENALTY ASSESSMENT - TO $90 - PLUS THE PENALTY ASSESSMENT - FOR A
SECOND OR SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to: (1) to increase the minimum
fine for a first DUI offense from $390 to $440 (leaving the
maximum fine for a first offense at the existing limit of
$1,000) and (2) increase the fine for violations of the
mandatory seatbelt law from $22 to $72 for a first offense and
from $55 to $95 for a second or subsequent offense.
DUI FINE INCREASE
Existing law provides it is unlawful for any person who is under
the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the
combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive
a vehicle. (Vehicle Code 23152(a).)
Existing law provides that it is unlawful for any person, while
having 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her
blood to drive a vehicle. (Vehicle Code 2152(b).)
Existing law provides that among other penalties, the fine for a
driving-under-the-influence provision (DUI) is not less than
$390 and not more than $1,000 plus penalty assessments.
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 3
(Vehicle Code 23536, 23538, 23540, 23542, 23546, 23548, 23550
and 235552.)
Existing law provides that among other penalties, the fine for a
second or subsequent DUI with injuries within seven years is a
fine of not less than $390 and not more than $5,000 plus penalty
assessments. (Vehicle Code 23560, 23562, 23566 and 23568.)
Existing law specifically provides that any person convicted of
a first violation of driving under the influence of drugs or
alcohol shall be punished by specified imprisonment in a county
jail and by a fine of not less than $390 nor more than $1,000.
(Vehicle Code 23536.)
Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to review
the effectiveness of programs, procedures, sanctions, fines, and
fees provided for in current law relating to the offense of
driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and to report
those findings to the Legislature on or before July 1, 2002
(note: the DMV has asked for additional time to complete the
study later in 2002). (Vehicle Code 1680.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of a prior conviction for a DUI, DUI with injury,
or reckless driving involving alcohol shall be punished by
imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 90 days and
not more than one year. It further provides that if the person
is granted probation, the person shall: be confined in county
jail for not less than 10 days and not more than one year; pay
a fine of $390-$1,000, plus 170% penalty assessments; have
their license suspended for two years and attend a 18-30 month
treatment program. A person convicted of a second DUI shall
also pay restitution of $100-$1,000, must have their vehicle
impounded under specified circumstances and may be ordered to
install an ignition interlock device. (Vehicle Code 23540,
23542, 23575 and 23594 and Penal Code 1202.4.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of two prior convictions for DUI, DUI with injury,
or reckless driving involving alcohol, shall be punished by
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 4
imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 120 days and
not more than one year. (Vehicle Code 23546.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of two or more prior convictions for a DUI, DUI with
injury, or reckless driving involving alcohol shall be punished
by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 120 days
and not more than one year. It further provides that if the
person is granted probation, the person shall: be confined in
county jail for not less than 120 days and not more than one
year; pay a fine of $390-$1,000, plus 170% penalty assessments;
have their license revoked for three years and attend a 18-30
month treatment program. (If the 30-month program is imposed
then the minimum jail term is 30 days.) A person convicted of a
third DUI shall also pay restitution of $100-$1,000: must have
their vehicle impounded for 90 days under specified
circumstances; may have their vehicle forfeited; may be ordered
to install an ignition interlock device; and must be designated
a habitual traffic offender. (Vehicle Code 13352(a)(5),
13350(b), 14601.3(e)(3), 23548, 23575, and 23596 and Penal Code
1202.4.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of three or more prior convictions for DUI, DUI with
injury, or reckless driving involving the consumption of
alcohol, be punished by imprisonment in state prison, or in a
county jail for not less than 180 days. (Vehicle Code 23550.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of three or more prior convictions for a DUI, DUI
with injury, or reckless driving involving alcohol shall be
punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 90
days and not more than one year. It further provides that if
the person is granted probation, the person shall: be confined
in county jail for not less than 180 days and not more than one
year; pay a fine of $390-$1,000, plus 170% penalty assessments;
have their license revoked for four years and attend a 18-30
month treatment program. (If the 30-month program is imposed
then the minimum jail term is 30 days.) A person convicted of a
second DUI shall also: pay restitution of $100-$1,000 for a
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 5
misdemeanor and $200-$2,000 for a felony; have their vehicle
impounded for 90 days under specified circumstances and may have
the vehicle forfeited; may be ordered to install an ignition
interlock device; and must be designated a habitual traffic
offender. (Vehicle Code 13350(b), 13352(a)(7),
14601.3(e)(3), 23552, 23575(l) and 23594 and Penal Code
1202.4.)
Existing law provides additional penalties if a person is
convicted of a DUI with injuries or a DUI with injuries when the
person has prior DUI related offenses. (Vehicle Code 23554,
23556, 23560, 23562, 23566 and 23568.)
Existing law provides that any person convicted of a DUI within
seven years of one or more prior convictions for DUI, DUI with
injury or reckless driving involving alcohol, or of a DUI with
injury within 10 years of certain alcohol-related driving
offenses, must serve either a minimum of 48 consecutive hours of
actual imprisonment or at least 10 days of community service.
(Vehicle Code 23580(a).)
Existing law provides that the term of actual imprisonment may
not be served on a work-release program, a weekend service of
sentence program, or through diversion or a treatment program.
(Vehicle Code 23580(b).)
Existing law allows the Board of Supervisors of any county to
authorize the correctional administrator to offer a program under
which minimum security inmates and low-risk offenders committed to
the county jail to voluntarily participate in a home detention
program during their sentence in lieu of confinement in the county
jail or other correctional facility. (Penal Code 1203.016.)
Existing law provides for an additional "state penalty" of $10
for every $10 or fraction thereof levied upon every fine,
penalty or forfeiture imposed and collected by the courts for
criminal offenses including all offenses, except parking
offenses, involving the Vehicle Code. The money collected from
the penalty is distributed in specified percentages among: the
Fish and Game Preservation Fund; the Restitution Fund; the Peace
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 6
Officers Training Fund; the Driver Training Penalty Assessment
Fund; the Corrections Training Fund; the Local Public
Prosecutors and Public Defenders Fund; the Victim-Witness
Assistance Fund; and the Traumatic Brain Injury Fund. (Penal
Code 1464.)
Existing law provides that in each county there shall be an
additional penalty of $7 for every $10 thereof upon every fine,
penalty, or forfeiture imposed and collected by the courts for
criminal offenses, including all offenses involving a violation
of the Vehicle Code or any local ordinance adopted pursuant to
the Vehicle Code except parking offenses. The money collected
shall be placed in any of the following funds if established by
a County Board of Supervisors: Courthouse Construction Fund; a
Criminal Justice Facilities Construction Fund; Automated
Fingerprint Identification Fund; Emergency Medical Services
Fund; DNA Identification Fund. (Government Code 76000.)
This bill increases the minimum fine for a first DUI offense
from $390 to $440.
SEATBELT LAW FINE INCREASE
Existing law generally provides that no person shall operate a
motor vehicle on a highway unless that person and all passengers
16 years of age or over are properly restrained by a safety
belt; no person 16 years of age or over shall be a passenger on
a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person is properly
restrained by a safety belt; and every owner of a motor vehicle
operated on a highway shall maintain safety belts in good
working order for the use of occupants of the vehicle.
Violations of any of those provisions is an infraction
punishable by a fine, including all penalty assessments and
court costs imposed on the convicted person, of not more than
$20 for a first offense, and not more than $50 for each
subsequent offense. An additional penalty assessment of $2 for
a first offense and $5 for any subsequent offense shall be
imposed, as specified. Attendance at a traffic violators school
may be imposed in lieu of a fine, penalty assessment, and any
court costs, for a first offense, as specified. (Vehicle Code
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 7
27315.)
This bill increases the fine for seatbelt offenses from $20 to
$70 for a first offense and from $50 to $90 for a second or
subsequent offense (plus the existing $2 and $5 penalty
assessments).
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
The author indicates the following:
The maximum fine for failing to wear a seatbelt ($20
for a first offense plus a $2 penalty assessment) is
considerably lower than other infractions and has not
been increased since enactment of the mandatory
seatbelt law in 1986 (Chapter 1361 Statutes 1985).
Although California led the nation in becoming the
first state to make a seatbelt violations a primary or
standard offense (e.g., a person can be cited
specifically for failure to wear a seatbelt),
California has the second to the lowest fine when
compared to other states with standard seatbelt use
laws. The lowest is Georgia at $15; the highest is
Oregon at $75. According to National Safety council,
Americans pay $14.3 billion on an annual basis in
injury related costs for people who don't wear
seatbelts. Raising the California fine by $50 could
result in millions of dollars of new revenue to the
state and counties at a time of dire fiscal need.
Moreover, an increase in the fine would serve as an
incentive to use a device that clearly saves lives.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, alcohol is a factor in 32% of the cost
of vehicle crashes in California, costing the state an
estimated $11 billion in 1998. These fiscal costs are
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 8
far outweighed by the intangible cost of loss of human
life. Despite the enormity of these costs, the fine
for driving under the influence of alcoholic beverage
or drug has not been increased since 1984. This bill
would increase the minimum fine for a first time
offense, currently $390, to $440. This increase is
less than the change in inflation (According to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, $390 in 1984 has the same
buying power as $687 today).
2. Existing Law Requiring a Study of DUI Fines and Other
Provisions of the DUI Law
As noted in the purpose section above, existing law requires the
Department of Motor Vehicles to review the effectiveness of
programs, procedures, sanctions, fines, and fees provided for in
current law relating to the offense of driving under the
influence of alcohol or drugs and to report those findings to
the Legislature on or before July 1, 2002 (note: the DMV has
asked for additional time to complete the study later in 2002).
(Vehicle Code section 1680 as enacted by SB 776 (Torlakson) -
Chapter 857, Stats. 2001.)
GIVEN THE DMV STUDY THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE NEXT YEAR, WOULD IT
BE PREMATURE TO MAKE ANY INCREASES IN DUI FINES AT THIS TIME?
3. DUI Fines - the "Real" Costs
Under existing law the base fine for a DUI is between
$390-$1,000 plus penalty assessments which are currently 170% of
the base fine thus the actual fine is between $1,053 to $2,700.
In addition to the base fine, there are many additional costs
for a DUI. For example, in one Orange County court in addition
to the base fine the following costs are imposed:
$50 Lab analysis fee
$50 Alcohol abuse fee
$67 Testing fee
$10 Citation and release fee
$100 Restitution fee (may be up to $1,000)
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 9
$100 Alcohol assessment fee
$50 Alcohol education fee
These costs imposed by the court are similar or greater in other
counties and even in different courts within the same county.
In addition, non-court related costs include but are not limited
to:
$ 477 (approximately) first offender 3-month program fee
(includes County, State and some DMV fees).
$100 to DMV to get a restricted license.
$700 to install an ignition interlock (if mandated) plus
additional costs to pay for monitoring. In addition a person
convicted of a DUI will also face increased insurance costs.
This is only a partial list of the costs. Anecdotally, a first
time DUI costs approximately $6,000 not including attorneys fees
or increased insurance costs. It is not unusual for people to
say a first time DUI cost them $8,000-$10,000 in addition to the
sanctions of potential jail time, license suspension, attendance
at the program and possible vehicle impoundment.
Because of the extensive costs often result in people choosing
to do work project or judges lowering the fine because they know
that in order for a person to get his or her license back the
program will need to be paid as well as the costs to DMV for
reinstating the license.
This bill would add an additional $500 fine to these existing
costs. Under this bill, just looking at the maximum fines for
DUI, not all the additional costs, the following would be the
changes by this bill.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |Base |Penalty |Additional |Total |
| |Fine |Assessment |Penalty |Bail |
| | | |Assessment | |
| | | |(this bill) | |
|--------------+--------+-------------+----------------+----------|
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 10
|Existing |$1,000 |$1,700 | |$2,700 |
|minimum fine | | | | |
|--------------+--------+-------------+----------------+----------|
|Existing |$1,000 |$1,900 | |$2,900 |
|minimum fine | | | | |
|with proposed | | | | |
|budget | | | | |
|increase | | | | |
|--------------+--------+-------------+----------------+----------|
|This bill |$1,000 |$1,700 |$500 |$3,200 |
|--------------+--------+-------------+----------------+----------|
|This bill |$1,000 |$1,900 |$500 |$3,400 |
|with proposed | | | | |
|budget | | | | |
|increase | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IS IT APPROPRIATE TO PUT ADDITIONAL COSTS ON DUI OFFENSES?
4. Related Legislation Increasing Fines for DUI Violations
AB 1398 (Chavez), as first amended in the Senate on June 24,
2002, provides that a person convicted of DUI or DUI with injury
shall pay an additional $500 penalty assessment if the county
has established an Emergency Medical Services Fund. AB 1398 is
also scheduled to be heard in this Committee today.
AB 3000 (Comm on Budget) as amended on June 29, 2002, includes
the following at lines 17-27, page 70:
SEC. 46. Section 1465.7 is added to the Penal Code,
to read:
1465.7. (a) A state surcharge of 20 percent shall
be levied on the base fine used to calculate the
state penalty assessment as specified in subdivision
(a) of Section 1464.
(b) This surcharge shall be in addition to the
state penalty assessed pursuant to Section 1464 of
the Penal Code and may not be included in the base
fine used to calculate the state penalty assessment
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 11
as specified in subdivision (a) of Section 1464.
(c) After a determination by the court of the
amount due, the clerk of the court shall cause the
amount of the state surcharge collected to be
transmitted to the General Fund.
AB 3000 is a budget trailer bill that passed the Senate on June
30, 2002, and is now in the Assembly for concurrence.
GIVEN THE PROPOSED 20% FINE SURCHARGE PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET
TRAILER BILL, ARE ADDITIONAL INCREASES IN DUI OR OTHER FINES
APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME?
5. Proposed Increases in Fines for Violations of the Mandatory
Seatbelt Law
California is a "primary" enforcement state meaning that a
vehicle may be stopped solely for failure to wear a seatbelt.
As originally enacted, enforcement of the seatbelt law was only
authorized if a vehicle was otherwise lawfully stopped. The
following paragraph from a December 15, 2001, Associated Press
wire story about Wisconsin mentions the high rate of compliance
in California with the mandatory seatbelt law (and the issue of
whether higher fines equate with higher rates of compliance).
The article is entitled "People Still Need To Be Persuaded To
Use Seat Belts: More Police Power Isn't The Whole Answer":
Higher fines and primary enforcement are often cited as
possible remedies for Wisconsin drivers' failure to
buckle up, but law enforcement can only do so much.
Texas, for example, has the highest fines ($88.20) for
not wearing a seat belt, and it has been a primary
enforcement state since 1985, but Texas ranks only 14th
in seat belt use. The state with the best record of
seat belt use is California, where almost 89 percent of
drivers wear them, and California's fine is only $22.
Indiana has had primary enforcement with a $25 fine
since 1998, but it only ranks 39th in seat belt use at
62.1 percent. (Emphasis added)
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 12
SHOULD THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA'S MANDATORY
SEATBELT LAW BE INCREASED AT THIS TIME?
(More)
This bill proposes increases in the fines for first and
subsequent violations of the mandatory seatbelt law. That law
as contained in Vehicle Code section 27315 does contain a unique
"cap" on the existing fines and applicable penalty assessments,
as follows (emphasis added):
(h) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 42001,
any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f) is an
infraction punishable by a fine, including all penalty
assessments and court costs imposed on the convicted
person, of not more than twenty dollars ($20) for a
first offense, and a fine, including all penalty
assessments and court costs imposed on the convicted
person, of not more than fifty dollars ($50) for each
subsequent offense. In lieu of the fine and any penalty
assessment or court costs, the court, pursuant to
Section 42005, may order that a person convicted of a
first offense attend a school for traffic violators or a
driving school in which the proper use of safety belts
is demonstrated.
(i) For any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f),
in addition to the fines provided for pursuant to
subdivision (h) and the penalty assessments provided for
pursuant to Section 1464 of the Penal Code, an
additional penalty assessment of two dollars ($2) shall
be levied for any first offense, and an additional
penalty assessment of five dollars ($5) shall be levied
for any subsequent offense.
All moneys collected pursuant to this subdivision shall be
utilized in accordance with Section 1464 of the Penal Code.
That unique provision limiting the application of additional
penalty assessments based on the Penal Code section 1464
provisions - and Government Code section 76000 - do not appear
to mean that those provisions do not apply but only that even
with the application of those additional penalty assessment the
total fines may not exceed the limits set in the statute. It
(More)
AB 1685 (Thomson)
Page 14
is not clear to Committee staff what the effect of the
increases proposed by this bill would be in terms of additional
monies to the state general fund, although the information
submitted by the author to the Assembly and Senate budget
committees do indicate an increase in both state and county
funding. However, it may be that some of the increase proposed
by this bill would be allocated to Penal Code section 1464 and
Government Code section 76000 purposes.
In addition, the mandatory seatbelt fines would also be subject
to the AB 3000 surcharge discussed in Comment #4, above.
GIVEN THE PROPOSED 20% FINE SURCHARGE PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET
TRAILER BILL, ARE ADDITIONAL INCREASES IN MANDATORY SEATBELT
FINES APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME?
***************