Drugged Driving:
2016 Summary of Key
Provisions of State Laws
Research current through August 30, 2016 (revised November 4, 2016).
This project was supported by Grant No. G15599ONDCP03A, awarded by the Office of
National Drug Control Policy. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the
author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy or the United States Government.
1
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
STATE
PAGE
ALABAMA .................................................................................................................................... 4
ALASKA ........................................................................................................................................ 7
ARIZONA .................................................................................................................................... 10
ARKANSAS................................................................................................................................. 13
CALIFORNIA ............................................................................................................................. 16
COLORADO ............................................................................................................................... 19
CONNECTICUT......................................................................................................................... 23
DELAWARE ............................................................................................................................... 25
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ..................................................................................................... 28
FLORIDA .................................................................................................................................... 31
GEORGIA ................................................................................................................................... 34
HAWAII....................................................................................................................................... 38
IDAHO ......................................................................................................................................... 41
ILLINOIS .................................................................................................................................... 44
INDIANA ..................................................................................................................................... 48
IOWA ........................................................................................................................................... 51
KANSAS ...................................................................................................................................... 54
KENTUCKY ............................................................................................................................... 57
LOUISIANA ................................................................................................................................ 60
MAINE ......................................................................................................................................... 63
MARYLAND ............................................................................................................................... 65
MASSACHUSETTS ................................................................................................................... 68
MICHIGAN ................................................................................................................................. 70
MINNESOTA .............................................................................................................................. 73
MISSISSIPPI ............................................................................................................................... 77
MISSOURI .................................................................................................................................. 79
MONTANA ................................................................................................................................. 82
NEBRASKA ................................................................................................................................ 85
NEVADA ..................................................................................................................................... 87
NEW HAMPSHIRE ................................................................................................................... 90
NEW JERSEY............................................................................................................................. 93
NEW MEXICO ........................................................................................................................... 95
2
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
STATE
PAGE
NEW YORK ................................................................................................................................ 98
NORTH CAROLINA ............................................................................................................... 100
NORTH DAKOTA ................................................................................................................... 103
OHIO.......................................................................................................................................... 106
OKLAHOMA ............................................................................................................................ 110
OREGON ................................................................................................................................... 113
PENNSYLVANIA ..................................................................................................................... 116
RHODE ISLAND ...................................................................................................................... 119
SOUTH CAROLINA ................................................................................................................ 122
SOUTH DAKOTA .................................................................................................................... 124
TENNESSEE ............................................................................................................................. 127
TEXAS ....................................................................................................................................... 129
UTAH ......................................................................................................................................... 132
VERMONT ................................................................................................................................ 135
VIRGINIA ................................................................................................................................. 138
WASHINGTON ........................................................................................................................ 141
WEST VIRGINIA ..................................................................................................................... 144
WISCONSIN ............................................................................................................................. 146
WYOMING ............................................................................................................................... 149
3
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALABAMA
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191.
Driving under the
influence (“DUI”) –
statute(s)
“A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
DUI – standard
vehicle while: . . . under the influence of a controlled substance to a
degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving . . . [or]
under the influence of any substance which impairs the mental or
physical faculties of such person to a degree which renders him or her
incapable of safely driving.” Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(a).
Controlled substance or “any substance which impairs the mental or
DUI - applicable
physical faculties of such person.”
substances
None. “The fact that any person charged with violating this section is
DUI – affirmative
or has been legally entitled to use . . . a controlled substance shall not
defense
constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.”
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(d).
None.
Per se – statute(s)
N/A
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable N/A
substances
Per se – affirmative N/A
defense
Alabama’s general implied consent statute (Ala.Code § 32-5-192)
Implied consent –
appears to apply only to chemical tests for the purpose of determining
applicable drivers
blood alcohol content. However, there is an implied consent provision
that applies to any person who operates a motor vehicle on Alabama’s
public highways and who is involved in an accident that results in
death or a serious physical injury. Ala. Code § 32-5-200(a).
In cases of an accident resulting in death or serious physical injury, a
Implied consent –
blood test for the presence of amphetamines, opiates, or cannabis.
tests authorized
Ala. Code § 32-5-200(a).
In cases of an accident resulting in death or serious physical injury,
Implied consent –
the test is at the direction of a law enforcement officer (“LEO”)
basis for test
having “reasonable grounds to believe” that a driver was operating a
vehicle under the influence of amphetamines, opiates, or cannabis.
Ala. Code § 32-5-200(a).
Although § 32-5-192 appears not to apply to testing for the presence
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal of controlled substances, evidence of the refusal to submit to a
chemical test under § 32-5-192 is “admissible in any civil, criminal, or
quasi-criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have
been committed while the person was driving or in actual physical
control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or
controlled substance.” Ala.Code § 32-5A-194(c).
4
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALABAMA
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
5
In cases of an accident resulting in death or serious physical injury,
the failure to submit to a test will result in a two-year suspension of
driving privileges for the offender. Ala. Code § 32-5-200(a). The
suspension can be reduced if it is determined subsequently that the
driver did not cause the accident. Ala. Code § 32-5-200(d).
None.
 First conviction 90-day license suspension, which may be stayed
if driver agrees to an approved ignition interlock device (“IID”) for
six months. Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(e).
 Second conviction within a five-year period  driver’s license
revoked for one year followed by the use of IID for two years.
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(f).
 Third conviction (lifetime) driver’s license revoked for three
years, followed by use of an IID for three years.
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(g).
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
revoked for five years, followed by use of an IID for five years.
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(g).
 If person convicted more than once in a five-year period, the
registration for all vehicles owned by the offender may be
suspended during the duration of the license suspension. Ala.Code
§ 32-5A-191(q).
 First conviction jail sentence up to one year; fine of $600$2,100. Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(e).
 Second conviction within five years  jail sentence of five days to
one year (or at least 30 days community service); fine of $1,000$5,100. Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(f).
 Third conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 60 days to one year;
fine of $2,100-$10,100. Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(g).
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) Class C felony; jail
sentence of one year to 10 years; fine of $4,100-$10,100.
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(g).
 Criminal penalties are enhanced in cases where the driver “causes
serious physical injury to the person of another.”
Ala.Code § 13A-6-20.
Criminal penalties are enhanced if a driver age 21 or older commits a
violation with a passenger under the age of 14 in the vehicle.
Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(j).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALABAMA
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
6
Any person convicted of a violation must be referred for substance
abuse evaluation and be required to complete a court-approved DUI or
substance abuse court referral program. The offender’s license may
be not reissued until he / she provides proof that the program has been
completed. Ala.Code § 32-5A-191(k).
Alabama does not allow the use of marijuana for recreational or
medicinal purposes.
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALASKA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
7
AS § 28.35.030.
“A person commits the crime of driving while under the influence of
. . . [a]controlled substance if the person operates or drives a motor
vehicle or operates an aircraft or a watercraft: . . . while under the
influence of . . . any controlled substance, singly or in combination
. . . .” AS § 28.35.030(a)(1).
Controlled substance.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Alaska’s general implied consent provision (§ 28.35.031(a)) appears
to apply only for purposes of consenting to a chemical test of breath
“for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content of the person’s
blood or breath.” However, under § 28.35.031(g) and
§ 28.35.035, a person who operates or drives a motor vehicle in
Alaska grants consent to a chemical test if they are “involved in a
motor vehicle accident that causes death or serious physical injury to
another person.” AS § 28.35.031(g); AS § 28.35.035.
In cases of an accident resulting in death or serious physical injury to
another person, a chemical test or tests of blood and urine.
AS § 28.35.031(g).
In cases of an accident resulting in death or serious physical injury to
another person, the LEO must have “probable cause to believe” that
the person was operating a vehicle involved in the accident.
AS § 28.35.031(g).
Refusal of a test is admissible evidence in a civil or criminal action
arising out of an act alleged to have been committed by a person while
committing a violation. AS § 28.35.032(e).
The refusal to submit to a test is subject to the same administrative
penalties as a conviction. AS § 28.15.181(c).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALASKA
8
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Pursuant to the statutory language, the refusal to submit to a chemical
test is a Class A misdemeanor and subject to the same criminal
penalties as a conviction. AS § 28.35.032(f), (g). The constitutionality
of this, however, has been called into question by the U.S. Supreme
Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016),
which holds that a state cannot place criminal penalty on a driver’s
refusal to undergo a warrantless blood test to determine alcohol
concentration.
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction license revoked for at least 90 days; use of IID
for six months.
 Second conviction (lifetime) license revoked for at least one
year; use of IID for one year.
 Third conviction (lifetime) license revoked for at least three
years; use of IID for 18 months.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) license revoked for at
least five years; use of IID for 24-60 months. AS § 28.15.181(c).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
revoked permanently. AS § 28.35.030(n).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction (lifetime) Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence of
at least 72 consecutive hours; fine of at least $1,500.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least 20 days;
fine up to $3,000.
 Third conviction (lifetime)jail sentence of at least 60 days; fine
up to $4,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least 120 days;
fine of at least $5,000.
 Fifth conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least 240 days; fine
of at least $6,000.
 Sixth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least
360 days; fine of at least $7,000. AS § 28.35.030(b).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years Class C felony;
jail sentence of 120-360 days; fine of at least $10,000.
AS § 28.35.030(n).
 If the act leading to a conviction “contributes” to an accident, the
court must order the offender “to pay the reasonable cost of any
emergency services that responded to the accident, if the convicted
person or the convicted person’s insurer has not already paid the
cost of the emergency services.” AS § 28.35.030(m).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ALASKA
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
9
A person commits the crime of endangering the welfare of a minor in
the first degree if the person transports a child in a motor vehicle,
aircraft, or watercraft while in violation of AS § 28.35.030.
AS § 11.51.100(b). Although the age of the child is not listed in
subsection (b) of the statute, subsection (a) of the statute refers to a
“child under 16 years of age.”
If convicted, the offender must be ordered by the court to undergo
“the screening, evaluation, referral, and program requirements of an
alcohol safety action program if such a program is available in the
community where the person resides.” If offender is convicted of a
felony, the evaluation is to occur prior to sentencing.
AS § 28.35.030(h).
Alaska allows the medicinal and recreational use of marijuana, but
Alaska laws do not specifically address the use of marijuana in a
vehicle.
 Dale v. State, 209 P.3d 1038 (Alaska Ct. App. 2009) exigent
circumstances exist as a matter of law to justify a warrantless blood
draw from defendant who was involved in a motor vehicle accident
that caused serious injury to his passengers.
 State v. Blank, 90 P.3d 156 (Alaska 2004) construing
AS § 28.35.031(g) to be constitutional in context of warrantless
searches for breath or blood in accident cases involving death or
serious physical injury “when probable cause to search exists and
the search falls within a recognized exception to the warrant
requirement.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARIZONA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
10
A.R.S. § 28-1381.
“It is unlawful for a person to drive or be in actual physical control of
a vehicle in this state under any of the following circumstances: . . .
[w]hile under the influence of . . . any drug . . . if the person is
impaired to the slightest degree.” A.R.S. § 28-1381(A)(1).
Any drug.
None. “It is not a defense to a charge of a violation . . . that the person
is or has been entitled to use the drug under the laws of this state.”
A.R.S. § 28-1381(B).
A.R.S. § 28-1381.
“It is unlawful for a person to drive or be in actual physical control of
a vehicle in this state under any of the following circumstances: . . .
[w]hile there is any drug defined in [A.R.S.] § 13-3401 or its
metabolite in the person’s body.” A.R.S. § 28-1381(A)(3).
Any drug defined in A.R.S. § 13-3401.
A person “using a drug as prescribed by a [licensed] medical
practitioner” is not guilty of a violation. A.R.S. § 28-1381(D).
Any person who operates a motor vehicle in Arizona.
A.R.S. § 28-1321(A); A.R.S. § 28-673(A).
Test or tests of the person’s blood, breath, urine or other bodily
substance. A.R.S. § 28-1321(A); A.R.S. § 28-673(A).
 Test can be requested if: (1) person is arrested for any offense
arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while
committing a violation; and (2) LEO has “reasonable grounds to
believe” that the person was operating a vehicle while under the
influence. A.R.S. § 28-1321(A).
 Test can be requested if: (1) person was involved in a traffic
accident “resulting in death or physical injury”; and (2) LEO has
“probably cause to believe” that the person caused the accident.
A.R.S. § 28-673(A).
Evidence of refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or
other proceeding. A.R.S. § 28-1388(D).
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for 12 months.
 Second or subsequent refusal in past 84 months driver’s license
suspended for two years. A.R.S. § 28-1321(B).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARIZONA
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction license suspension of at least 90 days (however
this can be lessened to 30 days with 60 days of restricted driving in
certain circumstances). A.R.S. § 28-1381(I).
 Second conviction within 84 months driver’s license revoked for
at least one year. A.R.S. § 28-1381(K).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 84 months treated as an
aggravated offense subject to enhanced penalties.
A.R.S. § 28-1383.
 Person convicted of violation must use IID for 12 months, except
in cases where the driver violated the “per se” provision for drugs,
completes required drug/alcohol screening and the court determines
that no alcohol treatment is required. A.R.S. § 28-3319(D),(G).
 If the convicted offender “causes an accident that results in an
appropriate emergency response,” they are liable for the expenses
of that response up to $1,000. A.R.S. § 28-1386(A).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction  Class 1 misdemeanor; jail sentence 10 days to
six months; fine of $250-$2,500; two $500 assessments.
A.R.S. § 28-1381(I); A.R.S. § 13-707; A.R.S. § 13-802.
 Second conviction within past 84 months jail sentence of 90 days
to six months; fine of $500-$2,500; 30 hours of community
restitution; two $1,250 assessments. A.R.S. § 28-1381(K);
A.R.S. § 13-707; A.R.S. § 13-802.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 84 months treated as an
aggravated offense subject to enhanced penalties.
A.R.S. § 28-1383.
Driver can be charged with aggravated DUI if a violation is
committed while a passenger under age 15 is in the vehicle.
A.R.S. § 28-1383(A)(3).
Court must order an offender to complete alcohol or other drug
screening that is provided by an approved facility. If the judge
determines that the person requires further alcohol or other drug
education or treatment, the person may be required to obtain alcohol
or other drug education or treatment under the court’s supervision
from an approved facility. A.R.S. § 28-1387(B). For first/second
offenders, the judge may suspend all but one day (30 days) of the
sentence if the person completes a court ordered alcohol or other drug
screening, education or treatment program. A.R.S. § 28-1381(J).
Arizona allows the medicinal use of marijuana, but Arizona laws do
not specifically address the use of marijuana in a vehicle.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
11
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARIZONA
Selected state court
decisions
12
 Dobson v. McClennen, 238 Ariz. 389, 361 P.3d 374 (2015)
holding that the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act “does not
immunize a medical marijuana cardholder from prosecution under
§ 28–1381(A)(3), but instead affords an affirmative defense if the
cardholder shows that the marijuana or its metabolite was in a
concentration insufficient to cause impairment.”
 State v. Harris, 237 Ariz. 98, 346 P.3d 984 (2014) holding that
Carboxy-THC is not a “metabolite” under A.R.S. § 28–1381(A)(3)
and stating that the “metabolite” reference is “limited to any of a
proscribed substance’s metabolites that are capable of causing
impairment.”
 State v. Bayardi, 230 Ariz. 195, 281 P.3d 1063 (Ariz. Ct. App.
2013) A.R.S. § 28-1381(D) is an affirmative defense that
requires defendant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
that he used prescription drugs as prescribed by a licensed
practitioner.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARKANSAS
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
13
A.C.A. § 5-65-103.
“It is unlawful and punishable . . . for a person who is intoxicated to
operate or be in actual physical control of . . . a motor vehicle.”
A.C.A. § 5-65-103(a)(1). “Intoxicated” means “influenced or affected
by the ingestion of . . . a controlled substance . . . to such a degree that
the driver’s reactions, motor skills, and judgment are substantially
altered and the driver, therefore, constitutes a clear and substantial
danger of physical injury or death to himself or herself or another
person.” A.C.A. § 5-65-102(4).
Controlled substance.
None. Pursuant to statutory language, an “alcohol-related offense” is
a strict liability offense, requiring no proof of the driver’s state of
mind. A.C.A. § 5-65-103(c). As a result, it would appear that in order
to prosecute a violation based on the use of a controlled substance, the
state must provide that the driver had a culpable mental state.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
 Applies to a person who operates a motor vehicle in Arkansas and
who is either: (1) arrested for an act alleged to be committed while
driving while intoxicated; or (2) “involved in an accident.”
A.C.A. § 5-65-202(a).
 Applies to a person who operates a motor vehicle in Arkansas and
is involved in an accident that did result in, or there is reasonable
cause to believe may result in, the loss of human life.
A.C.A. § 5-65-208.
In either of the above cases, one or more chemical tests of blood,
breath, saliva, or urine.
In cases where there is no accident resulting in the loss of human life,
the tests may be done at the direction of a LEO having “reasonable
cause to believe the person” operated a motor vehicle while
intoxicated. A.C.A. § 5-65-203(a).
A defendant’s refusal to submit to a chemical test is admissible
evidence on the issue of intoxication. Metzner v. State, 2015 Ark.
222, 462 S.W.3d 650 (2015).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARKANSAS
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction six-month license suspension.
 Second conviction within five years 24-month license
suspension.
 Third conviction within five years 30-month license suspension.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within five years four-year
license revocation; vehicle may be seized. A.C.A. § 5-65-104(a).
 IID provisions do not apply if violation based on use of a
controlled substance. A.C.A. § 5-65-104(a).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction unclassified misdemeanor; jail sentence of 24
hours to one year; fine of $150-$1,000.
 Second conviction within five years unclassified misdemeanor;
jail sentence of seven days to one year; fine of $400-$3,000.
 Third conviction within five years unclassified misdemeanor; jail
sentence of 90 days to one year; fine of $900-$5,000.
 Fourth conviction within five years unclassified felony; jail
sentence of one year to six years; fine of $900-$5,000.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction within five years unclassified
felony; jail sentence of two years to ten years; fine of $900-$5,000.
 Sixth or subsequent conviction within ten years Class B felony;
jail sentence of two years to ten years; fine of $900-$5,000.
A.C.A. § 5-65-111(a)-(f), § 5-65-112.
Penalties and fines are increased if there is a passenger under age 16 in
car at time of the offense, although there is an affirmative defense if
the driver was not more than two years older than the passenger.
A.C.A. § 5-65-111(i).
A person whose driving privilege is suspended or revoked for driving
while intoxicated is required to complete an alcohol education
program or an alcohol treatment program unless the charges are
dismissed or the person is acquitted. A.C.A. § 5-65-115.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
14
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for 180 days.
 Second refusal within five years driver’s license suspended for
two years.
 Third refusal within five years driver’s license revoked for three
years.
 Fourth refusal within five years driver’s license permanently
revoked. A.C.A. § 5-65-205(b).
There does not appear to be a criminal penalty for refusing a chemical
test for drivers aged 21 or older. If a driver under age 21 is arrested
for driving while intoxicated or for refusal of a test, however, the
driver faces criminal fines between $100-$2,000, depending upon the
number of prior occurrences. A.C.A. § 5-65-305.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ARKANSAS
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
15
Arkansas does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
 Metzner v. State, 2015 Ark. 222, 462 S.W.3d 650 (2015) An
Arkansas driver’s ability to refuse a chemical test applies only to a
warrantless test. State law does not prohibit an LEO from
obtaining a search warrant to compel a chemical test after refusal.
 Leeka v. State, 2015 Ark. 183, 461 S.W.3d 331 (2015) the
offense of driving while intoxicated requires a “culpable mental
state,” that is, that the driver acted “purposely, knowingly, or
recklessly.” Subsequent to the decision, the statute was changed to
remove this requirement with respect to alcohol-related offenses,
but not other drug-related offenses.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
CALIFORNIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard(s)
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
16
Cal. Vehicle Code § 23152.
 “It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any drug
to drive a vehicle.” Cal. Vehicle Code § 23152(e).
 “It is unlawful for a person who is addicted to the use of any drug
to drive a vehicle.” Cal. Vehicle Code § 23152(c).
Any drug.
The provision prohibiting persons addicted to any drug from driving a
vehicle does “not apply to a person who is participating in [an
approved] narcotic treatment program.” Cal. Vehicle Code
§ 23152(c).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Anyone who drives a vehicle in California. Cal. Vehicle Code
§ 23612(a)(1)(B).
Chemical testing of blood for the purpose of determining drug
content. If a blood test is unavailable, the driver is deemed to have
given consent for chemical testing of urine. Cal. Vehicle Code
§ 23612(a)(1)(B).
Test is to be given incidental to a lawful arrest and administered at the
direction of an LEO having “reasonable cause to believe” the person
was driving a motor vehicle in violation of state drugged driving laws.
Cal. Vehicle Code § 23612(a)(1)(C).
The refusal of a chemical test “may be used against [the defendant] in
a court of law.” Cal. Vehicle Code § 23612(a)(4).
 First refusal  driver’s license suspension of one year.
 Refusal within 10 years of a prior conviction driver’s license
revoked for two years.
 Refusal within 10 years of two or more prior convictions driver’s
license revoked for three years. Cal. Vehicle Code § 13353(a).
Upon a conviction for an offense, the driver’s refusal to take a
chemical test is “a special factor that may justify enhancing the
penalties in sentencing, in determining whether to grant probation,
and, if probation is granted, in determining additional or enhanced
terms and conditions of probation.” Cal. Vehicle Code § 23578.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
CALIFORNIA
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license suspension of six months.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
two years; use of IID for one year.
 Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
three years; use of IID for two years.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
suspension of four years; use of IID for three years.
Cal. Vehicle Code § 13352(a); Cal. Vehicle Code § 23573.
 In cases where the offender caused bodily injury to one or more
persons, the length of time of suspension is longer.
Cal. Vehicle Code § 13352.
 A court may order a 10-year revocation of the driver’s license of a
person who has been convicted of three or more separate
violations. Cal. Vehicle Code § 23597.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First offense jail sentence of 96 hours to six months; fine of
$390-$1,000.
 Second offense within 10 years jail sentence of 90 days to one
year; fine of $390-$1,000.
 Third offense within 10 years jail sentence of 120 days to one
year; fine of $390-$1,000.
 Fourth or subsequent offense within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of 180 days to one year; fine of $390-$1,000.
Cal. Vehicle Code §§ 23536 – 23552; §§ 23554- 23568.
 There is a separate offense with increased penalties if a driver
causes bodily injury to another person while driving under the
influence. Cal. Vehicle Code § 23153.
 Driver committing a violation may be held liable for the cost of any
EMS response required as a result of their operation of a vehicle.
Cal. Gov. Code § 53150.
Enhancements to penalties if minor under age 14 in car at time of
violation. Cal. Vehicle Code § 23572.
As a condition of probation for a first-time offense, if such program is
available in the locality, the court must require that the driver enroll,
participate and complete a licensed “driving-under-the- influence
program.” Cal. Vehicle Code § 23538(b).
California law allows the medicinal use of marijuana. A patient in the
California Medical Marijuana Program may not smoke marijuana
“while in a motor vehicle that is being operated.” Cal. Health &
Safety Code § 11362.79(d).
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
17
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
CALIFORNIA
Selected state court
decisions
18
 People v. Arredondo, 245 Cal.App.4th 186 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016),
review granted 371 P.3d 240 (Cal. 2016) California Supreme
Court to review if a LEO violated the U.S. Fourth Amendment by
taking a warrantless blood sample from defendant while he was
unconscious, or was the search and seizure valid because the
defendant expressly consented to chemical testing when he applied
for a driver's license or because defendant was “deemed to have
given his consent” under California’s implied consent law?
 People v. Harris, 234 Cal.App.4th 671 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)
driver’s consent to warrantless blood draw after receiving implied
consent advisement satisfies U.S. Fourth Amendment. The fact
that a driver must choose between submitting to test and facing
serious consequences for refusal does not make consent coerced.
 People v. Mathson, 210 Cal.App.4th 1297 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)
“The evidence overwhelmingly establishes defendant knew or
should have known that the Ambien he took could have caused
sleep driving, even though he had not previously personally
experienced a sleep-driving episode after using Ambien. Thus,
defendant was voluntarily intoxicated, and the unconsciousness
instruction does not apply.”
 People v. Canty, 32 Cal. 4th 1266, 90 P.3d 1168 (2004) for a
defendant to be guilty of driving while under the influence of drugs
“‘the . . . drug(s) must have so far affected the nervous system, the
brain, or muscles [of the individual] as to impair to an appreciable
degree the ability to operate a vehicle in a manner like that of an
ordinarily prudent and cautious person in full possession of his
faculties. [Citations.]’”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
COLORADO
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
19
C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301.
 “A person who drives a motor vehicle or vehicle under the
influence of . . . one or more drugs . . . commits driving under the
influence.” C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301(1)(a). “Driving while under the
influence” (“DUI”) means that the substance affects the person “to
a degree that the person is substantially incapable, either mentally
or physically, or both mentally and physically, to exercise clear
judgment, sufficient physical control, or due care in the safe
operation of a vehicle.” C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301(1)(f).
 “A person who drives a motor vehicle or vehicle while impaired by
. . . one or more drugs . . . commits driving while ability impaired.”
C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301(1)(b). “Driving while ability impaired”
(“DWAI”) means that the substance affects the person “to the
slightest degree so that the person is less able than the person
ordinarily would have been, either mentally or physically, or both
mentally and physically, to exercise clear judgment, sufficient
physical control, or due care in the safe operation of a vehicle.”
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301(1)(g).
Any drug means a drug defined in C.R.S.A. § 27-80-203(13), a
controlled substance defined in C.R.S.A. § 18-18-102(5), and any
inhaled glue, aerosol, or other toxic vapor or vapors.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301(1)(d).
None. The fact that a person charged is entitled to use one or more
drugs under Colorado law, “including, but not limited to, the medical
use of marijuana” does not constitute a defense.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301(e).
C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301.
If, at the time of an offense, “or within a reasonable time thereafter,”
the driver’s blood contains five nanograms or more of delta 9tetrahydrocannabinol per milliliter in whole blood, that fact “gives rise
to a permissible inference” that the defendant was under the influence
of one or more drugs. C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301(6)(a).
Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”).
None.
Any person who drives any motor vehicle upon the streets and
highways of Colorado. C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301.1(2)(b).
Test or tests of blood, saliva, and urine. The driver must cooperate so
that the test can be obtained within two hours of driving.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301.1(2)(b).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
COLORADO
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
20
 LEO must have “probable cause to believe” that the person was
driving a motor vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws and
“when it is reasonable to require such testing.” C.R.S.A. § 42-41301.1(2)(b). However, the driver’s possession of his or her own
valid medicinal use of marijuana registry card, “in the absence of
other contributing factors,” does not constitute probable cause for
an analysis of blood. C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301(6)(k).
 LEO may “physically restrain” a person in order to obtain a
chemical test only when the LEO has “probable cause to believe”
that the driver has committed vehicular assault or homicide.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301.1(3).
The refusal to take, complete or cooperate with taking any tests is
admissible at trial, and a person may not claim the privilege against
self-incrimination with regard to admission of refusal.
C.R.S.A.§ 42-4-1301(6)(d).
 First refusal driver’s license revoked for one year.
 Second refusal license revoked for two years.
 Third or subsequent refusal license revoked for three years.
C.R.S.A. § 42-2-126(3)(c).
None.
 First conviction (ability impaired) no license suspension.
 First conviction (DUI) driver’s license suspension for nine
months.
 Second offense (lifetime) driver’s license suspension for 12
months.
 Third offense (lifetime) driver’s license suspension for 24
months. C.R.S.A. § 42-2-125.
 Persons convicted of a third DUI or DWAI offense within seven
years also face a mandatory five-year license revocation under the
"habitual traffic offender" statute.
 In addition, the person must hold a restricted license (IID) for a
minimum of two years upon restoration of driving privileges.
C.R.S.A. § 42-2-132.5.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
COLORADO
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
21
 First conviction (ability impaired) misdemeanor; jail sentence of
two days to 180 days; fine of $200-$500; 24-48 hours community
service.
 First conviction (DWI) misdemeanor; jail sentence of five days
to one year; fine of $600-$1,000; 48-96 hours community service.
 Second conviction (lifetime) misdemeanor; jail sentence of 10
days to one year; fine of $600-$1,500; 48-120 hours community
service.
 Third conviction (lifetime) misdemeanor; jail sentence of 60
days to one year; fine of $600-$1,500; 48-120 hours community
service.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) Class 4 felony; jail
sentence of two to six years; 48-120 hours community service.
 Criminal penalties are enhanced in cases where driver causes
bodily injury to another person while committing a violation.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1307; C.R.S.A. § 18-1.3-401.
There does not appear to be a law that directly addresses the
commission of a violation with a child as a passenger, but it is against
the law to “permit[] a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation
that poses a threat of injury to the child’s life or health.”
C.R.S.A. § 18-6-401(1)(a).
 Each judicial department administers an alcohol and drug driving
safety program that provides pre-sentence and post-sentence
alcohol and drug evaluations on all persons convicted of a
violation. These programs provide supervision and monitoring of
all persons whose sentences or terms of probation require
completion of a program of alcohol and drug driving safety
education or treatment. C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1301.3(3)(a).
 Driver who refuses a chemical test is given a “Persistent Drunk
Driver” designation, which requires the driver to complete a Level
II Alcohol and Drug Education and Treatment program.
C.R.S.A. § 42-2-132.5.
Colorado allows the medicinal and recreational use of marijuana. A
person in the passenger area of a motor vehicle may not use marijuana
or have an open marijuana container in their possession.
C.R.S.A. § 42-4-1305.5.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
COLORADO
Selected state court
decisions
22
 People v. Ackerman, 346 P.3d 61 (Colo. 2015) exigent
circumstances existed, allowing police to take a warrantless
nonconsensual blood draw, “where the police were still
investigating the scene of the crime and were not finished
preparing the affidavit for a warrant when they learned that hospital
personnel were taking the unconscious and injured defendant for
medical procedures that could alter his blood-alcohol content.”
 People v. Smith, 254 P.3d 1158 (Colo. 2011) court establishes
“that the police do not need to obtain a driver’s consent prior to
drawing his blood when they have probable cause that the driver
committed vehicular assault under the influence of alcohol or
drugs, and that they may physically restrain a driver who resists or
refuses to cooperate.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
CONNECTICUT
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
23
C.G.S.A. § 14-227a.
“No person shall operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of
intoxicating liquor or any drug or both.” C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(a).
Any drug.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle in Connecticut.
C.G.S.A. § 14-227b(a).
Chemical analysis of blood, breath or urine. C.G.S.A. § 14-227b(a).
Test at the option of a LEO after driver arrested for operating a vehicle
while under the influence. C.G.S.A. § 14-227b(b).
Evidence that a driver refused to submit to a blood, breath or urine test
may be used in any criminal prosecution for a violation of
C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(a). The court is to instruct the jury as to any
inference that may or may not be drawn from the refusal.
C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(e).
 First refusal driver’s license suspension of 45 days; use of IID
for one year.
 Second refusal driver’s license suspension of 45 days; use of IID
for two years.
 Third or subsequent violation driver’s license suspension of 45
days; use of IID for three years. C.G.S.A. § 14-227b(i).
None.
 First conviction driver’s license suspension of 45 days; use of
IID for one year.
 Second violation within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
45 days; use of IID for three years.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
permanently revoked; must wait at least two years for
reconsideration hearing. C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(g).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
CONNECTICUT
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
24
 First conviction jail sentence of 48 hours to six months (or
suspended sentence and 100 hours of community service); fine of
$500-$1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 120 days to
two years; fine of $1,000-$4,000; sentenced to probation (100
hours community service, assessment and possible treatment
program).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of one to three years; fine of $2,000-$8,000; sentence to
probation (100 hours community service, assessment and possible
treatment program). C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(g).
 Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence and causing
“serious physical injury” to another person is assault in the second
degree with a motor vehicle and a Class D felony.
C.G.S.A. § 53a-60d.
 Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence and causing
the death of another person is manslaughter in the second degree
with a motor vehicle and a Class C felony. C.G.S.A. § 53a-56b.
There do not appear to be enhanced penalties in Connecticut if the
offense is committed with a child in the vehicle.
 In addition to any fine or sentence imposed, the court may order a
violator to participate in an alcohol education and treatment
program. C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(j).
 Upon a second conviction, the offender must submit to an
assessment through the Connecticut Court Support Services
Division of the degree of such person’s alcohol or drug abuse, and
undergo a treatment program if so ordered. C.G.S.A. § 14-227a(g).
Connecticut allows certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal purposes. A patient may not ingest marijuana “in a motor
bus or a school bus or in any other moving vehicle.” C.G.S.A. § 21a408a(b)(2).
State v. Weisenberg, 830 A.2d 795 (Conn. Ct. App. 2013)  rejecting
defendant’s request to overturn jury conviction because prosecution
had not proven the exact quantity of drugs in bloodstream.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DELAWARE
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
25
21 Del.C. § 4177.
“No person shall drive a vehicle: . . . [w]hen the person is under the
influence of any drug.” 21 Del.C. § 4177(a)(2).
Any drug.
“Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)b of this section [defense for
per se provision] the fact that any person charged with violating this
section is, or has been, legally entitled to use alcohol or a drug shall
not constitute a defense.” 21 Del.C. § 4177(b)(1).
21 Del.C. § 4177.
“No person shall drive a vehicle . . . [w]hen the person’s blood
contains, within 4 hours of driving, any amount of an illicit or
recreational drug that is the result of the unlawful use or consumption
of such illicit or recreational drug or any amount of a substance or
compound that is the result of the unlawful use or consumption of an
illicit or recreational drug prior to or during driving.”
21 Del.C. § 4177(a)(6).
“Illicit or recreational drug” or a substance or compound that results
from the unlawful use of such drug. The term “illicit or recreational
drug” is defined as: (1) a Schedule I controlled substance; (2) cocaine
or any mixture containing it; (3) amphetamine, or any mixture
containing it; (4) methamphetamine, or any mixture containing it; (5)
phencyclidine, or of any mixture containing it; (6) a “designer drug,”
as defined by Delaware law; or (7) a “substance or preparation having
the property of releasing vapors or fumes which may be used for the
purpose of producing a condition of intoxication, inebriation,
stupefaction or lethargy or for the purpose of dulling the brain or
nervous system.” 21 Del.C. § 4177(c)(7).
 There is no violation where the driver did not consume the illicit or
recreational drug prior to or during driving, but instead consumed
the substance after driving. 21 Del.C. § 4177(b)(3)(a).
 There is no violation if the driver “used or consumed the drug or
drugs detected according to the directions and terms of a lawfully
obtained prescription for such drug or drugs.”
21 Del.C. § 4177(b)(3)(b).
Anyone who drives, operates or has actual physical control of a
vehicle within Delaware. 21 Del.C. § 2740(a).
Chemical test or tests of blood, breath and/or urine for the purpose of
determining the presence of alcohol or a drug or drugs.
21 Del.C. § 2740(a).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DELAWARE
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
26
 Testing may be required if a LEO has “probable cause to believe”
the driver was operating a vehicle in violation of 21 Del.C. § 4177.
21 Del.C. § 2740(a).
 Testing is required if a LEO has “probable cause to believe” the
driver was violating 21 Del.C. § 4177 and “was involved in an
accident which resulted in a person’s death.” 21 Del.C. § 2740(b).
Refusal can be admitted into any trial arising out of actions alleged to
have been committed by any person while in violation of Delaware’s
drugged driving law. 21 Del.C. § 2749.
 Refusal  driver’s license revoked for one year.
 Refusal with one prior conviction within five years driver’s
license revoked for 18 months.
 Refusal with two or more prior convictions within five years
driver’s license revoked for 24 months. 21 Del.C. § 2742(b)(1).
None.
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for three months.
 Second conviction within five years driver’s license revoked for
one year.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years driver’s license
revoked for 18 months. 21 Del.C. § 2742(c)(1).
 Upon conviction, an offender may not operate a motor vehicle
unless it is equipped with a functioning IID as set forth in
21 Del.C. §§ 4177C, 4177G, 4177(e).
 First conviction jail sentence up to one year; $500-$1,500 fine.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 60 days to 18
months; fine of $750-$2,500.
 Third conviction (lifetime) Class G felony; jail sentence of one
to two years; fine of up to $5,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) Class E felony; jail sentence of two
to five years; fine of up to $7,000.
 Fifth conviction (lifetime) Class E felony; jail sentence of three
to five years; fine of up to $10,000.
 Sixth conviction (lifetime) Class D felony; jail sentence of four
to eight years; fine of up to 10,000.
 Seventh or subsequent conviction (lifetime) Class C felony; jail
sentence of five to 15 years; fine up to $15,000.
21 Del.C. § 4177(d).
 In cases where the offender caused either bodily injury or serious
bodily injury to another, the driver can be charged with vehicular
assault. 11 Del.C. §§ 628A-629.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DELAWARE
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
27
Any offense committed while a person under age 17 is in the vehicle
results in: (1) for the first offense, an additional fine of $500-$1,500
and at least 40 hours of community service in a program benefiting
children; or (2) for each subsequent offense, an additional fine of
$750-$2,500 and at least 80 hours of community service in a program
benefiting children. 21 Del.C. § 4177(d)(10).
A person whose license has been suspended for either refusing a
chemical test or a violation of 21 Del.C. § 4177 cannot have the
license reissued until completing a program established under 21
Del.C. § 4177D (“Courses of instruction; rehabilitation programs”).
21 Del.C. § 2743(c)(1).
Delaware allows certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal purposes. A patient may not smoke marijuana “[i]n any
form of transportation.” 16 Del.C. § 4904A(3).
Flonnory v. State, 109 A.3d 1060 (Del. 2015) “Due to the invasive
nature of this procedure, a Fourth Amendment totality of the
circumstances analysis must be performed when the search is not
based upon a warrant or exigent circumstances in order to determine
whether a defendant voluntarily consented to the blood draw.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
28
DC ST § 50-2206.11; DC ST § 50-2206.14.
 “No person shall operate or be in physical control of any vehicle in
the District: . . . [w]hile the person is under the influence of alcohol
or any drug or any combination thereof.” DC ST § 50-2206.11(2).
 No person shall operate or be in physical control of any vehicle in
the District while the person’s ability to operate or be in physical
control of a vehicle is impaired by . . . any drug or any combination
thereof.” DC ST § 50-2206.14.
Any drug. “Drug” means “any chemical substance that affects the
processes of the mind or body, including but not limited to a
controlled substance . . . and any prescription or non-prescription
medication.” DC ST § 50-2206.01(6).
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person operating a motor vehicle within the District.
DC ST § 50-1904.02(a).
Consent to provide two specimens for chemical testing of the person’s
blood, breath, or urine. DC ST § 50-1904.02(a).
 Test can be requested if: (1) LEO has “reasonable grounds to
believe” that a person is operating vehicle while intoxicated or
impaired; and (2) after driver’s arrest. DC ST § 50-1904.02(a).
 If the arrested person was involved in a collision that resulted in a
fatality, a LEO “may employ whatever means are reasonable to
collect blood specimens from the person if the law enforcement
officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the person was
intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or of any drug or any
combination thereof.” DC ST § 50-1905(d).
Evidence of the refusal is “admissible in any civil or criminal
proceeding arising as a result of the acts alleged to have been
committed by the person prior to the arrest.” DC ST § 50-1905(c). If
the offender has a prior DUI conviction, however, “there shall be a
rebuttable presumption that the person is under the influence of
alcohol or a drug or any combination thereof.” DC ST § 50-1905(b).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Driver’s license suspension of 12 months.
DC ST § 50-1905(a)(1)(2)(A).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)

None.
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for up to six months.
 Second conviction within 15 years driver’s license revoked for
up to one year.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 15 years driver’s license
revoked for up to two years. DC ST § 50-1403.02.
 Any person whose licenses has been revoked may apply for
participation in an IID program. 18 DCMR § 311.3.






29
First conviction (impaired) jail sentence of up to 90 days; $500
fine.
First conviction (influence) jail sentence up to 180 days, with a
minimum of 15 days “if the person’s blood or urine contains a
Schedule I chemical or controlled substance . . . Phencyclidine,
Cocaine, Methadone, Morphine, or one of its active metabolites or
analogs”; $1,000 fine.
Second conviction within 15 years (impaired) jail sentence of 5
days to one year; fine of $1,000-$2,500.
Second conviction within 15 years (influence) jail sentence of
10 days to one year, with a minimum of 20 days “if the person’s
blood or urine contains a Schedule I chemical or controlled
substance . . . Phencyclidine, Cocaine, Methadone, Morphine, or
one of its active metabolites or analogs”; fine of $2,500-$5,000.
Third or subsequent conviction within 15 years (impaired) jail
sentence of 10 days to one year; fine of $1,000-$5,000.
Third conviction within 15 years (influence) jail sentence of 15
days to one year, with a minimum of 25 days “if the person’s
blood or urine contains a Schedule I chemical or controlled
substance . . . Phencyclidine, Cocaine, Methadone, Morphine, or
one of its active metabolites or analogs”; fine of $2,500-$10,000.
Fourth or subsequent conviction within 15 years(influence)
same as third offense with an additional 30-day minimum sentence
added for each additional violation. DC ST § 50-2206.13(a)-(d);
DC ST § 50-2206.15(a)-(c).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
If an offender had a passenger under age 18 in the vehicle at the time
of the offense, then the offender faces additional penalties of: (1) fine
of $500-$1,000; and (2) mandatory minimum prison sentences of five
days or 10 days, with the higher sentence occurring if the minor is not
restrained in age-appropriate safety restraint. DC ST § 50-2206.18(a).
Any person convicted of violating § 50-2206.11 or § 50-2206.14 for
the second time within 15 years “shall have his or her alcohol or drug
abuse history assessed and a treatment program prescribed as
appropriate.” DC ST § 50-2206.54.
The District of Columbia allows persons to possess marijuana for
recreational use and for certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal use. A patient is not allowed to ingest marijuana anywhere
but their residence or a medical treatment facility.
DC ST § 7-1671.03(b).


Taylor v. District of Columbia, 49 A.3d 1259 (D.C. 2012) OWI
does not carry a lesser impairment standard that DWI (despite
lesser penalties), but rather was created as a “lesser offense” to
promote plea bargaining.
Karamychev v. District of Columbia, 772 A.2d 806 (D.C. 2001)
“A person is guilty of DUI if he or she is ‘to the slightest degree ...
less able, either mentally or physically or both, to exercise the
clear judgment and steady hand necessary to handle as powerful
and dangerous a mechanism as a modern automobile with safety to
himself or the public.’”
,
30
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
FLORIDA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
31
F.S.A. § 316.193.
“A person is guilty of the offense of driving under the influence . . . if
the person is driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within
this state and: . . . [t]he person is under the influence of . . . any
chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance controlled
under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that the person’s
normal faculties are impaired.” F.S.A. § 316.193(1)(a).
Any chemical substance in F.S.A. § 877.111 [harmful chemical
substances] or any controlled substance.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who accepts the privilege of operating a motor vehicle in
Florida. F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(a)(1)(b).
Urine and/or blood test for the purpose of detecting the presence of
chemical substances or controlled substances.
F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(a)(1)(b); § 316.1932(1)(c).
 In cases of a urine test: (1) the driver must have been lawfully
arrested for any offense allegedly committed while driving under
the influence of chemical substances or controlled substances; and
(2) the LEO must have “reasonable cause to believe” the person
was driving under the influence. F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(a)(1)(b).
 In cases of a blood test, the test can be administered “if there is
reasonable cause to believe” the person was driving while under
the influence and “the person appears for treatment at a hospital,
clinic, or other medical facility and the administration of a breath
or urine test is impractical or impossible.”
F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(c).
 If a LEO has “probable cause to believe” a motor vehicle driven by
someone under the influence has caused “the death or serious
bodily injury of a human,” the LEO must require a blood test, and
“may use reasonable force if necessary.” No arrest is needed in
this case. F.S.A. § 316.1933(1)(a).
The refusal to submit to a urine or blood test upon the request of an
LEO is admissible into evidence in any criminal proceeding.
F.S.A. § 316.1932(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
FLORIDA
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
 First refusal driver’s license suspension of one year.
 Second or subsequent refusal driver’s license suspension of 18
months. F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(a)(1)(b).
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction vehicle impounded for 10 days; driver’s license
revoked for 180 days to one year; court may require use of IID for
six months.
 Second conviction within five years vehicle impounded for 30
days; driver’s license revoked for five years (eligible for hardship
reinstatement after one year); use of IID for one year.
 Third conviction within 10 years of second conviction driver’s
license revoked for 10 years (may be eligible for hardship
reinstatement after two years); use of IID for two years; if third
conviction within 10 years, vehicle impounded for 90 days.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) permanent license revocation.
F.S.A. § 316.193(2)(a), (6); § 322.271; § 322.28.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction jail sentence of up to six months; fine of $500$1,000; one year probation; 50 hours community service.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of up to nine months;
fine of $1,000-$2,000; if second offense is within five years of
prior offense, the minimum jail sentence is 10 days.
 Third conviction, within 10 years of second offense third degree
felony, punishable as provided in F.S.A. §§ 775.082- 775.084
(minimum jail sentence of 30 days).
 Third conviction, more than 10 years since second offense  jail
sentence up to 12 months; fine of $2,000-$5,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) third degree felony, punishable as
provided in F.S.A. §§ 775.082- 775.084; fine of at least $2,000.
F.S.A. § 316.193(2).
 Criminal penalties are increased if a driver commits a violation
while either: (1) causing damage to property of another; (2) causing
serious bodily injury to another person; or (3) causing the death of
“any human being or unborn child.” F.S.A. § 316.193(3).
Criminal penalties are enhanced if a person commits a violation while
a person under age 18 is in the vehicle. F.S.A. § 316.193(3)-(4).
Child
endangerment
32
It is a misdemeanor of the first degree to refuse a chemical test for a
second time. The offense is punishable as provided in F.S.A.
§ 775.082 or § 775.083. F.S.A. § 316.1932(1)(b); § 316.1939(1)(e).
The constitutionality of this, however, has been called into question by
the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136
S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which holds that a state cannot place criminal
penalty on a driver’s refusal to undergo a warrantless blood test to
determine alcohol concentration.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
FLORIDA
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
33
All offenders must be placed by the court on monthly reporting
probation and complete a substance abuse course conducted by a
licensed DUI program, which must include a psychosocial evaluation.
F.S.A. § 316.193(5).
Florida does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.
 State v. Liles, 191 So.3d 484 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016) “Following
[Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013)] we must read section
316.1933, Florida Statutes, as a directive to law enforcement to
obtain blood samples in serious and deadly crashes when probable
cause exists to suggest impaired driving. To comply with
McNeely, the statute must assume the blood draw will be obtained
with a warrant, absent consent or proof of exigent circumstances.”
 State v. Vinci, 146 So.3d 1255 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014) “[t]o support
a valid stop for a DUI offense an officer needs only a founded
suspicion of criminal activity.”
 Kurecka v. State, 67 So.3d 1052 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010)
“[m]oreover, under the implied consent statute, a defendant is not
precluded from explaining to the jury his reasons for refusing to
take the breath test.”
 Sabree v. State, 978 So.2d 840 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008)
“[c]onsequently, simply having cocaine in the system is legally
insufficient to convict because the State is required to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that Sabree was ‘under the influence’ of
cocaine.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
GEORGIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
34
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391.
“A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
moving vehicle while: . . . [u]nder the influence of any drug to the
extent that it is less safe for the person to drive.”
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(a)(2).
Any drug.
None. “The fact that any person charged with violating this Code
section is or has been legally entitled to use a drug shall not constitute
a defense.” Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(b).
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391.
“A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
moving vehicle while . . . there is any amount of marijuana or a
controlled substance . . . present in the person’s blood or urine, or
both, including the metabolites and derivatives of each or both without
regard to whether or not any alcohol is present in the person’s breath
or blood.” Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(a)(6).
Marijuana or a controlled substance, including the metabolites and
derivatives of both.
Georgia law provides that a person’s legal entitlement to use a drug is
not a defense but that “such person shall not be in violation . . . unless
such person is rendered incapable of driving safely as a result of using
a drug other than alcohol which such person is legally entitled to use.”
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(b). As such, the law makes a distinction
between persons legally entitled to use marijuana / controlled
substances (standard = rendered incapable of driving safely) and those
that are not legally entitled (standard = illegal if any amount in breath
or blood). The Supreme Court of Georgia has held this distinction to
be unconstitutional. Love v. State, 271 Ga. 398, 517 S.E.2d 53
(1999).
Person operating a vehicle upon Georgia highways “or elsewhere
throughout the state.” Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-55(a).
Chemical test or tests of blood, breath, urine, or other bodily
substances for the purpose of determining the presence of alcohol or
any other drug. Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-55(a).
 Test may be requested where: (1) driver arrested for any offense
arising out of an alleged violation of § 40-6-391; and (2) LEO must
have “reasonable grounds to believe” the driver was operating a
moving vehicle in Georgia in violation of §40-6-391.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-55(a).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
GEORGIA
Implied consent –
basis for test
(continued)
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
35
 Alternatively, a test can be requested without arrest if: (1) a driver
is involved in “any traffic accident resulting in serious injuries or
fatalities”; and (2) LEO has “reasonable grounds to believe” the
driver was operating a moving vehicle in Georgia in violation of
§40-6-391. Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-55(a). The Supreme Court of
Georgia, however, has held that this provision is unconstitutional to
the extent it allows a chemical test without any determination of
probable cause. Cooper v. State, 277 Ga. 282, 587 S.E.2d 605
(2003).
An offender’s refusal to submit to a chemical test at the time of his
arrest is admissible in evidence in any criminal trial.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-392(d).
Driver’s license suspension of one year.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-67.1(d).
None.
 First conviction driver’s license suspension of 180 days.
 Second conviction within five years driver’s license suspension
of three years, although license may be reinstated after one year
upon completion of a DUI Alcohol or Drug Use Risk Reduction
Program.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years driver is an
“habitual” offender; driver’s license revoked for five years.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-5-75(a).
 Upon a second or subsequent conviction within five years, the
court must issue an order requiring that the license plates of all
motor vehicles registered to be surrendered.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-2-136(a).
 A three-time violator within five years is termed a “habitual”
offender, and faces forfeiture of their vehicle upon a fourth
conviction. Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391.2.
 All violators face a requirement to complete a DUI Alcohol or
Drug Use Risk Reduction Program after conviction.
 First conviction misdemeanor; jail sentence of 10 days to one
year; fine of $300-$1,000; at least 40 hours community service.
 Second conviction within past 10 years misdemeanor; jail
sentence of 90 days to 12 months; fine of $600-$1,000; at least 30
days of community service.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
GEORGIA
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
(continued)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions

Third conviction within past 10 years high and aggravated
misdemeanor; jail sentence of 120 days to one year; fine of
$1,000-$5,000; at least 30 days community service.
 Fourth conviction within 10 years felony; jail sentence of 1-5
years; fine of $1,000-$5,000; at least 60 days community service.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(c).
 Georgia law has a separate crime of causing “serious injury by
vehicle” which is not conditioned on intoxication of the driver.
Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-394.
A person who commits a violation while a child under age 14 is in the
vehicle commits the separate offense of endangering a child by
driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Ga. Code Ann., § 406-391(l). Punishment of that offense is provided in Ga. Code Ann., §
16-12-1.
All persons convicted of an offense, regardless of number of prior
offenses, must take part in a clinical evaluation, and, if recommended
as a part of such evaluation, completion of a substance abuse
treatment program. Ga. Code Ann., § 40-6-391(c).
Georgia does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.



36
Bailey v. State, 790 S.E.2d 98 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016) in
prosecution for driving with “any amount” of controlled substance
in blood, state failed to show that exigent circumstances supported
warrantless blood and urine sampling of defendant while he was
unconscious in hospital, where no evidence was provided
regarding how long warrant process was expected to take and
whether warrant could have been sought while defendant was
being transferred from scene of accident to hospital.
State v. Collier, 279 Ga. 316, 612 S.E.2d 281 (2005) holding
that police do not have the authority to seek a search warrant to
compel a person to submit blood and urine samples for drug
testing when that person has invoked his or her right under the
implied consent law to refuse such testing.
Cooper v. State, 277 Ga. 282, 587 S.E.2d 605 (2003) provision
in § 40-5-55(a) that allows LEO to request chemical test if driver
is involved in “any traffic accident resulting in serious injuries or
fatalities” is unconstitutional to the extent it allows a chemical test
without any determination of probable cause.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
GEORGIA
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)


37
State v. Kachwalla, 274 Ga. 886, 561 S.E.2d 403 (2002) “we
presume the General Assembly knew in 1988, when it enacted
§ 40–6–391(a)(1)–(4) with a “less safe” standard and § 40–6–
391(b) with a “incapable of driving safely” standard, that the
appellate courts of this State had repeatedly held that the two
standards were the equivalent of each other.”
Love v. State, 271 Ga. 398, 517 S.E.2d 53 (1999) Georgia’s
distinction in § 40-6-391(b) between persons legally entitled to use
marijuana / controlled substances (standard = rendered incapable
of driving safely) and those that are not legally entitled (standard =
illegal if any amount in breath or blood), violates equal protection
and is unconstitutional.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
HAWAII
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
38
HRS § 291E-61.
“A person commits the offense of operating a vehicle under the
influence of an intoxicant if the person operates or assumes actual
physical control of a vehicle: . . . [w]hile under the influence of any
drug that impairs the person's ability to operate the vehicle in a careful
and prudent manner.” HRS § 291E-61(a)(2).
Any drug, which means “any controlled substance, as defined and
enumerated in schedules I through IV of chapter 329, or its
metabolites.” HRS § 291E-1.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person who operates a motor vehicle upon a public street, road or
highway in Hawaii. HRS § 291E-11(a).
Test or tests approved by the director of health of breath, blood, or
urine. HRS § 291E-11(a),(d).
 Test can be requested if LEO has “probable cause to believe” the
driver operated a motor vehicle while under the influence, but only
after the driver: (1) has been arrested lawfully; and (2) has been
informed that test can be refused. HRS § 291E-11(b).
 Test shall be requested if driver involved in collision resulting in
injury or death, and LEO has “probable cause to believe” that the
driver has committed a DUI violation. HRS § 291E-21(c).
Hawaii statutes do not appear to specifically address the admissibility
of test refusal in a civil or criminal proceeding. Prior to 2011, Hawaii
law provided that such evidence was not admissible. HRS § 291E–65.
 Refusal with no prior alcohol or drug enforcement contact within
five years driver’s license revoked for two years; use of IID
during revocation period.
 Refusal with one prior enforcement contact within five years
driver’s license revoked for three years; use of IID during
revocation period.
 Refusal with two prior enforcement contacts within five years
driver’s license revoked for four years; use of IID during period.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
HAWAII
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
(continued)
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 Refusal with three or more enforcement contacts within 10 years
driver’s license revoked for 10 years; use of IID during period.
HRS § 291E-41(b), (c).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction one or more of the following: jail sentence of 48
hours to five days; fine of $150-$1,000; 72 hours community
service.
 Second conviction within five years jail sentence of five to 30
days or 240 hours community service; fine of $500-$1,500.
 Third conviction within five years jail sentence of 10-30 days;
fine of $500-$2,500. HRS § 291E-61(b).
 Fourth conviction within ten years habitual offender; Class C
felony; jail sentence of five years or: (1) jail sentence of at least 10
days; (2) referral to substance abuse counselor; (3) administrative
penalty noted above. HRS § 291E-61.5(c), (d).
If an offender is age 18 or older and had a passenger under age 15 in
the vehicle at the time of the offense, that person is subject to an
additional mandatory fine of $500 and jail sentence of 48 hours.
HRS § 291E-61(b)(4).
Child
endangerment
Treatment
39
None. The provision that the refusal to submit to a chemical test is a
petty misdemeanor was repealed in April 2016. HRS § 291E–68.
 First conviction driver’s license revocation of one year, but
allowed use of vehicle with IID if conditions met.
 Second conviction within five years driver’s license revocation
of 18-24 months; use of vehicle with IID if conditions met.
 Third conviction within five years driver’s license revocation of
two years; allowed use of vehicle with IID if conditions met.
HRS § 291E-61(b).
 Fourth conviction within 10 years may have driver’s license
revoked for one to five years. HRS § 291E-61.5(d).
 A person convicted for their first offense within a five-year period
is required to complete a 14-hour minimum substance abuse
rehabilitation program. HRS § 291E-61(b)(1).
 Whenever a court sentences a person pursuant to subsection (b), it
also shall require that the offender be referred to the driver's
education program for an assessment, by a certified substance
abuse counselor, of the offender's substance abuse or dependence
and the need for appropriate treatment. The counselor shall submit
a report with recommendations to the court. HRS § 291E-61(h).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
HAWAII
40
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Hawaii allows certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal purposes. A registered patient may not use marijuana in
“any moving vehicle.” HRS § 329-122(c)(2).
Selected state court
decisions
 State v. Won, 137 Hawai’i 330, 372 P.3d 1065 (2015) it is
coercive for state to force a driver to choose between surrendering
a right to refuse a search or avoiding criminal charges; impliedly
concludes that Hawaii law (since repealed) that makes refusal of a
chemical test a petty misdemeanor is unconstitutional.
 State v. Entrekin, 98 Hawai'i 221, 47 P.3d 336 (2002) “[w]e
agree with the weight of authority that a nonconsensual,
warrantless blood extraction does not violate the fourth amendment
to the United States Constitution, whether the person has been
arrested or not, so long as (1) the police have probable cause to
believe that the person is DUI and that the blood sample will
evidence that offense, (2) exigent circumstances are present, and
(3) the sample is obtained in a reasonable manner.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IDAHO
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
41
I.C. § 18-8004.
“It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of . . . drugs
or any other intoxicating substances . . . to drive or be in actual
physical control of a motor vehicle within this state . . . .”
I.C. § 18-8004(1)(a).
Drugs or any other intoxicating substances.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of the
provisions of this chapter . . . is or has been entitled to use such drug
under the laws of this state or of any other jurisdiction shall not
constitute a defense against any charge of a violation of the provisions
of this chapter.” I.C. § 18-8004(7).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person who drives or is in physical control of a motor vehicle in
Idaho. I.C. § 18-8002(1).
“Evidentiary testing” for the presence of drugs or other intoxicating
substances. I.C. § 18-8002(1). It appears that such testing involves
the testing of breath, blood or urine. I.C. § 18-8002A(e).
LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” that a person was
driving in violation of drugged driving laws. I.C. § 18-8002(1).
Idaho court decisions hold that the refusal to take a chemical test is
generally admissible in a DUI case. State v. Rocha, 157 Idaho 246,
335 P.3d 586 (Id. Ct. App. 2014).
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for one year; civil fine of
$250.
 Second or subsequent refusal within 10 years driver’s license
suspended for two years; civil fine of $250. I.C. § 18-8002(3), (4).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IDAHO
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driving privileges suspended for 30 days;
restricted driving privileges for 60-150 days. I.C. § 18-8005(1).
 Second conviction within 10 years driving privileges suspended
for one year; use of IID. I.C. § 18-8005(4).
 Third conviction within 10 years driving privileges suspended
for 1-5 years; use of IID. I.C. § 18-8005(6).
 Conviction within 15 years of prior felony violation same
penalty as third violation within 10 years. I.C. § 18-8005(9).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)

Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
42
First conviction misdemeanor; jail sentence of up to six months;
fine of up to $1,000. I.C. § 18-8005(1).
 Second conviction within 10 years misdemeanor; jail sentence
of 10 days to one year; fine up to $2,000. I.C. § 18-8005(4).
 Third conviction within 10 years felony; jail sentence of 30 days
to ten years; fine up to $5,000. I.C. § 18-8005(6).
 Conviction within 15 years of prior felony violation same
penalty as third violation within 10 years. I.C. § 18-8005(9).
 Aggravated DUI charge if person causes “great bodily harm,
permanent disability or permanent disfigurement to any person
other than himself.” I.C. § 18-8006(1).
Person age 18 or older commits the crime of “injury to a child” if they
commit a violation while a minor is a passenger in the vehicle.
I.C. § 18-1501(3).
A person who is enrolled in and is a participant in good standing in an
approved drug court or mental health court is eligible for restricted
noncommercial driving privileges provided that he / she has served a
period of absolute suspension of driving privileges of at least 45 days,
that a state approved ignition interlock system is installed, and for
repeat offenders it shall be maintained for not less than one (1) year.
I.C. § 18-8005(7).
Idaho does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.

State v. Rios, 160 Idaho 262, 371 P.3d 316 (2016) “[u]nder
Idaho law, a driver’s implied consent continues if it is not revoked
before the time of evidentiary testing. Therefore, implied consent
may justify a warrantless blood draw only when (1) the driver
gave his or her initial consent by voluntarily driving on Idaho
roads, and (2) the driver did not revoke consent before the time of
evidentiary testing.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IDAHO
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)



43
State v. Morin, 158 Idaho 622, 349 P.3d 1213 (Id. Ct. App.
2015) “although . . . carboxy-THC evidence, standing alone, is
not sufficient to prove that marijuana use was the cause of
intoxication, carboxy-THC evidence is relevant when combined
with other evidence indicating the driver’s recent marijuana use.”
State v. Wulff, 157 Idaho 416, 337 P.3d 575 (2014) McNeely
prohibits all blanket exceptions to the requirement that law
enforcement obtain a warrant prior to a blood draw, and as a
result, Idaho’s implied consent statute cannot act as one.
State v. Stark, 157 Idaho 29, 333 P.3d 844 (Id. Ct. App. 2013)
evidence of carboxy-THC (but not THC) in driver’s blood is
insufficient by itself to establish “under the influence.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ILLINOIS
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
44
625 ILCS 5/11-501.
“A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle within this State while: . . . under the influence of any other
drug or combination of drugs to a degree that renders the person
incapable of safely driving.” 625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(4).
Any drug.
None. “The fact that any person charged with violating this Section is
or has been legally entitled to use alcohol, cannabis under the
Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act, other
drug or drugs, or intoxicating compound or compounds, or any
combination thereof, shall not constitute a defense against any charge
of violating this Section.” 625 ILCS 5/11-501(b).
625 ILCS 5/11-501; 625 ILCS 5/11-501.2.
 “A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle within this State while: . . . there is any amount of a drug,
substance, or compound in the person’s breath, blood, other bodily
substance, or urine resulting from the unlawful use or consumption
of a controlled substance listed in the Illinois Controlled
Substances Act, an intoxicating compound listed in the Use of
Intoxicating Compounds Act, or methamphetamine as listed in the
Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act.”
625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(6).
 “A person shall not drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle within this State while . . . the person has, within 2 hours of
driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle, a
tetrahydrocannabinol concentration in the person’s whole blood or
other bodily substance as defined in paragraph 6 of subsection (a)
of Section 11–501.2 of this Code.” 625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(7)
(provision added effective July 29, 2016).
 For the “any amount” standard, a drug, substance, or compound
resulting from the unlawful use or consumption of a controlled
substance, an intoxicating compound or methamphetamine.
625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(6).
 For THC, a concentration of 5 nanograms or more per milliliter of
whole blood or 10 nanograms or more of per milliliter of other
bodily substance. 625 ILCS 5/11–501.2(a)(6)(provision added
effective July 29, 2016).
 In a trial or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been
committed while under the influence, if a chemical test of driver’s
blood or other substance is above the specified concentrations,
there is a presumption that the person was “under the influence of
cannabis.” 625 ILCS 5/11–501.2(b-5)(added July 29, 2016).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ILLINOIS
Per se – affirmative None. “The fact that any person charged with violating this Section is
or has been legally entitled to use alcohol, cannabis under the
defense(s)
Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act, other
drug or drugs, or intoxicating compound or compounds, or any
combination thereof, shall not constitute a defense against any charge
of violating this Section.” 625 ILCS 5/11-501(b).
Implied consent –
 Person who drives or is in actual physical control of a motor
applicable drivers
vehicle on Illinois public highways. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.1(a).
 Person who has been issued a registry identification card under
Illinois law allowing the medicinal use of marijuana and is driving
on Illinois public highways gives consent to “standardized field
sobriety tests approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.” 625 ILCS 5/11-501.9.
Chemical test or tests of blood, breath, other bodily substance or urine.
Implied consent –
625 ILCS 5/11-501.1(a).
tests authorized
Implied consent –
 Driver must be arrested (or ticketed) for any DUI offense and LEO
basis for test
must have probable cause to believe the person was under the
influence of alcohol, other drug or drugs, intoxicating compound or
compounds, or any combination thereof. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.1(a).
 LEO must request a chemical test when there is probable cause to
suspect DUI is a factor in a crash that results in personal injury or
death. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.2(c)(2).
 In cases of a driver holding a marijuana registry card, the LEO
“must have an independent, cannabis-related factual basis giving
reasonable suspicion that the person is driving or in actual physical
control of a motor vehicle while impaired by the use of cannabis”
in order to conduct field sobriety tests. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.9(a).
Evidence of refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while
under the influence of drugs. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.2.
Implied consent –
 First refusal statutory summary driver’s license suspension of
administrative /
one year. 625 ILCS 5/6-208.1(a)(1).
civil penalty for
 Refusal by person who is not a first offender statutory summary
refusal
driver’s license suspension of three years.
625 ILCS 5/6-208.1(a)(3).
None.
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
45
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ILLINOIS
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First failed chemical test statutory summary suspension of
driving privileges for six months.
 Second failed chemical test statutory summary suspension of
driving privileges for three years. 625 ILCS 5/6-208.1.
 First conviction minimum revocation of driving privileges for
one year.
 Second conviction within 20 years minimum revocation of
driving privileges for five years.
 Third conviction (lifetime) revocation of driving privileges for
10 years.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) revocation of driving
privileges for life.
 Any person who has been convicted of a second of subsequent
offense must use IID for not less than five years on all vehicles.
625 ILCS 5/11-501.01(e).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence of up to one
year; fine up to $2,500.
 Second conviction (lifetime) Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence
of at least five days or 240 hours community service; possible jail
sentence up to one year; fine up to $2,500.
 Third conviction (lifetime) Class 2 felony; jail sentence of three
to seven years; fine up to $25,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) Class 2 felony; jail sentence of three
to seven years; fine up to $25,000.
 Fifth conviction (lifetime) Class 1 felony; jail sentence of four to
15 years; fine of up to $25,000.
 Sixth conviction (lifetime) Class X felony; jail sentence of six to
30 years; fine of up to $25,000. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.
 There are enhanced penalties if a driver commits a violation that
proximately causes a “motor vehicle accident that resulted in great
bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement to another.”
625 ILCS 5/11-501(d)(1)(C).
There are enhanced criminal penalties if a driver commits a violation
while a child under age 16 is a passenger. 625 ILCS 5/11-501(c)(3).
After conviction, an offender is required to undergo a professional
evaluation to determine if an alcohol, drug, or intoxicating compound
abuse problem exists and the extent of the problem, and undergo the
imposition of treatment as appropriate. 625 ILCS 5/11-501.01(a).
Illinois allows certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal purposes. No driver who is a marijuana registry card holder
may: (1) use marijuana while in a passenger area of a vehicle; or (2)
possess marijuana in the vehicle “except in a sealed, tamper-evident
medical cannabis container.” 625 ILCS 5/11-502.1.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
46
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
ILLINOIS
Selected state court
decisions
47
 People v. Gaede, 20 N.E.3d 1266 (Ill. Ct. App. 2014) Illinois’
implied consent law is not unconstitutional on its face after
McNeely, because state allows defendants to refuse requested
chemical tests.
 People v. Martin, 955 N.E.2d 1058 (Ill. 2011) there was
sufficient evidence to support conviction for driving with “any
amount” of methamphetamine in body, where tests only found
trace amounts of substance in urine and state could not show when
it was last used.
 People v. McPeak, 399 Ill.App.3d 799, 927 N.E.2d 312 (2010)
court finds that evidence was insufficient to support conviction for
driving under the influence of cannabis, even though LEO smelled
burnt cannabis about defendant’s person, drug paraphernalia was
found in his car, and defendant admitted to smoking it one hour
prior to traffic stop, where there was no evidence presented
whether consuming that amount of cannabis would result in any
cannabis being left in his breath, blood, or urine one hour later and
no evidence that defendant was impaired.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
INDIANA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
48
IC 9-30-5-2.
“[A] person who operates a vehicle while intoxicated commits a Class
C misdemeanor.” IC 9-30-5-2(a). “Intoxicated” means being “under
the influence . . . so that there is an impaired condition of thought and
action and the loss of normal control of a person’s faculties.”
IC 9-13-2-86.
Controlled substance or a drug other than alcohol or a controlled
substance. IC 9-13-2-86.
None.
IC 9-30-5-1.
“A person who operates a vehicle with a controlled substance listed in
schedule I or II of IC 35-48-2 or its metabolite in the person’s body.”
IC 9-30-5-1(c).
Schedule I or II controlled substance or its metabolite.
There is a defense if the driver “consumed the controlled substance
under a valid prescription or order of a practitioner . . . who acted in
the course of the practitioner’s professional practice.” IC 9-30-5-1(d).
 Person who operates a vehicle in Indiana. IC 9-30-6-1.
 Person who operates a vehicle in Indiana that is involved in an
accident that causes serious bodily injury or a fatality. IC 9-30-7-2.
“Chemical test” means an analysis of a person’s blood, breath, urine,
or other bodily substance. IC 9-13-2-22.
 LEO must have “probable cause to believe” that the driver has
violated drugged driving laws and the test must be completed
within three hours of LEO determination of probable cause.
IC 9-30-6-2.
 If an LEO certifies in writing that: (1) the LEO has “probable cause
to believe” the person violated IC 9-30-5; (2) the person has been
involved in a motor vehicle accident that resulted in the serious
bodily injury or death of another; and (3) the accident occurred not
more than three (3) hours before the time the sample is requested,
then the LEO may “use reasonable force to assist” the person
taking the same if the driver does not consent and resists the taking
of the sample. IC 9-30-6-6(g),(h).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
INDIANA
Implied consent –
basis for test
(continued)
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
49
 LEO shall offer a portable breath test or chemical test to any driver
who the LEO has “reason to believe” was operating a vehicle that
was involved in a fatal accident or an accident causing serious
bodily injury if: (1) breath test shows the presence of alcohol; (2)
the breath test does not show presence of alcohol but LEO has
“probably cause” to believe the driver is under the influence of a
controlled substance or other drug; or (3) driver refuses breath test.
IC 9-30-7-3.
Evidence of refusal is admissible in any proceeding arising out of
chapter IC-9-30-5. IC 9-30-6-3(b).
 Refusal driving privileges suspended for one year.
 Refusal with at least one prior conviction driving privileges
suspended for two years. IC 9-30-6-9; IC 9-30-7-5.
 First refusal Class C infraction; fine up to $500.
 Refusal with at least one prior conviction Class A infraction; fine
up to $10,000.
 The constitutionality of this, however, has been called into question
by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North
Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which holds that a state cannot
place criminal penalty on a driver’s refusal to undergo a
warrantless blood test to determine alcohol concentration.
 If chemical test is failed driving privileges suspended for at least
180 days. IC 9-30-6-9(c).
 First conviction Class C misdemeanor; jail sentence up to 60
days; fine up to $500.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least five days;
180 hours community service.
 Second conviction within five years level 6 felony; jail sentence
of six months to two-and-a-half years; fine of up to $10,000.
 Third conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of at least 10 days; 360
hours community service.
IC 9-30-5-1; IC 9-30-5-2; IC 9-30-5-3; IC 9-30-5-15.
 Court may order violator to make “restitution” of not more than
$1,000 to the emergency medical services fund for any needed
services provided by emergency services personnel as a result of
their actions. IC 9-30-5-17(b).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
INDIANA
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
(continued)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
50

Additional criminal penalties in cases where driver commits a
violation: (1) “in a manner that endangers a person”; (2) while
causing serious bodily injury to another person; or (3) while
causing the death of another person. IC 9-30-5-2(b); IC 9-30-5-4;
IC 9-30-5-5.
If driver is age 21 or older and commits a violation when at least one
passenger is under age 18. IC 9-30-5-3(a)(2).
If an offender has one prior conviction of operating while intoxicated,
the court must order the person to receive an assessment of the
person’s degree of alcohol and drug abuse and, if appropriate, to
successfully complete an alcohol or drug abuse treatment program,
including an alcohol deterrent program if the person suffers from
alcohol abuse. IC 9-30-5-15(a).
Indiana does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.
Hucker v. State, 4. N.E.3d 797 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) provision
making it illegal to drive with any schedule I or II substance (or its
metabolite) in the body is not unconstitutional. “The disparate
treatment to persons who operate a vehicle with a schedule I or
schedule II controlled substance is reasonably related to inherent
characteristics among those persons—namely, the usage of those
controlled substances causes impairment and the amount necessary to
cause impairment is not easily quantifiable.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IOWA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
51
I.C.A. § 321J.2.
“A person commits the offense of operating while intoxicated if the
person operates a motor vehicle in this state in any of the following
conditions: . . .[w]hile under the influence of . . . or other drug or a
combination of such substances.” I.C.A. § 321J.2(1)(a).
Any drug.
DUI provision does not apply in cases where: (1) the substance was
prescribed and was taken under the prescription and in accordance
with the directions of a medical practitioner; or (2) the substance was
dispensed by a pharmacist without a prescription. In these cases, there
must be no evidence of alcohol consumption and no direction from
either the practitioner or pharmacist to refrain from driving.
I.C.A. § 321J.2(11)(a).
I.C.A. § 321J.2.
“A person commits the offense of operating while intoxicated if the
person operates a motor vehicle in this state in any of the following
conditions: . . . [w]hile any amount of a controlled substance is present
in the person, as measured in the person’s blood or urine.”
I.C.A. § 321J.2(1)(c).
Controlled substances.
Person charged may assert that the controlled substance “was
prescribed or dispensed for the person and was taken in accordance
with the directions of a practitioner and the labeling directions of the
pharmacy.” I.C.A. § 321J.2(11)(b).
Person who operates a motor vehicle in Iowa. I.C.A. § 321J.6(1).
Withdrawal of specimens of the person’s blood, breath, or urine and to
a chemical test or tests of the specimens. I.C.A. § 321J.6(1).
 LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” that the person
was operating a motor vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws
and one of the following must be true: (1) driver placed under
arrest; or (2) driver involved in motor vehicle accident or collision
that resulted in personal injury or death. I.C.A. § 321J.6(1).
 If LEO “has reasonable grounds to believe” that the person was
under the influence of a controlled substance, a drug other than
alcohol, or a combination of alcohol and another drug, a blood or
urine test shall be required even after another type of test has been
administered. I.C.A. § 321J.6(3).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IOWA
Implied consent –
basis for test
(continued)
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
52
 Blood test may be given without person’s consent if driver was
involved in accident that causes death (or injury reasonably likely
to cause death), if LEO believes blood draw will show intoxication,
can be done in a reasonable manner, and the delay necessary to get
a warrant will destroy evidence. I.C.A. § 321J.10A(1).
Proof of refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or
proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed in
violation of drugged driving laws. I.C.A. § 321J.16.
 First refusal driver’s license revocation for one year; use of IID
if restricted license granted. I.C.A. § 321J.4(1); I.C.A. § 321J.9.
 Second refusal or refusal with a prior conviction driver’s license
revocation for two years; use of IID if restricted license granted.
I.C.A. § 321J.4(2); I.C.A. § 321J.9.
 A refusal to submit to a chemical test of blood is not deemed a
refusal. In that case, the LEO can choose which of the other two
substances to test. I.C.A. § 321J.6(2).
None.
 First conviction driver’s license revocation for 180 days to one
year. I.C.A. § 321J.2(3); I.C.A. § 321J.4(1).
 Second conviction within past 12 years driver’s license
revocation for one year; use of IID if restricted license granted.
I.C.A. § 321J.2(4); I.C.A. § 321J.4(2).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 12 years driver’s license
revocation for six years; use of IID required. I.C.A. § 321J.2(5);
I.C.A. § 321J.4(4).
 Reinstatement of license requires payment of $200 civil penalty.
 First conviction serious misdemeanor; jail sentence of 48 hours
to one year; fine of $1,250. I.C.A. § 321J.2(3).
 Second conviction within 12 years aggravated misdemeanor; jail
sentence of seven days to two years; fine of $1,875-$6,250. I.C.A.
§ 321J.2(4).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 12 years class D felony;
jail sentence of 30 days to five years; fine of $3,125-$9,375. I.C.A.
§ 321J.2(5).
 Offender may be ordered to pay restitution up to $500 to any public
agency for the costs of the emergency response.
I.C.A. § 321J.2(13)(b).
 Additional penalties if an offender causes serious bodily injury or
death while committing violation. I.C.A. § 321J.4(5), (6).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
IOWA
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
53
It does not appear that Iowa law provides for enhanced penalties in
cases of violations with a minor in the vehicle.
Any person convicted must be assigned to substance abuse evaluation
and treatment, a course for drinking drivers, and, if available and
appropriate, a reality education substance abuse prevention program.
I.C.A. § 321J.2; I.C.A. § 321J.3.
Iowa does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.
 State v. Childs, 2016 WL 4543960 (Iowa Ct. App. August 31,
2016) (unpublished) court rejects defendant’s argument to depart
from Comried and follow Harris case from Arizona where court
found that the presence of a non-impairing metabolite does not
violate a zero tolerance law.
 Bearinger v. Iowa Dept. of Transportation, 844 N.W.2d 104 (Iowa
2014) valid prescription defense could be used by driver to
prevail on appeal of DOT’s administrative revocation of license,
but could not be used to contest police officer’s grounds for initial
stop or request for test.
 State v. Schories, 827 N.W.2d 659 (Iowa 2013) court reverses
jury decision, finding insufficient evidence that state disproved
defendant’s prescription defense to operating vehicle with the
presence of methadone.
 State v. Comried, 693 N.W.2d 773 (Iowa 2005) in provision that
criminalizes driving with “any amount” of controlled substance
present, “any amount” means “any amount greater than zero.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KANSAS
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
54
K.S.A. § 8-1567.
“Driving under the influence is operating or attempting to operate any
vehicle within this state while . . . under the influence of any drug or
combination of drugs to a degree that renders the person incapable of
safely driving a vehicle.” K.S.A. § 8-1567(a)(4).
Any drug or combination of drugs.
None. The fact that a person “is or has been entitled to use the drug
under the laws of this state shall not constitute a defense against the
charge.” K.S.A. § 8-1567(d).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person who operates or attempts to operate a vehicle in Kansas.
K.S.A. § 8-1001(a).
One or more tests of the person’s blood, breath, urine or other bodily
substance. K.S.A. § 8-1001(a).
 Preliminary screening of breath or saliva may be given if LEO has
“reasonable suspicion to believe” the person is operating a vehicle
while under the influence. K.S.A. § 8-1012(b).
 LEO “shall” request test if LEO has “reasonable grounds to
believe” the driver was operating a vehicle in violation of drugged
driving laws and either: (1) the driver was arrested for any offense;
or (2) the driver was involved in a motor vehicle accident that
resulted in property or non-serious personal injury.
K.S.A. § 8-1001(b)(1).
 LEO shall also request test if driver was operating a motor vehicle
when it was “involved in an accident or collision resulting in
serious injury or death of any person” and the driver could be cited
for any traffic offense. K.S.A. § 8-1001(b)(2). A recent Kansas
intermediate appellate court has found this provision
unconstitutional in State v. Declerck, 317 P.3d 794 (Kan. Ct. App.
2014).
Refusal is admissible in evidence against the person at any trial on a
charge arising out of the alleged operation or attempted operation of a
vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
K.S.A. § 8-1001(n).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KANSAS
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for one year; use of IID
for two years after suspension.
 Second refusal driver’s license suspended for one year; use of
IID for three years after suspension.
 Third refusal driver’s license suspended for one year; use of IID
for four years after suspension.
 Fourth refusal driver’s license suspended for one year; use of IID
for five years after suspension.
 Fifth or subsequent refusal driver’s license suspended for one
year; use of IID for 10 years after suspension. K.S.A. § 8-1014(a).
Per K.S.A. § 8-1025, there is a criminal violation of refusing a test if a
person refuses a test for a second time, or refuses a test after having
any prior DUI violation. A first or second conviction is a Class A
nonperson misdemeanor (unless prior conviction within 10 years) and
a third or subsequent violation is a nonperson felony. Recently, the
Kansas Supreme Court has held this statute to be unconstitutional in
State v. Ryce, 303 Kan. 899, 368 P.3d 342 (2016).
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license suspended for 30 days; after
suspension, license restricted per K.S.A. § 8-1015(b).
 Second conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for one
year; use of IID for one year after suspension.
 Third conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for one
year; use of IID for two years after suspension.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for one
year; use of IID for three years after suspension.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
suspended for one year; use of IID for 10 years after suspension.
K.S.A. § 8-1014(b).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)





55
First conviction Class B nonperson misdemeanor; jail sentence
of 48 hours to six months or 100 hours community service; fine of
$750-$1,000.
Second conviction (lifetime) Class A nonperson misdemeanor;
jail sentence of 90 days to one year; fine of $1,250-$1,750.
Third conviction, with no prior conviction in past 10 years Class
A nonperson misdemeanor; jail sentence of 90 days to one year;
fine of $1,750-$2,500.
Third conviction, with prior conviction within 10 years
nonperson felony; jail sentence of 90 days to one year; fine of
$1,750-$2,500.
Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) nonperson felony;
jail sentence of 90 days to one year; fine of $2,500.
K.S.A. § 8-1567(b)(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KANSAS
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
Committing a violation with one or more passengers under the age of
14 results in an additional one month of imprisonment per violation.
K.S.A. § 8-1567(c).
Upon a first or second conviction, the court must order the offender to
participate in an alcohol and drug evaluation conducted by a provider.
K.S.A. § 8-1567(b)(4). If an offender is convicted for a third or
subsequent time, after discharged from jail, he / she faces a one-year
period of supervision, during which they are “required to participate in
a multidisciplinary model of services for substance use disorders
facilitated by a Kansas department for aging and disability services
designated care coordination agency to include assessment and, if
appropriate, referral to a community based substance use disorder
treatment including recovery management and mental health
counseling as needed.” K.S.A. § 8-1567(b)(3).
Kansas does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.


56
State v. Ryce, 303 Kan. 899, 368 P.3d 342 (2016) statute
(K.S.A. § 8-1025) criminalizing a driver’s refusal to submit to a
warrantless chemical test is not narrowly tailored to compelling
State interests, and thus violates due process and is
unconstitutional.
State v. Declerck, 317 P.3d 794 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014)
Statutory provision allowing LEO to require test in cases of traffic
accident resulting in serious injury (K.S.A. § 8-1001(b)(2)) is
“unconstitutional to the extent it requires a search and seizure
absent probable cause the person was operating or attempting to
operate a vehicle under the influence of drugs or alcohol. . . . A
traffic infraction plus an injury or fatality, without more, does not
constitute probable cause that drugs or alcohol were involved in
the accident.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KENTUCKY
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
57
KRS § 189A.010.
“A person shall not operate or be in physical control of a motor
vehicle anywhere in this state . . . while under the influence of any
other substance or combination of substances which impairs one’s
driving ability.” KRS § 189A.010(1)(c).
Any substance (besides alcohol).
None. “The fact that any person charged with violation of subsection
(1) of this section is legally entitled to use any substance, including
alcohol, shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violation
of subsection (1) of this section.” KRS § 189A.010(4)(a).
KRS § 189A.010.
“A person shall not operate or be in physical control of a motor
vehicle anywhere in this state . . . while the presence of a controlled
substance listed in subsection (12) of this section is detected in the
blood, as measured by a scientifically reliable test, or tests, taken
within two (2) hours of cessation of operation or physical control of a
motor vehicle.” KRS § 189A.010(1)(d).
Any Schedule I controlled substance except marijuana, Alprazolam,
Amphetamine, Buprenorphine, Butalbital, Carisoprodol, Cocaine,
Diazepam, Hydrocodone, Meprobamate, Methadone,
Methamphetamine, Oxycodone, Promethazine, Propoxyphene and
Zolpidem. KRS § 189A.010(12).
A laboratory test for a controlled substance is “inadmissible as
evidence in a prosecution under subsection (1)(d)” if the court finds
that the person “consumed the substance under a valid prescription
from a practitioner . . . acting in the course of his or her professional
practice.” KRS § 189A.010(4)(b).
Any person who operates a motor vehicle in Kentucky.
KRS § 189A.103.
One or more tests blood, breath, and urine, or combination thereof.
KRS § 189A.103(1).
 LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” that a violation of
drugged driving laws has occurred. KRS § 189A.103(1).
 Court may issue search warrant requiring a blood or urine test if a
defendant is charged with violating drugged driving laws arising
from an incident that causes death or physical injury.
KRS § 189A.105(2)(b).
Refusal to submit to a test can be used against the driver as evidence
of violating drugged driving laws. KRS § 189A.105(2).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KENTUCKY
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
58
Driver’s license is suspended during pendency of criminal action for
violating drugged driving laws. If the driver is not convicted, there
still may be a hearing concerning whether or not there was a refusal to
test, in which case the court can suspend the driver’s license for the
same length of time as would have occurred if convicted.
KRS § 189A.107(2).
Refusal to submit to a test becomes an aggravating factor in
sentencing of a conviction. KRS § 189A.105(2).
 First conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for 30120 days.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
12-18 months.
 Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for 2436 months.
 Fourth or subsequent offense within 10 years driver’s license
revoked for 60 months. KRS § 189A.070(1).
 If offender is convicted of a second or subsequent offense, they
must provide proof of meeting requirements for issuance of IID or
face the impoundment of all license plates for vehicles owned
solely or jointly. KRS § 189A.085(1).
 First conviction jail sentence of 48 hours to 30 days; fine of
$200-500; possible community service of 48 hours to 30 days.
 Second conviction within 10 yearsjail sentence of seven days to
six months; fine of $350-$500; may be sentenced 10 days to six
months of community labor.
 Third conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 30 days to 12
months; fine of $500-$1,000; may be sentenced 10 days to 12
months of community labor.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years Class D felony;
minimum jail sentence of 120 days. KRS § 189A.010(5).
 Enhanced penalties for doing any of the following in addition to
committing a violation: (1) driving in excess of 30 mph above the
speed limit; (2) driving in the wrong direction on a limited access
highway; or (3) causing an accident resulting in death or serious
physical injury.
There are enhanced criminal penalties if the offender commits a
violation in a motor vehicle that is transporting a passenger under the
age of 12 years old. KRS § 189A.010(12).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
KENTUCKY
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
59
All persons convicted of a violation are to be sentenced to an alcohol
or substance abuse education or treatment program. For first
offenders, the program is 90 days, and for all others, it is one year.
The program must be completed before the offender’s driver’s license
will be reinstated. KRS § 189A.040.
Kentucky does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
 Sluss v. Commonwealth, 450 S.W.3d 279 (Ky. 2014)
distinguishing Burton (below); finding that trial court did not abuse
discretion by admitting into evidence the results of urinalysis test
showing presence of controlled substances, where “there is
additional admissible evidence that provides context” for the
results.
 Epperson v. Commonwealth, 437 S.W.3d 157 (Ky. Ct. App.
2014) provision in KRS § 189A.010(4)(a) that makes the
laboratory test showing presence of one or more certain specified
controlled substances inadmissible if the driver has a valid
prescription does not violate equal protection and is constitutional.
 Burton v. Commonwealth, 300 S.W.3d 126 (Ky. 2009) trial court
abused discretion in admitting results of urinalysis test showing
metabolites of cocaine and marijuana since the lab witnesses
“acknowledged that the urine test indicated absolutely nothing
about whether Burton was impaired at the time of the accident.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
LOUISIANA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
LSA-R.S. 14:98.
“The crime of operating a vehicle while intoxicated is the operating of
any motor vehicle, aircraft, watercraft, vessel, or other means of
conveyance when any of the following conditions exist: . . . [t]he
operator is under the influence of any controlled dangerous substance
listed in Schedule I, II, III, IV, or V as set forth in R.S. 40:964. . . [or]
[t]he operator is under the influence of one or more drugs that are not
controlled dangerous substances and that are legally obtainable with
or without a prescription. LSA-R.S. 14:98(A)(1).
DUI - applicable
substances
 Any controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedule I, II, III, IV,
or V. LSA-R.S. 14:98(A)(1)(c).
 One or more drugs that are not controlled dangerous substances
and that are legally obtainable with or without a prescription.
LSA-R.S. 14:98(A)(1)(e).
There is an affirmative defense to LSA-R.S. 14:98(A)(1)(e) [applying
to non-controlled dangerous substances] if “the operator did not
knowingly consume quantities of the drug or drugs that substantially
exceed the dosage prescribed by the physician or the dosage
recommended by the manufacturer of the drug.”
LSA-R.S. 14:98(A)(1)(e)(ii).
None.
N/A
N/A
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
60
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle on the public highways of
Louisiana. LSA-R.S. 32:661(A)(1).
Chemical test or tests of blood, breath, urine, or other bodily
substance. LSA-R.S. 32:661(A)(1).
 Driver must be arrested for any offense arising out of allegedly
driving a vehicle while under the influence. LSA-R.S.
32:661(A)(1).
 LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” the driver operated
the motor vehicle while under the influence. LSA-R.S.
32:661(A)(2).
 Where LEO has “probable cause to believe” that the person has
violated drugged driving laws, the driver may not refuse a chemical
test if: (1) he / she has refused to submit to one or more tests on
two or more occasions; or (2) if the driver has been involved in an
accident causing a fatality or where any person has suffered
“serious bodily injury.” LSA-R.S. 32:666(A)(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
LOUISIANA
61
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Evidence of a refusal is admissible in any criminal action or
proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while
the person was driving under the influence. LSA-R.S. 32:666(2)(c).
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
 First refusal driving privileges suspended for one year.
 Second or subsequent refusal within 10 years driving privileges
suspended for two years. LSA-R.S. 32:667(B)(2).
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license suspension of 12 months; if
offender placed on probation, the court may order that the offender
not operate a motor vehicle during the period of probation, or such
shorter time as set by the court, unless any vehicle operated has IID
in compliance with the requirements of R.S. 14:98.5(C) and R.S.
32:378.2. LSA-RS 32:414(A); LSA-R.S. 14:98.1(A)(1)(d).
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
24 months; if offender placed on probation, the court must order
that the offender not operate a motor vehicle during the period of
probation unless any vehicle operated has IID for at least six
months from the date of conviction. In addition, the device shall
remain installed and operative during any period that the offender’s
driver’s license is suspended under law and for any additional
period as determined by the court.
LSA-RS 32:414(B); LSA-R.S. 14:98.2(A)(1)(d).
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
suspended for 36 months; use of IID until the offender has
completed the requirements of substance abuse treatment and home
incarceration; vehicle can be seized, impounded and sold.
LSA-RS 32:414(D); LSA-R.S. 14:98.3(d).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction jail sentence of 10 days to six months; fine of
$300-$1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 30 days to six
months; fine of $750-$1,000.
 Third conviction within 10 years jail sentence of one to five
years; fine of $2,000.
If a driver has previously refused a chemical test on two or more
occasions, he / she is subject to a fine of $300-$1,000 and jail sentence
of 10 days to six months. LSA-R.S. 14:98.7. The constitutionality of
this, however, has been called into question by the U.S. Supreme
Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016),
which holds that a state cannot place criminal penalty on a driver’s
refusal to undergo a warrantless blood test to determine alcohol
concentration.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
LOUISIANA
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
(continued)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions


There are enhanced penalties if an offender commits a violation with a
minor aged 12 or under in vehicle at time of offense. LSA-R.S.
14:98(B).
First offenders may have portion of their sentence suspended if,
among other things, they agree to participate in a court-approved
substance abuse program, which may include an assessment by a
licensed clinician to determine if the offender has a diagnosis of
substance abuse disorder. LSA-R.S. 14:98.1(A)(1). Substance abuse
evaluations and participating in treatment plans are required in cases
of multiple convictions and being placed on probation. LSA-R.S.
14:98.3.
Louisiana allows certain registered patients to use marijuana for
medicinal purposes, although not through inhalation. Louisiana laws
do not specifically address the use of marijuana in a vehicle.


62
Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of 10-30 years; fine of $5,000. LSA-R.S. 14:98.1.-14:98.
There are enhanced penalties if offense involved vehicular
homicide, feticide or negligent injuring. LSA-R.S. 14:98.2(D).
State v. Weber, 139 So.2d 519 (La. 2014) overturns appellate
court’s suppression of blood test results; indicates that when “an
accident involving motor vehicles results in a fatality, the police
need not have reasonable grounds to suspect that alcohol or drugs
were involved to order a chemical test of the operator’s blood,
urine, or other bodily substances, as to which the operator of the
vehicle is deemed by law to give his consent.”
State v. Davis, 128 So.3d 1195 (La. Ct. App. 2013) affirmative
defense that either: (1) label contains no warning about combining
with alcohol; or (2) driver did not knowingly consume quantities
in excess of amount prescribed by physician, does not apply if the
drug at issue is a controlled substance. Defense only applies to
non-controlled substances.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MAINE
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
63
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411.
“A person commits OUI [operating under the influence] if that person:
. . . operates a motor vehicle: . . . [w]hile under the influence of
intoxicants.” 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(1-A). This is defined as being
under the influence of “alcohol, a drug other than alcohol, a
combination of drugs or a combination of alcohol and drugs.”
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2401(13).
Drugs. “Drugs” is defined as “scheduled drugs as defined under Title
17-A, section 1101” and “any natural or artificial chemical substance
that, when taken into the human body, can impair the ability of the
person to safely operate a motor vehicle.” 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2401(4).
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
A person who operates a motor vehicle. 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2521.
A test to determine the presence of a drug or drug metabolite by
analysis of blood, breath or urine. 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2401(3).
 LEO must have “probable cause to believe” a person has operated a
motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2521(1).
 Test is required if LEO has “probable cause to believe” that “death
has occurred or will occur as a result of an accident.”
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2522(1).
Evidence of refusal is admissible at a trial for operating a vehicle
under the influence of intoxicants. 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2521(3)(B).




First refusal driver’s license suspended for 275 days.
Second refusal driver’s license suspended for 18 months.
Third refusal driver’s license suspended for four years.
Fourth refusal driver’s license suspended for six years.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2521(6).
Minimum penalties for conviction are increased (both fine and jail
sentence) if the driver refused a chemical test at time of arrest.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(5).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MAINE
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license suspension of 150 days.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
three years.
 Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspension of
six years.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
suspension of eight years. 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(5).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction no minimum jail sentence; minimum fine of
$500.
 Second conviction within 10 years minimum jail sentence of
seven days; minimum fine of $700.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class C crime; minimum jail
sentence of 30 days; minimum fine of $1,100.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years Class C crime;
minimum jail sentence of 6 months; minimum fine of $2,100.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(5).
 Enhanced penalties in cases where an offender commits a violation
and causes the death or serious bodily injury of a person.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(5) (D-1), (D-2).
Committing a violation while a person under age 21 is a passenger at
the time of the offense. M.R.S.A. § 2411(5).
Anyone convicted for a second or subsequent time within 10 years
must be ordered to participate in the alcohol and other drug program
of the Department of Health and Human Services.
29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(5)(F).
Maine allows the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes by certain
registered patients. Maine law, however, does not specifically address
the use of marijuana by such patients in a vehicle.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
64
 State v. Arndt, 133 A.3d 587 (Me. 2016) in light of U.S.
Supreme Court’s McNeely decision, court finds exigent
circumstances existed to allow warrantless blood draw; prior to
blood test, police officer attempted four times to obtain BAC
reading using malfunctioning breathalyzer equipment and resorted
to blood test only after 1.5 hour delay.
 State v. Soucy, 36 A.3d 910 (Me. 2012) there is no defense to
OUI that the driver’s impairment was caused by prescription drugs
taken as prescribed.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MARYLAND1
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
MD Code, Transportation, § 21-902.
 “A person may not drive or attempt to drive any vehicle while he is
so far impaired by any drug, any combination of drugs, or a
combination of one or more drugs and alcohol that he cannot drive
a vehicle safely.” MD Code, Transportation, § 21-902(c)(1).
 “A person may not drive or attempt to drive any vehicle while the
person is impaired by any controlled dangerous substance, as that
term is defined in § 5-101 of the Criminal Law Article, if the
person is not entitled to use the controlled dangerous substance
under the laws of this State.” MD Code, Transportation, § 21902(d)(1).
There are separate standards for controlled dangerous substances and
other drugs.
 With respect to being “so far impaired by any drug,” there may be
a defense if the person “was unaware that the drug or combination
would make the person incapable of safely driving a vehicle.”
MD Code, Transportation, § 21-902(c)(2).
 With respect to controlled dangerous substances, the lesser
“impaired” standard does not apply if the person is entitled to use
the substance under Maryland law.
MD Code, Transportation, § 21-902(d)(1).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who drives or attempts to drive a motor vehicle on a
highway or on any private property that is used by the public in
general in Maryland. MD Code, Transportation, § 16-205.1
A test or tests of one specimen of the person’s blood.
MD Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, § 10-302.
Information in this section is based, in part, from the Maryland Department of Legislative Services’ 2016
document entitled “Guide to Drunk and Drugged Driving Laws,” available at:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/Pubs/LegisLegal/2016-Drunk-Drugged-Driving-Laws.pdf.
1
65
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MARYLAND1
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
66
 Test may be given if person is “detained on suspicion” of driving
while under the influence or impaired by drugs by LEO.
MD Code, Transportation, § 16-205.1(a)(2).
 Person is required to provide specimen if they are involved in an
accident that results in death or a “life threatening injury” to
another and the driver is detained by LEO with “reasonable
grounds to believe” they have been driving while under the
influence or impaired by drugs. MD Code, Transportation, § 16205.1(c)(1).
The fact of a driver’s refusal to submit to a chemical test is admissible
in evidence at trial. MD Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10309(a)(2).
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for 270 days.
 Second or subsequent refusal driver’s license suspended for two
years. MD Code, Transportation, § 16-205.1(b)(1)(5);
2016 MD Laws Chapter 512.
 The use of IID is required in cases where driver is convicted of
offense and court finds that a chemical test was refused.
2016 MD Laws Chapter 512.
Driver convicted of an offense faces a fine of not more than $500 or
jail sentence of up to two months, if court finds that the driver
“knowingly” refused a chemical test. MD Code, Transportation, § 27101(x).
 Driver’s license may be revoked for any person who is either: (1)
convicted of driving while impaired by controlled substance; or (2)
convicted of driving while impaired by any drug and who has two
or more violations in the prior three years.
 Driver’s license may be suspended up to one year if a person is
convicted of more than one offense (of any type) within a five-year
period.
 Restricted license may be issued during suspension period if IID
allowed and used.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MARYLAND1
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
67

First conviction (so far impaired by drug) jail sentence up to two
months; fine up to $500.
 First conviction (impaired by controlled substance) jail sentence
up to one year; fine up to $1,000.
 Second conviction (so far impaired by drug) jail sentence up to
one year; fine up to $500.
 Second conviction within five years (impaired by controlled
substance) jail sentence of five days to two years; fine up to
$2,000.
 Third or subsequent conviction (so far impaired by drug) jail
sentence up to three years; fine up to $3,000.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years (impaired by
controlled substance) jail sentence of 10 days to three years;
fine up to $3,000.
Enhanced criminal penalties if driver commits a violation while a
minor is a passenger in the vehicle. MD Code, Transportation § 27101(q).
Persons with multiple convictions in a five-year period are required to
undergo alcohol and drug abuse assessments and potentially
participate in treatment programs. MD Code, Transportation § 27101(j).
Maryland allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. Registered patients, however, are not allowed to smoke
marijuana “in a motor vehicle.” MD Code, Health - General,
§ 13-3314(4).
Colbert v. State, 229 Md. App. 79, 143 A.3d 173 (Md. Ct. App.
2016) reading McNeely decision “as holding that state and local
governments may develop appropriate per se rules to help law
enforcement to decide when warrants will be required,” and finding
that MD Code, Transportation § 16-205.1(c) is such a rule that is
constitutional under that decision.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MASSACHUSETTS
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
68
M.G.L.A. 90 § 24.
It is illegal to operate a motor vehicle “while under the influence of
intoxicating liquor, or of marijuana, narcotic drugs, depressants or
stimulant substances, all as defined in [M.G.L.A. 94C § 1] . . . .”
M.G.L.A. 90 § 24(1)(a)(1).
Marijuana, narcotic drugs, depressants or stimulant substances.
“Depressant or stimulant substances” are defined as: (1) a drug which
contains any quantity of barbituric acid; (2) a drug that contains any
quantity of amphetamine; (3) LSD; or (4) a drug except marijuana that
“the United States Attorney General has by regulation designated as
having a potential for abuse because of its depressant or stimulant
effect on the central nervous system or its hallucinogenic effect.”
M.G.L.A. 94C § 1.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person operating a motor vehicle “upon any way or in any place to
which the public has right to access” in Massachusetts.
M.G.L.A. 90 § 24(1)(f).
Massachusetts’ implied consent law (M.G.L.A. 90 § 24(1)(f)) appears
to apply only to the testing for the presence of alcohol, and not for the
presence of any other drug.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MASSACHUSETTS
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction one year loss of license; reduced to 45-90 days if
offender chooses education program and up to two-year probation.
 Second conviction (lifetime) two-year loss of license.
 Third conviction (lifetime) eight-year loss of license.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) 10-year loss of license.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) lifetime loss of license.
M.G.L.A. 90 § 24(1)(c).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction jail sentence up to two-and-a-half years; fine of
$500-$5,000.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 60 days to two-anda-half years; fine of $600-$10,000.
 Third conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of 180 days to
two-and-a-half years; fine of $1,000 - $15,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of two to twoand-a-half years; fine of $1,500 - $25,000.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) felony; minimum jail
sentence of two-and-a-half; fine of $2,000-$50,000.
M.C.L.A. § 24(1)(a).
 Enhanced criminal penalties for committing a violation that results
in serious bodily injury. M.G.L.A. 90 § 24L.
Enhanced penalty of imprisonment and fine if offender operates a
vehicle with a child aged 14 or under as a passenger.
M.G.L.A. 90 § 24V.
Any person convicted of a violation involving marihuana, narcotic
drugs, depressants or stimulant substances, may, as part of the
disposition in the case, be ordered to participate in a driver education
program or a drug treatment or drug rehabilitation program, or any
combination of said programs. M.G.L.A. 90 § 24(1)(h).
Massachusetts allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients, but the law does not specifically address the use of
marijuana in a vehicle.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
69
 Commonwealth v. Sousa, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 47, 35 N.E.3d 440
(2015) person who drove while spraying his mouth with aerosol
canister containing difluoroethane did not drive under the influence
of narcotic drugs, depressants, or stimulant substances, since
difluoroethane was not defined as a prohibited substance.
 Commonwealth v. Wallace, 14 Mass. App. Ct. 358, 439 N.E.2d 848
(1982) when the impairing substance alleged is a
prescription/licit drug, the Commonwealth has the added burden of
proving that the defendant knew or should have known of the
impairing effects of the medication.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MICHIGAN
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
70
M.C.L.A. 257.625.
 “A person . . . shall not operate a vehicle . . . within this state if the
person is operating while intoxicated. As used in this section,
‘operating while intoxicated’ means any of the following: . . . [t]he
person is under the influence of . . . a controlled substance, or
other intoxicating substance.” M.C.L.A. 257.625(1)(a).
 “A person . . . shall not operate a vehicle . . . within this state
when, due to the consumption of . . . a controlled substance, or
other intoxicating substance . . . the person’s ability to operate the
vehicle is visibly impaired.” M.C.L.A. 257.625(3).
Controlled substance or “other intoxicating substance.”
None.
M.C.L.A. 257.625.
“A person . . . shall not operate a vehicle . . . within this state if the
person has in his or her body any amount of a controlled substance
listed in schedule 1 . . . .” M.C.L.A. 257.625(8).
A controlled substance listed in schedule 1 under M.C.L.A. § 7212 or
of a controlled substance described in M.C.L.A. § 7214(a)(iv). This
does not include marijuana used for medicinal purposes, which is a
schedule II drug in Michigan.
None.
A person who operates a vehicle upon a public highway or other place
open to the general public or generally accessible to motor vehicles, in
Michigan. M.C.L.A. 257.625c(1).
Chemical tests of blood, breath, or urine. M.C.L.A. 257.625c(1).
 Test can be requested if driver is arrested for violating drugged
driving laws. M.C.L.A. 257.625c(1)(a).
 Test can be requested if driver is arrested for causing death of
another person and LEO has “reasonable grounds to believe” driver
was violating drugged driving laws at time of offense.
M.C.L.A. 257.625c(1)(b).
The refusal to submit to a chemical test is admissible in a criminal
prosecution of drugged driving only to show that a test was offered,
“but not as evidence in determining the defendant’s innocence or
guilt.” M.C.L.A. 257.625a(9).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MICHIGAN
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)


Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)

Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
71
First refusal driver’s license suspension of one year.
Second or subsequent refusal within seven years driver’s license
suspension of two years. M.C.L.A. 257.625f(1)(a).
None.




First conviction driver’s license suspended for 180 days.
Second or subsequent conviction within seven years driver’s
license suspended for minimum of one year.
Third conviction (lifetime) driver’s license revoked.
The court may order as a condition of probation that a person
convicted may not operate a motor vehicle unless that vehicle is
equipped with an approved IID. M.C.L.A. § 257.303(2), (4).
First conviction misdemeanor; jail sentence up to 93 days; fine
of $100-500; community service of up to 360 hours. If convicted
of driving while visibly impaired, the fine can be no higher than
$300.
 Second conviction within seven years jail sentence of five days
to one year; fine of $200-$1,000; community service of 30-90
days.
 Third conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of one to five
years; fine of $500-$5,000; community service 60-180 days.
M.C.L.A. 257.625(9), (11).
 Enhanced criminal penalties for causing the death of another
person or causing serious impairment of a bodily function.
M.C.L.A. § 257.625(4),(5).
 Violator may be required to pay the emergency response costs
incurred by State or local government as a result of an offense.
M.C.L.A. §. 769.1f(1), (3).
Committing a violation while a person under age 16 is a passenger in
the vehicle. M.C.L.A. § 257.625(7).
Before imposing a sentence, the court must order the offender to
undergo screening and assessment to determine whether the person is
likely to benefit from rehabilitative services, including alcohol or drug
education and alcohol or drug treatment programs.
M.C.L.A. 257.625b(5).
Michigan allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain patients,
but does not specifically address the use of marijuana in a vehicle.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MICHIGAN
Selected state court
decisions



72
Bloomfield Township v. Kane, 302 Mich.App. 170, 839 N.W.2d
505 (2013) trial court erred in dismissing charge of driving
under the influence of controlled substances. Although substance
at issue, zolpidem, is not listed in statutory controlled substances,
it is a controlled substance pursuant to Board of Pharmacy
regulations.
People v. Koon, 494 Mich. 1, 832 N.W.2d 724 (2013) the
Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (“MMMA”) supersedes
Michigan Vehicle Code and thus a registered MMMA patient is
allowed drive with “indications” of marijuana in his / her system,
if not otherwise under the influence of marijuana.
People v. Feezel, 486 Mich. 184, 783 N.W.2d 67 (2010)
11-carboxy-THC found in driver’s blood is not a schedule I
controlled substance.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MINNESOTA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
73
M.S.A. § 169A.20.
 “It is a crime for any person to drive, operate, or be in physical
control of any motor vehicle. . . when: . . . the person is under the
influence of a controlled substance.” M.S.A. § 169A.20(1)(2).
 “It is a crime for any person to drive, operate, or be in physical
control of any motor vehicle. . . when: . . . the person is knowingly
under the influence of a hazardous substance that affects the
nervous system, brain, or muscles of the person so as to
substantially impair the person’s ability to drive or operate the
motor vehicle.” M.S.A. § 169A.20(1)(3).
Controlled substance or hazardous substance.
None.
M.S.A. § 169A.20.
“It is a crime for any person to drive, operate, or be in physical control
of any motor vehicle . . . when . . . the person’s body contains any
amount of a controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II, or its
metabolite, other than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols.”
M.S.A. § 169A.20(1)(7).
Controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II, or its metabolite, other
than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols. M.S.A. § 169A.20(1)(7).
If defendant “used the controlled substance according to the terms of a
prescription issued for the defendant in accordance with” Minnesota
law. M.S.A. § 169A.46(2).
Any person who drives, operates, or is in physical control of a motor
vehicle within Minnesota. M.S.A. § 169A.51(1).
Chemical test of breath, blood, or urine. M.S.A. § 169A.51(1).
LEO must have probable cause that driver has committed a drugged
driving violation and the driver must either: (1) been arrested; (2) been
involved in a motor vehicle accident or collision involving bodily
injury, death, or property damage; or (3) refused to take a preliminary
screening test. M.S.A. § 169A.51(1)(b).
Evidence of the refusal to take a test is admissible into evidence in a
prosecution for driving while impaired. M.S.A. § 169A.45(3).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MINNESOTA
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
74
 Refusal with no prior impaired driving incident in prior 10 years
driver’s license revoked for one year.
 Refusal with one prior incident within 10 years or two total
incidents license revoked for two years.
 Refusal with two prior incidents within 10 years driver’s license
revoked for three years.
 Refusal with three prior incidents within 10 yearsdriver’s license
revoked for four years.
 Refusal with four or more prior incidents driver’s license
revoked for six years. M.S.A. § 169A.52(3).
According to Minnesota statutes, it is a crime for any person to refuse
to submit to a chemical test of the person’s blood, breath, or urine
under section 169A.51 (chemical tests for intoxication), or 169A.52
(test refusal or failure; revocation of license). M.S.A. § 169A.20(2).
However, the U.S. Supreme Court (in Birchfield) and the Minnesota
Supreme Court (in Thompson discussed below) have found these
provisions to be unconstitutional with respect to blood or urine tests.
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction  driver’s license revoked for at least 30 days.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for at
least one year.
 Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for at
least three years.
 Fourth conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
four years.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
revoked for six years.
 Driver’s vehicle may be forfeited if he / she is convicted of first or
second degree DWI, which usually means a third or subsequent
offense within 10 years. M.S.A. § 169A.54.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction fourth degree DWI; jail sentence of up to 90
days; fine up to $1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years third degree DWI; gross
misdemeanor; jail sentence of at least 30 days or eight hours
community service for each day less than 30 that person is required
to serve in jail.
 Third conviction within 10 years second degree DWI; gross
misdemeanor; jail sentence of at least 90 days or “a program of
intensive supervision of the type described in section 169A.74
(pilot programs of intensive probation for repeat DWI offenders)
that requires the person to consecutively serve at least six days in a
local correctional facility.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MINNESOTA
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
(continued)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
75
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years first degree
DWI; felony; jail sentence of at least 180 days; “a program of
intensive supervision of the type described in section 169A.74
(pilot programs of intensive probation for repeat DWI offenders)
that requires the person to consecutively serve at least six days in a
local correctional facility.” M.S.A. § 169A.275(1)-(4).
 Enhanced criminal penalties if a driver commits criminal vehicular
injury, which includes violating drugged driving provisions, and
causing bodily harm, substantial bodily harm or great bodily harm.
M.S.A. § 609.2113.
There are enhanced penalties if the driver commits a violation with
passenger under age 16 in the vehicle, if the driver is at least three
years older than the passenger. M.S.A. § 169A.03(3).
Substance abuse treatment can be ordered by the court in cases of a
second conviction within 10 years. It is mandatory in cases of third
conviction.
Minnesota allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients, but it may not be ingested via smoking. Minnesota law does
not specifically address the use of marijuana in a vehicle.
 State v. Thompson, --- N.W.2d ---, 2016 WL 5930162 (Minn. Oct.
12, 2016) applying the “same logic” as the U.S. Supreme Court
in Birchfield, the court held that Minnesota’s statute criminalizing
the refusal to submit to a warrantless urine test “does not qualify as
a search incident to a valid arrest” as thus is unconstitutional.
 State v. Trahan, --- N.W.2d ---, 2016 WL 5930153 (Minn. Oct. 12,
2016) in a case where the U.S. Supreme Court had found
Minnesota’s statute criminalizing the refusal to submit to a
warrantless blood test unconstitutional, the court ruled that the state
had not shown that either the exigency or good-faith exceptions
applied to allow test.
 State v. Carson, 884 N.W.2d 917 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016)
affirming conviction for driving under the influence of a hazardous
substance even though 1,1–difluoroethane (“DFE”) is not listed as
a hazardous substance in state regulations governing occupational
safety, because such list is not exhaustive and DFE is a toxic,
combustible, irritant that can cause personal injury.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MINNESOTA
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)
76
 State v. Fawcett, 884 N.W.2d 380 (Minn. 2016) rejecting
driver’s argument that facts attested to by LEOs to obtain search
warrant to compel blood test did not provide basis to test for
controlled substances in addition to alcohol (where driver’s sample
did not show the presence of alcohol).
 State v. Stavish, 868 N.W.2d 670 (Minn. 2015) in circumstances
involved in case, the state was able to “under the totality-of-thecircumstances approach that exigent circumstances justified the
warrantless blood draw.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MISSISSIPPI
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
77
Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30, as amended by 2016 Mississippi Laws
Chapter 503, effective October 1, 2016.
“It is unlawful for a person to drive or otherwise operate a vehicle
within this state if the person: . . . [i]s under the influence of any drug
or controlled substance, the possession of which is unlawful under the
Mississippi Controlled Substances Law.” Miss. Code Ann. § 63-1130(1)(c).
Any drug or controlled substance, whose possession is unlawful under
Mississippi controlled substances laws.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public highways,
public roads and streets of Mississippi. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-115(1)(a).
A chemical test or tests of his breath, blood or urine. Miss. Code Ann.
§ 63-11-5(1)(a).
LEO must have “reasonable grounds and probable cause to believe”
that the person was driving in violation of drugged driving laws.
Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-5(1)(b).
If a person under arrest refuses to submit to a chemical test, evidence
of refusal is admissible in any criminal action under Miss. Code Ann.
§ 63-11. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-41.

Refusal without a prior conviction driver’s license suspended 90
days, unless driver obtains restricted IID license.
 Refusal with at least one prior conviction driver’s license
suspended for one year, unless driver obtains restricted IID
license. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-23(1).
 There is an assessment of $243 if violation of implied consent law.
Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-73(2).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MISSISSIPPI
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions.
78
First conviction driver’s license suspension of 120 days, unless
driver surrenders license and obtains new license restricted to use
of IID.
Second conviction within five years driver’s license suspension
of one year, unless driver surrenders license and obtains new
license restricted to use of IID.
Third conviction within five years driver’s license suspended
for length of incarceration; use of IID for three years afterwards.
Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) use of IID for 10
years after incarceration. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-23(5).

First conviction jail sentence up to 48 hours; fine of $250$1,000.
 Second conviction within five years jail sentence of five days to
six months; fine of $600-$1,500; community service of 10 days to
six months.
 Third conviction within five years felony; jail sentence of one to
five years; fine of $2,000-$5,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of two to 10
years; fine of $3,000-$10,000. Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30(2).
 There are enhanced penalties a person commits a violation and
causes death or disfigurement of another.
Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30(5).
There are enhanced criminal penalties if a person age 21 or older
commits a violation while person under age 16 in vehicle.
Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30(12).
Any person convicted of a second or subsequent violation must
receive “an in-depth diagnostic assessment, and if as a result of the
assessment is determined to be in need of treatment for alcohol or
drug abuse, the person must successfully complete treatment at a
program site certified by the Department of Mental Health.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30(2)(e).
Mississippi does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Warwick v. State, 179 So.3d 1069 (Miss. 2015) affirming conviction
for driving under the influence of marijuana, in part because driver’s
blood tested positive for the active metabolite of marijuana.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MISSOURI
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
79
V.A.M.S. 577.010.
 Prior to January 1, 2017, “[a] person commits the crime of ‘driving
while intoxicated’ if he operates a motor vehicle while in an
intoxicated or drugged condition.” V.A.M.S. 577.010(1).
 After January 1, 2017, “[a] person commits the offense of driving
while intoxicated if he or she operates a vehicle while in an
intoxicated condition.” 2016 Missouri Laws Chapter 87.
Both before and after January 1, 2017, a person is in an “intoxicated
condition” when “he is under the influence of alcohol, a controlled
substance, or drug, or any combination thereof.”
V.A.M.S. 577.001(3).
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a vehicle upon the public highways of
Missouri. V.A.M.S. 577.020(1).
Chemical test or tests of the person’s breath, blood, saliva or urine, but
the consent is limited to no more than “two such tests arising from the
same stop, detention, arrest, incident or charge.”
V.A.M.S. 577.020(1), (2).
 The driver must be arrested for any offense arising out of acts
which the LEO “had reasonable grounds to believe” were
committed while operating a vehicle in an intoxicated condition.
V.A.M.S. 577.020(1)(1).
 Alternatively, test can be requested if driver was involved in
accident that resulted in the death or “a readily apparent serious
physical injury” of another. V.A.M.S. 577.020(1)(6).
Evidence of a refusal is admissible in any proceeding related to the
acts resulting in the detention, stop, or arrest. V.A.M.S. 577.041(1).
Prior to January 1, 2017, the driver is subject to up to a one-year
license revocation. The driver may be eligible for a hardship,
restricted license. V.A.M.S. 577.041(3).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MISSOURI
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction  90-day license suspension.
 Second conviction (lifetime) normally a one-year license
revocation.
 Second conviction within five years may receive a five-year
license denial.
 Third conviction (lifetime) 10-year license denial.
V.A.M.S. 302.060; http://dor.mo.gov/drivers/dwiinfo.php.
 Under current law, the court must require a second or subsequent
offender to only operate vehicles with IID for not less than six
months following license reinstatement. V.A.M.S. § 577.041(10).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class B misdemeanor; jail sentence up to six
months; fine up to $500.
 Second conviction within five years Class A misdemeanor; jail
sentence up to one year; fine up to $1,000.
 Third conviction (lifetime) persistent offender; felony; jail
sentence up to four years; fine up to $5,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) aggravated offender; felony; jail
sentence up to seven years; fine up to $5,000.
 Fifth conviction (lifetime) chronic offender; felony; jail sentence
of five to 15 years. V.A.M.S. 577.023.
As of January 1, 2017, in cases of a first offense, a violation is a Class
A misdemeanor if it is committed with a person under age 17 in the
vehicle. V.A.M.S. 577.010(2)(b).
Upon a plea of guilty or a finding of guilty for an offense of violating
the provisions of V.A.M.S. 577.010, a court must order the person to
participate in and successfully complete a substance abuse traffic
offender program defined in section V.A.M.S. 577.001.
V.A.M.S. 577/049(1).
Missouri does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
80
 State v. Pickering, 473 S.W.3d 698 (Mo. Ct. App. 2105)
“[i]ntoxication consists of three components: impaired ability,
presence of a proscribed substance in the defendant’s body at the
time of the offense, and a causal connection between the proscribed
substance and the defendant’s impaired ability.”
 State v. McNeely, 358 S.W.3d 65 (Mo. 2012), aff’d by 133 S.Ct.
1552 (2013) non-consensual warrantless blood draw in “routine”
DWI case with no “special facts of exigency,” other than the
natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood, was not constitutional.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MISSOURI
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)
81
 State v. Clarkson, 963 S.W.2d 705 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998) “it
simply is no defense to a charge of driving while intoxicated that
the intoxication was caused by prescription drugs” and “before
intoxication with drugs can be submitted, the evidence must show
that the drug can cause intoxication and that the defendant had a
sufficient level of the drug in his system to cause intoxication,
either alone or when taken in combination with alcohol.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MONTANA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
MCA 61-8-401.
“It is unlawful and punishable . . . for a person who is under the
influence of: . . . a dangerous drug to drive or be in actual physical
control of a vehicle within this state; [or] . . . any other drug to drive
or be in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state.”
MCA 61-8-401(1).
A dangerous drug or any other drug.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of
subsection (1) is or has been entitled to use alcohol or a drug under the
laws of this state does not constitute a defense against any charge of
violating subsection (1).” MCA 61-8-401(2).
MCA 61-8-411.
“It is unlawful and punishable . . . for any person to drive or be in
actual physical control of: . . . a noncommercial vehicle upon the ways
of this state open to the public while the person’s delta-9tetrahydrocannabinol level, excluding metabolites, as shown by
analysis of the person’s blood, is 5 ng/ml or more.”
MCA 61-8-411(1)(a).
Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC”).
None.
A person who operates or is in actual physical control of a vehicle
upon ways of Montana open to the public. MCA 61-8-402(1).
Test or tests of the person’s blood or breath. MCA 61-8-402(1).




82
Test must be given if LEO has “reasonable grounds to believe”
that the person has been driving while under the influence and has
been placed under arrest for a violation of § 61-8-401.
MCA 61-8-402(2)(a)(i).
Test must be given if LEO has “probable cause to believe” that the
person was driving while under the influence and caused an
accident resulting in property damage. MCA 61-8-402(2)(a)(iii)
Test must be given if LEO has “probable cause to believe” that the
person was driving and was involved in an accident resulting in
“serious bodily injury.” MCA 61-8-402(2)(a)(iii).
If a driver refuses testing for a second time, or refuses testing after
a prior conviction, LEO may seek search warrant to compel blood
testing. MCA 61-8-402(5).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MONTANA
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Proof of refusal is admissible in any criminal action or proceeding
arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while driving under
the influence. A trier of fact may infer from the refusal that the person
was under the influence. The inference, however, is rebuttable.
MCA 61-8-404(2).
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal


Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
First refusal driver’s license suspended for six months.
Second or subsequent refusal within five years driver’s license
suspended for one year. MCA 61-8-402(8).
 If driver is arrested and test is refused, driver must pay $300
administrative fee. MCA 61-8-402(6)(a).
None.




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
83
First conviction driver’s license suspended for six months.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for one year.
Third or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
suspended for one year. MCA 61-5-208(2)(a).
Upon a second or subsequent conviction: (1) if the court
recommends a probationary license, it must be with the installation
of an IID; and (2) the court must require the person to participate
in 24/7 drug monitoring. MCA 61-8-733(1).

First conviction jail sentence of 24 hours to six months; fine of
$600-$1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of seven days
(five days if violation of specified concentration of THC) to one
year; fine of $1,200-$2,400.
 Third conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 30 days to one year;
fine of $2,500-$5,000.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of 13 months
to two years; fine of $5,000-$10,000.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence of
13 months to five years; fine of $5,000-$10,000. MCA 61-8-714.
 The offense of negligent vehicular assault occurs if a person
negligently operates a vehicle while under the influence and
causes bodily injury to another. MCA 45-5-205.
Committing a violation while one or more passengers under the age of
16 are in the vehicle. MCA 61-8-714.
For violators, a portion of the sentence can be suspended pending
completion of court-ordered chemical dependency assessment,
education or treatment. MCA 61-8-714(1)(c).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
MONTANA
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Montana allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. An LEO who has “reasonable cause to believe” that a person
with a valid registry identification card is driving under the influence
of marijuana may apply for a search warrant to require the person to
provide a sample of the person’s blood for testing. MCA 50-46320(7)(a). Any registered cardholder who is found guilty of a drugged
driving violation faces the revocation of their registry card.
Selected state court
decisions


84
State v. Pinder, 379 Mont. 357, 350 P.3d 377 (2015) legislature
did not intend to apply the “pharmacy definition” of “drug” to the
DUI statute; accordingly, the chemical found in dust remover, 1,1Difluoroethane (“DFE”) fell under the law since qualified under
the dictionary definition of drug, “a natural or synthetic substance
that alters one’s perception or consciousness.”
State v. Minett, 376 Mont. 260, 332 P.3d 235 (2014) after driver
refused to consent to blood test, provision in implied consent law
that says no test may be given does not prevent LEO from
obtaining warrant to compel blood test.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEBRASKA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
85
Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,196.
“It shall be unlawful for any person to operate or be in the actual
physical control of any motor vehicle: . . . [w]hile under the influence
of . . . of any drug.” Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,196(1)(a).
Any drug.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates or has in his or her actual physical control a
motor vehicle in Nebraska. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197(1).
Chemical test or tests of his or her blood, breath, or urine.
Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197(1).
 Person arrested may be subject to test if LEO “has reasonable
grounds to believe” that the person was driving or in control of
vehicle while under the influence. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197(2).
 Test may be required if driver involved in a motor vehicle accident
and LEO “has reasonable grounds to believe” that the person was
driving or in control of vehicle while under the influence.
Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197(4).
Driver’s refusal to submit to a chemical test is “admissible evidence in
any action for a violation of § 60-6,196.”
Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197(5).
Driver’s license revoked for one year. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-498.02(1).
Criminal penalties are higher in cases where driver refused chemical
testing prior to conviction. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197.03.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEBRASKA
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for six months.
 Second conviction within 15 years driver’s license revoked for
18 months.
 Second conviction within 15 years and refused chemical test
driver’s license revoked for 18 months to 15 years.
 Third conviction within 15 years driver’s license revoked for 15
years. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197.03.
 As an alternative, a court can order any person whose license is
revoked for at least one year to obtain an IID on each motor vehicle
owned or operated by the convicted person, after a minimum 45day no driving period. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197.01(1).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class W misdemeanor; jail sentence of seven to
60 days; fine of $500.
 Second conviction within 15 years Class W misdemeanor; jail
sentence of 30 days to six months; fine of $500.
 Second conviction and refused chemical test Class I
misdemeanor; fine of $1,000.
 Third conviction within 15 years Class W misdemeanor; jail
sentence of 90 days to one year; fine of $1,000.
 Third conviction and refused chemical test Class IIIA felony.
 Fourth conviction within 15 years Class IIIA felony; jail
sentence of 180 days to three years; fine of $10,000.
 Fourth conviction and refused chemical test Class IIA felony.
Neb.Rev.St. § 28-105; § 28-106; § 60-6,197.03.
 Additional criminal penalties if a driver commits a violation and
causes serious bodily injury. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,198.
It is unlawful for any person to operate or be in the actual physical
control of a motor vehicle with a passenger under the age of 16 if the
person is under the influence of alcoholic liquor or any drug.
Neb.Rev.St. § 28-1254(1)(a).
Any person convicted, during a presentence evaluation, must submit
to and participate in an alcohol assessment by a licensed alcohol and
drug counselor. Neb.Rev.St. § 60-6,197.08.
Nebraska does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
86
State v. Rothenberger, 294 Neb. 810, 885 N.W.2d 23 (2016) issued
post-Birchfield, but the constitutionality of Nebraska’s crime for
refusing a chemical test was not before the court; among other things,
holding that there is no bright-line rule requiring that Nebraska’s full
drug recognition expert protocol be administered as a prerequisite to a
finding of probable cause to arrest for driving under the influence of
drugs.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEVADA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
N.R.S. 484C.110.
“It is unlawful for any person who: . . . [i]s under the influence of a
controlled substance . . . to drive or be in actual physical control of a
vehicle on a highway or on premises to which the public has access.”
N.R.S. 484C.110(2)(a).
Controlled substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of this
subsection is or has been entitled to use that drug under the laws of
this State is not a defense against any charge of violating this
subsection.” N.R.S. 484C.110(2).
N.R.S. 484C.110.
“It is unlawful for any person to drive or be in actual physical control
of a vehicle on a highway or on premises to which the public has
access with an amount of a prohibited substance in his or her blood or
urine that is equal to or greater than [amounts noted below].”
N.R.S. 484C.110(3).
Amphetamine (500 ng/ml urine, 100 ng/ml blood); Cocaine / Cocaine
metabolite (150 ng/ml urine, 50 ng/ml blood); Heroin (2,000 / 50);
Heroin metabolite – Morphine (2,000 / 50); Heroin metabolite 6monoacetyl morphine (10 / 10); Lysergic acid diethylamide (25 / 10);
Marijuana (10 / 2); Marijuana metabolite (15 / 5); Methamphetamine
(500 / 100); Phencyclidine (25 / 10). N.R.S. 484C.110(3).
None.
Any person who drives or is in actual physical control of a vehicle on
a highway or on premises to which the public has access in Nevada.
N.R.S. 484C.160(1).
Evidentiary test of blood, urine, breath or other bodily substance.
N.R.S. 484C.160(1). In addition, if “the presence of a controlled
substance . . . or another prohibited substance in the blood or urine of
the person is in issue, the officer may request that the person submit to
a blood or urine test, or both.” N.R.S. 484C.160(6).


87
LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” that driver was in
physical control of a vehicle while violating drugged driving laws.
N.R.S. 484C.160(1)(a)
If a person fails to submit to a requires test, and the LEO has
reasonable grounds to believe that the person is driving in
violation of drugged driving laws, “the officer may apply for a
warrant or court order directing that reasonable force be used to
the extent necessary to obtain samples of blood from the person to
be tested.” N.R.S. 484C.160(8).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEVADA
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Evidence of refusal is admissible in any criminal or administrative
action arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while the
person was driving in violation of drugged driving laws.
N.R.S. 484C.240(1).
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)


None.





Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
88
First refusal driver’s license revoked for one year.
Second or subsequent refusal within past seven years driver’s
license revoked for three years. N.R.S. 484C.210(1).
If chemical test shows there is a prohibited substance in driver’s
blood for which he or she did not have a valid prescription or hold
a valid registry identification card, the driver license is revoked for
90 days. N.R.S. 484C.210(2).
First conviction driver’s license revoked for 90 days.
Second conviction within seven years driver’s license revoked
for one year.
Third or subsequent conviction within seven years driver’s
license revoked for three years. N.R.S. 483.460(1).
Any offender convicted of a felony DUI must be ordered by a
court to install an IID for 12-36 months. N.R.S. § 484C.460(1).

First conviction  jail sentence of two days to six months or 4896 hours community service; fine of $400-$1,000; must pay
tuition for an educational course on the abuse of alcohol and
controlled substances.
 Second conviction within seven years jail sentence of 10 days to
six months; fine of $750-$1,000.
 Third conviction within seven years Category B felony; jail
sentence of one to six years; fine of $2,000-$5,000.
N.R.S. 484C.400.
 Additional criminal penalties for committing a violation and
causing the death or substantial bodily harm to another.
N.R.S. § 484C.430(1).
Committing a violation with a person less than age 15 in the vehicle is
an aggravating factor to be considered by a court at the time of
sentencing. N.R.S. 484C.400(5).

First time offenders must attend an educational course on the
abuse of alcohol and controlled substances. Second time offenders
must be ordered to attend a program of treatment for the abuse of
alcohol or drugs pursuant to the provisions of N.R.S 484C.360.
N.R.S. 484C.400.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEVADA
Treatment
(continued)
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions

Before sentencing an offender for a violation of NRS 484C that is
punishable as a felony, a court must require that the offender be
evaluated to determine whether the offender is an abuser of
alcohol or drugs and whether the offender can be treated
successfully for the condition. N.R.S. 484C.300(1).
Nevada allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. Nevada law, however, does not specifically address the use
of marijuana in a vehicle.


89
Byars v. State, 336 P.3d 939 (Nev. 2014) in version of N.R.S.
484C.160(8) prior to 2015 amendment, the provision that allows
LEO to direct that reasonable force be used to compel blood test
(in the absence of a warrant) is unconstitutional.
Whisler v. State, 121 Nev. 401, 116 P.3d 59 (2005) unwilling or
unknowing intoxication is not a defense to driving under the
influence of a controlled substance.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
90
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:2.
“No person shall drive or attempt to drive a vehicle upon any way . . .
[w]hile such person is under the influence of . . . any controlled drug,
prescription drug, over-the-counter drug, or any other chemical
substance, natural or synthetic, which impairs a person’s ability to
drive.” N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:2(I)(a).
Controlled drug, prescription drug, over-the-counter drug, or any other
chemical substance.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who drives or attempts to drive a vehicle upon the ways of
New Hampshire. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:4.
Chemical, infrared molecular absorption, or gas chromatograph test or
tests of any or all of any combination of the following: blood, urine, or
breath. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:4.
 Driver must be arrested and LEO must have “reasonable grounds to
believe” to believe the driver was operating the vehicle while under
the influence. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:4.
 If there is a motor vehicle accident that results in death or bodily
injury to any person, a living driver who an LEO has “probable
cause” to believe caused the collision may be subject to chemical
test. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:16.
A refusal may be admissible into evidence in a civil or criminal action
or proceeding arising out of an act alleged to have been committed by
the driver while driving under the influence.
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:10.
 First refusal with no prior convictions driver’s license suspended
for 180 days.
 Second refusal, or first refusal with prior conviction driver’s
license suspended for two years. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:14.
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for nine months to two
years.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
three years.
 Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked
indefinitely, with no restoration for at least five years.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
revoked indefinitely, with no restoration for at least seven years.
 Any person whose license or permission to drive has been revoked
or suspended for an aggravated DWI offense or a subsequent DWI
offense must be required by the court after the period of revocation
or suspension to install an IID device for use between one and two
years. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:36(I).
 Offender may be liable to reimburse a public agency for up to
$10,000 of the cost incurred in responding to an incident.
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 153-A:24.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class B misdemeanor; minimum fine of $500.
 Second conviction within 10 years Class A misdemeanor;
minimum jail sentence of 17 days; minimum fine of $750.
 Second conviction within two years Class A misdemeanor;
minimum jail sentence of 60 days; minimum fine of $750.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class A misdemeanor;
minimum jail sentence of at least 180 days; minimum fine of $750.
 Fourth of subsequent conviction within 10 years felony;
minimum jail sentence of 180 days; minimum fine of $750.
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:18(IV).
 Offender maybe charged with aggravated DWI if he/she commits a
violation while: (1) exceeding the speed limit by more than 30
mph; or (2) causing a collision that results in serious bodily injury.
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:3(I)(b).
Offender may be charged with aggravated offense if he/she commits a
violation while a minor under age 16 is in the vehicle.
N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:3(I)(d).
First time offenders are required to submit to an alcohol and drug
abuse screening within 14 days of conviction, and, if testing
demonstrates the likelihood of a substance use disorder, to submit
further to a full substance use disorder evaluation within 30 days of
conviction. N.H. Rev. Stat. § 265-A:18(I)(3).
New Hampshire allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients. The law, however, does not specifically address
the use of marijuana in a vehicle.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
91
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Selected state court
decisions
92
State v. Ducharme, 167 N.H. 606, 116 A.3d 1281 (2015) “a police
inquiry of whether the suspect will take a blood-alcohol test is not an
interrogation within the meaning of Miranda” (citing other sources).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW JERSEY
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.
It is illegal to operate a motor vehicle “while under the influence of
. . . narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug.”
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a).
Narcotic, hallucinogenic or habit-producing drug.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
New Jersey’s general implied consent statute, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.2,
appears to apply only to the “taking of samples of [the driver’s] breath
for the purpose of making chemical tests to determine the content of
alcohol in his blood,” and not to chemical tests of blood or urine for
the presence of other drugs.
N/A
N/A
N/A
None for the refusal of a blood or urine test. Drivers who refuse a
breath test face the suspension of driving privileges.
None for the refusal of a blood or urine test. Drivers who refuse a
breath test face fines.




93
First conviction driver’s license suspended for seven to ten
months.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for two years; use of IID required.
Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended for
10 years; use of IID required. N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.
Offenders face insurance surcharges of $1,000-$1,500 per year,
depending on the number of prior offenses. N.J.S.A. 17:29A-35.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW JERSEY
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)




Child
endangerment


Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
94
First conviction jail sentence up to 30 days; fine of $300-$500.
Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 48 hours to
90 days; fine of $500-$1,000; 30 days community service.
Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years minimum jail
sentence of 180 days; fine of $1,000; community service up to 90
days.
Additional penalties for committing a violation while causing
serious bodily injury. N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.
Enhanced criminal penalties for committing a violation within
1,000 feet of a school or through a school crossing.
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(g).
Parent or guardian who is convicted of a violation and, at the time
of the violation, had a passenger age 17 or under in the motor
vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense.
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50.15.

An offender must satisfy the screening, evaluation, referral,
program and fee requirements of the Division of Mental Health
and Addiction Services’ Intoxicated Driving Program Unit, and of
the Intoxicated Driver Resource Centers and a program of alcohol
and drug education and highway safety. N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(b).
 For third or subsequent offense, a court may lower the term of
imprisonment for each day, not exceeding 90 days, served
participating in a drug or alcohol inpatient rehabilitation program
approved by the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center.
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a)(3).
New Jersey allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients. A registered patient may not smoke marijuana in a
private vehicle unless the vehicles is not in operation.
N.J.S.A. 24:6I-8(b).
State v. Bealor, 187 N.J. 574, 902 A.2d 226 (2006) “the driving
while intoxicated statute ‘does not require that the particular narcotic[,
hallucinogen or habit-producing drug] be identified.’”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW MEXICO
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
95
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102.
“It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of any drug to a
degree that renders the person incapable of safely driving a vehicle to
drive a vehicle within this state.” N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(B).
Any drug.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle within New Mexico.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-107.
Chemical tests of breath, blood or both. N. M. S. A. § 66-8-107.
 Driver must be arrested for an offense arising out of the acts
alleged to have been committed while the person was driving under
the influence and LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe”
the driver was operating the vehicle while under the influence.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-107(A)-(B).
 LEO may seek warrant to compel test if LEO provides affidavit
that there is “probable cause to believe” that the person operated a
motor vehicle while under the influence and either: (1) caused the
death or great bodily injury of another person; or (2) committed a
felony while under the influence. N. M. S. A. § 66-8-111(A).
Evidence of a defendant’s refusal to take a breath alcohol test is
admissible at trial. McKay v. Davis, 99 N.M. 29, 653 P.2d 860
(1982).
Driver’s license revoked for one year, or until all requirements for
reinstatement are completed, whichever is later.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-111(B).
Refusal to submit to chemical testing, where the court finds that driver
was under the influence of intoxicating drugs, results in an
aggravating charge, potentially increasing criminal penalties.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(D)(3).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW MEXICO
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for one year; use of IID
for one year.
 Second conviction (lifetime) driver’s license revoked for two
years; use of IID for two years.
 Third conviction (lifetime) driver’s license revoked for three
years; use of IID for three years.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
revoked for life; use of IID indefinitely (offender may apply for
removal every five years). N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(O), (P).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction jail sentence up to 90 days; fine up to $500
(likely $300); minimum 24 hours community service.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 96 hours to one
year; fine of $500-$1,000; minimum 48 hours community service.
 Third conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 30 days to one year;
fine of $750-$1,000; at least 96 hours community service.
 Fourth conviction (lifetime) fourth-degree felony; jail sentence
of 18 months; fine up to $5,000.
 Fifth conviction (lifetime) fourth-degree felony; jail sentence of
two years; fine up to $5,000.
 Sixth conviction (lifetime) third degree felony; jail sentence of
30 months; fine up to $5,000.
 Seventh conviction (lifetime) third degree felony; jail sentence of
three years; fine up to $5,000.
 Eighth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) second-degree felony;
jail sentence of 12 years; fine up to $5,000.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(F)-(K).
 It is an aggravating factor to cause bodily injury while committing
a violation. N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(D)(2).
It is an aggravating factor to cause bodily injury to a pregnant woman
while committing a violation. N. M. S. A.§ 66-8-101.1(C).
Child
endangerment
Treatment
96
 Upon any conviction, an offender is required to participate and
complete an alcohol or drug abuse screening program and, if
necessary, a treatment program approved by the court.
N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(L).
 Upon a second or third conviction, an offender must participate in
and complete: (1) not less than a 28-day inpatient, residential or incustody substance abuse treatment program approved by the court;
(2) not less than a 90-day outpatient treatment program approved
by the court; (3) a drug court program approved by the court; or (4)
any other substance abuse treatment program approved by the
court. N. M. S. A. § 66-8-102(M).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW MEXICO
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
97
New Mexico allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients. New Mexico law, however, does not specifically
address the use of marijuana in a vehicle.
State v. Garnenez, 344 P.3d 1054 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014) “a
constitutionally permissible search of a person’s blood may arise
either from an arrest pursuant to the Implied Consent Act or a valid
search warrant supported by probable cause.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW YORK
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
98
N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192.

“No person shall operate a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated
condition.” N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192(3).
 “No person shall operate a motor vehicle while the person’s ability
to operate such a motor vehicle is impaired by the use of a drug as
defined in this chapter.” N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192(4).
Drug, which “means and includes any substance listed in [New York’s
schedule of controlled substances].” N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law
§ 114-a.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle in New York. N.Y. Vehicle
and Traffic Law § 1194(2).
Chemical test of one or more of the following: breath, blood, urine, or
saliva. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194(2).

Test can be requested if driver is arrested and LEO has
“reasonable grounds to believe” the person was operating a
vehicle while intoxicated or impaired. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic
Law § 1194(2)(a)(1).
 Test can be requested if breath test is performed and it indicates
that alcohol has been consumed. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law §
1194(2)(a)(2).
 Upon a refusal, LEO may request court order for chemical test if
the driver: (1) killed or seriously injured someone while operating
the vehicle; (2) operated the vehicle while impaired or intoxicated;
and (3) was arrested. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194(3).
Evidence of a test refusal is admissible in any trial, proceeding or
hearing based upon the driving while intoxicated or impaired, but only
upon a showing that the person was given sufficient warning.
N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194(2)(f).


First refusal $500 civil penalty; driver’s license revoked for at
least one year.
Refusal within five years of prior refusal or conviction $750
civil penalty; driver’s license revoked for at least 18 months.
N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194(2)(d).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NEW YORK
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
None.




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
99
First conviction driver’s license revoked for at least six months.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
at least one year.
Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for at
least one year. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1193(2)(b).
For an aggravated DWI offense or any repeat alcohol or drug
offense within five years, a judge is required to order an IID on
each vehicle owned or operated by the motorist during both the
revocation period and any probation period that follows.

First conviction jail sentence up to one year; fine of $500$1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years Class E felony; jail sentence
up to four years; fine of $1,000-$5,000.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class D felony; jail sentence
of up to seven years; fine of $2,000-$10,000.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 15 years Class D felony;
jail sentence up to seven years; fine of $2,000-$10,000.
N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1193(1).
 Additional criminal penalties for causing serious physical injury or
death while committing a violation. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law
§ 1192(12).
It is an aggravated offense to commit a violation while a child age 15
or under is a passenger in the vehicle. N.Y. Vehicle and Traffic Law
§ 1192(2-a)(b).
Two or more alcohol/drug related driving violations within a 25-year
period on a driving record establishes a history of alcohol or drug
abuse per New York motor vehicle regulations. If a driver’s license
has been revoked and the driving record contains a history of such
alcohol or drug abuse, New York DMV must receive proof of
completion of an alcohol or drug rehabilitation before processing an
application for a new license.
New York allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. A registered patient may not consume marijuana in a vehicle
located on a public highway, private road open to traffic, or public
parking lot. 10 NYCRR 1004.18(c).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH CAROLINA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
100
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.1.
“A person commits the offense of impaired driving if he drives any
vehicle upon any highway, any street, or any public vehicular area
within this State: . . .[w]hile under the influence of an impairing
substance.” N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.1(a)(1).
Impairing substance, which means “alcohol, controlled substance . . .
any other drug or psychoactive substance capable of impairing a
person’s physical or mental faculties, or any combination of these
substances.” N.C.G.S.A. § 20-4.01(14a).
None. “The fact that a person charged with violating this section is or
has been legally entitled to use . . . a drug is not a defense to a charge
under this section.” N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.1(b). However, a mitigating
factor in sentencing is if the impairment was “caused primarily by a
lawfully prescribed drug for an existing medical condition, and the
amount of the drug taken was within the prescribed dosage.”
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-179(e).
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.1; N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.3.
 “A person commits the offense of impaired driving if he drives any
vehicle upon any highway, any street, or any public vehicular area
within this State: . . . [w]ith any amount of a Schedule I controlled
substance, as listed in G.S. 90-89, or its metabolites in his blood or
urine.” N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.1(a)(3).
 “It is unlawful for a person less than 21 years old to drive a motor
vehicle on a highway or public vehicular area . . . at any time while
he has remaining in his body any . . . controlled substance
previously consumed.” N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.3(a).
Schedule 1 substances (drivers age 21 or older); all controlled
substances (drivers under age 21).
With respect to drivers under age 21, there is a defense if the driver
“drives with a controlled substance in his body which was lawfully
obtained and taken in therapeutically appropriate amounts.”
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.3(a).
Any person who drives a vehicle on a highway or public vehicular
area in North Carolina. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-16.2(a).
“Chemical analysis.” This term is defined as “a test or tests of the
breath, blood, or other bodily fluid or substance.”
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-4.01(3a).
Driver must be charged with an “implied-consent offense,” which
includes an offense involving impaired driving and LEO must have
“reasonable grounds to believe” that the person charged committed an
implied-consent offense. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-16.2(a).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH CAROLINA
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
The fact of the refusal is admissible evidence at trial.
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-16.2(a)(1).
Driver’s license revoked for one year. If no prior offense (or refusal)
within past seven years, driver may petition for restricted driving
privileges after six months. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-16.2(d), (e1).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 Level 5 Punishment jail sentence of 24 hours to 60 days; fine up
to $200; minimum for first conviction
 Level 4 Punishment jail sentence of 48 hours to 120 days; fine
up to $500.
 Level 3 Punishment jail sentence of 72 hours to six months; fine
up to $1,000.
 Level 2 Punishment jail sentence of 7 days to 12 months; fine up
to $2,000; minimum for second conviction.
 Level 1 Punishment jail sentence of 30 days to two years; fine up
to $4,000.
 Violation of N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.3 is a Class 2 misdemeanor,
resulting in a jail sentence of up to 60 days and a fine up to $1,000.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years “habitual
impaired driving”; Class F felony. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-138.5;
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-179; N.C.G.S.A. § 20-19.
 Additional criminal penalties if a person commits an offense while
causing death or critical injury to another person.
Committing a violation while a person under age 18 is a passenger in
the vehicle. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-179(c).
Child
endangerment
101
None.
 First conviction driver’s license revoked for one year.
 Second conviction within three years driver’s license revoked for
four years.
 Second conviction within seven years driver’s license revoked
for one year and no limited driving privileges.
 Third conviction, where second conviction was within five years of
third driver’s license permanently revoked.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
permanently revoked. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-19(c1), (d), (e).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH CAROLINA
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
102
 In order to apply for restricted driving privileges after refusal of a
chemical test, the driver must first obtain a substance abuse
assessment from a mental health facility and successfully
completed any recommended training or treatment program.
N.C.G.S.A. § 20-16.2(e1).
 For Levels 3-5 punishment, if the defendant is placed on probation,
the court must impose a requirement that the defendant obtain a
substance abuse assessment and the education or treatment for the
restoration of driving privileges. N.C.G.S.A. § 20-179(k).
North Carolina does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
State v. Romano, 785 S.E.2d 168 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016), review
granted  in a case to be reviewed by the North Carolina Supreme
Court, an intermediate appellate court upheld the trial court’s
suppression of evidence under McNeely, finding a warrantless, nonconsensual blood draw to be unconstitutional without exigent
circumstances.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH DAKOTA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
NDCC, 39-08-01.
“A person may not drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle upon a highway or upon public or private areas to which the
public has a right of access for vehicular use in this state if any of the
following apply: . . . [t]hat person is under the influence of any drug or
substance or combination of drugs or substances to a degree which
renders that person incapable of safely driving.”
NDCC, 39-08-01(1)(c).
Any drug.
Person’s legal entitlement to use a drug does not provide a defense
“unless a drug which predominately caused impairment was used only
as directed or cautioned by a practitioner who legally prescribed or
dispensed the drug to that person.” NDCC, 39-08-01(1).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any individual who operates a motor vehicle on a highway or on
public or private areas to which the public has a right of access for
vehicular use in North Dakota. NDCC, 39-20-01(1).
Chemical test, or tests, of the blood, breath, or urine.
NDCC, 39-20-01(1).

LEO can request test if driver placed under arrest for driving under
the influence. NDCC, 39-20-01(2).
 LEO can request test if driver involved in crash that resulted in the
death or serious bodily injury of another person and there is
“probable cause to believe” that driver was operating vehicle while
under the influence. NDCC, 39-20-01.1(1), (2).
Proof of refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or
proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while
the person was driving under the influence. NDCC, 39-20-08.



103
First refusal with no prior driver’s suspension or conviction in past
seven years driver’s license suspended for 180 days.
Refusal with one prior suspension for refusal or conviction in past
seven years driver’s license suspended for two years.
Refusal with two or more prior suspensions for refusal or
conviction in past seven years driver’s license suspended for
three years. NDCC, 39-20-04(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH DAKOTA
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Refusing a chemical test is a crime subject to the same penalties as a
conviction. NDCC, 39-20-01(3)(a). The constitutionality of this,
however, has been called into question by the U.S. Supreme Court’s
decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which
holds that a state cannot place criminal penalty on a driver’s refusal to
undergo a warrantless blood test to determine alcohol concentration.
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
104
First conviction driver’s license suspended for 91 days.
Second conviction within seven years driver’s license
suspended for one year.
Third or subsequent conviction within seven years driver’s
license suspended for two years. NDCC, 39-06.1-10(8).
If court allows offender to have a temporary restricted license, the
court may direct that an IID be installed. NDCC, 39-06.1-11(4).

First conviction Class B misdemeanor; jail sentence up to 30
days; fine of $500-$1,500.
 Second conviction within seven years Class B misdemeanor;
jail sentence of 10-30 days; fine of $1,500.
 Third conviction within seven years Class A misdemeanor; jail
sentence of 120 days to one year; fine of at least $2,000.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 15 years Class C felony;
jail sentence of one to five years; fine of $2,000.
NDCC, 39-08-01(5); NDCC, 12.1-32-01.
 Additional penalties if the offender commits a violation while
causing death or serious bodily injury to another person.
NDCC, 39-08-01.2.
A person age 21 or older committing a violation with a minor in the
vehicle as a passenger. NDCC, 39-08-01.4.
A first-time or subsequent offender faces an order for addiction
evaluation by an appropriate licensed addiction treatment program.
NDCC, 39-08-01(5). A second time offender faces one year of
participation in the 24/7 program.
North Dakota does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.

Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016) N.D. driver
suspected of drunk driving refused warrantless blood draw after
being informed that such refusal could lead to criminal
punishment. U.S. Supreme Court finds that placing criminal
penalty on the refusal to take a warrantless blood test is
unconstitutional as “motorists cannot be deemed to have consented
to submit to a blood test on pain of committing a criminal
offense.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
NORTH DAKOTA
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)
105

State v. Bitz, 757 N.W.2d 565 (N.D. 2008) “a person can be
under the influence of drugs even if the drugs taken by that
individual were over-the-counter medications, so long as the drugs
or substances had an intoxicating effect or impaired the person’s
ability to operate a vehicle.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OHIO
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
106
R.C. § 4511.19.
“No person shall operate any vehicle, . . . within this state, if, at the
time of the operation, any of the following apply: . . . (t)he person is
under the influence of alcohol, a drug of abuse, or a combination of
them.” R.C. § 4511.19(A)(1)(a).
A “drug of abuse,” which means “any controlled substance, dangerous
drug as defined in [R.C. § 4729.01], or over-the-counter medication
that, when taken in quantities exceeding the recommended dosage,
can result in impairment of judgment or reflexes.”
R.C. § 4506.01(M).
None.
R.C. § 4511.19.
“No person shall operate any vehicle, . . . within this state, if, at the
time of the operation, any of the following apply: . . . [t]he person has
a concentration of any of the following controlled substances or
metabolites of a controlled substance in the person’s whole blood,
blood serum or plasma, or urine that equals or exceeds any of the
following . . . .” R.C. § 4511.19(1)(A)(j).
 Amphetamine (500 ng/ml urine; 100 ng/ml whole blood, blood
serum or plasma).
 Cocaine (150 ng/ml urine; 50 ng/ml whole blood, blood serum or
plasma).
 Cocaine metabolite (150 ng/ml urine; 50 ng/ml whole blood, blood
serum or plasma).
 Heroin (2,000 ng/ml urine; 50 ng/ml whole blood, blood serum or
plasma).
 Heroin metabolite - 6-monoacetyl morphine (10 ng/ml urine; 10
ng/ml whole blood, blood serum or plasma).
 L.S.D. (25 ng/ml urine; 10 ng/ml whole blood, blood serum or
plasma).
 Marijuana (10 ng/ml urine; 2 ng/ml whole blood, blood serum or
plasma).
 Marijuana metabolite and under the influence of alcohol or another
drug (15 mg/ml urine; 5 mg/ml whole blood, blood serum or
plasma).
 Marijuana metabolite (35 ng/ml urine; 50 ng/ml whole blood,
blood serum or plasma).
 Methamphetamine (500 ng/ml urine; 100 ng/ml whole blood, blood
serum or plasma).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OHIO
Per se – applicable
substances
(continued)
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
107
 Phencyclidine (25 ng/ml urine; 10 ng/ml whole blood or blood
serum or plasma).
 Salvia divinorum; salvinorin A. R.C. § 4511.19(1)(A)(j).
Subsection (A)(1)(j) does not apply if: “(1) The person obtained the
controlled substance pursuant to a prescription issued by a licensed
health professional authorized to prescribe drugs; [and] (2) The person
injected, ingested, or inhaled the controlled substance in accordance
with the health professional’s directions.” R.C. § 4511.19(K).
Any person who operates a vehicle upon a highway or any public or
private property used by the public for vehicular travel or parking
within Ohio. R.C. § 4511.191(A)(2).
Chemical test or tests of the person’s whole blood, blood serum or
plasma, breath, or urine. R.C. § 4511.191(A)(2).
 Driver must be arrested for DUI violation and LEO must have
“reasonable grounds to believe” the person was operating a vehicle
in violation of drugged driving laws. R.C. § 4511.191(A)(2), (3).
 LEO must advise the driver at the time of the arrest that if the
person refuses to take a chemical test, the LEO “may employ
whatever reasonable means are necessary to ensure that the person
submits to a chemical test of the person’s whole blood or blood
serum or plasma.” In such a case, the LEO is “immune from
criminal and civil liability based upon a claim for assault and
battery or any other claim for the acts, unless the officer so acted
with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless
manner.” R.C. § 4511.191(A)(5)(a), (b).
“Thus, it is reasonable to infer that a refusal to take such a test
indicates the defendant’s fear of the results of the test and his
consciousness of guilt, especially where he is asked his reason for
such refusal and he gives no reason which would indicate that his
refusal had no relation to such consciousness of guilt.” City of
Westerville v. Cunningham, 15 Ohio St.2d 121, 239 N.E.2d 40 (1968).
 First refusal within six years Class C suspension of driver’s
license (one year).
 Refusal with one prior refusal or conviction within six years
Class B suspension of driver’s license (two years).
 Refusal with two prior events of either refusal or conviction within
six years Class A suspension of driver’s license (three years).
 Refusal with three or more prior events of either refusal or
conviction within six years driver’s license suspended for five
years. R.C. § 4510.02
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OHIO
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
If driver has prior conviction for violation within past 20 years, a
refusal to take chemical test will result in increased criminal penalties.
R.C. § 4511.192(B).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction first-degree misdemeanor; jail sentence of three
days to six months; fine of $375-$1,075.
 Second conviction within six years first-degree misdemeanor;
jail sentence of 10 days to six months; fine of $525-$1,625.
 Third conviction within six years misdemeanor; jail sentence of
30 days to one year; fine of $850-$2,750.
 Fourth or fifth conviction within six years or sixth or subsequent
conviction within 20 years felony; jail sentence of 60 days to one
year; fine of $1,350-$10,500. R.C. § 4511.19(G).
 It is aggravated vehicular assault to cause serious physical harm to
another person in the course of committing a violation of drugged
driving laws. R.C. § 2903.08(A)(1)(a).
It is a separate criminal offense to commit a violation with a child
under age 18 in the vehicle. R.C. § 2919.22(C)(1).
Child
endangerment
Treatment
108
 First conviction Class 5 driver’s license suspension (six months
to three years).
 Second conviction within six years Class 4 driver’s license
suspension (one to five years).
 Third conviction within six years Class 3 driver’s license
suspension (two to ten years).
 Fourth or fifth conviction within six years or sixth or subsequent
conviction within 20 years Class 2 driver’s license suspension
(three years to life). R.C. § 4511.19(G); R.C. § 4510.02.
 Court may require, as a condition of a community control sanction,
that an offender operate only a motor vehicle with IID.
R.C. § 2951.02(C)(1).
 For a first violator, a court may require the offender to attend and
satisfactorily complete any treatment or education programs.
 For a second offender, there is mandatory drug/alcohol assessment
and (if any) recommended treatment.
 A three-time offender faces mandatory participation in addition
treatment. R.C. § 4511.19(G).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OHIO
109
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Ohio allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. Under the law, “a person’s status as a registered patient or
caregiver is not a sufficient basis for conducting a field sobriety test
on the person or for suspending the person’s driver’s license.” In
order to conduct a sobriety test, the LEO must have “an independent,
factual basis giving reasonable suspicion that the person is operating a
vehicle under the influence of marijuana” or with a prohibited
concentration in the blood, breath or urine.” R.C. § 3796.24(E).
Selected state court
decisions
 State v. Husted, 23 N.E.3d 253 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014) if
defendant is charged with driving while under the influence of a
drug of abuse, “the General Assembly requires that the state do
more than prove impairment in a vacuum; there must be some
evidence ‘to establish a nexus between the defendant’s impaired
condition and any type of drug abuse.’”
 State v. Whalen, 991 N.E.2d 738 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013) statute
criminalizing driving with specified amount of marijuana or nonimpairing marijuana metabolite in blood is not unconstitutional;
use of a maximum allowable amount “discourages arbitrary and
discriminatory enforcement.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OKLAHOMA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
110
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902.
“It is unlawful and punishable as provided in this section for any
person to drive, operate, or be in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle within this state . . . who: . . . [i]s under the influence of any
intoxicating substance other than alcohol which may render such
person incapable of safely driving or operating a motor vehicle.”
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(A)(4).
Any intoxicating substance other than alcohol.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of this
section is or has been lawfully entitled to use alcohol or a controlled
dangerous substance or any other intoxicating substance shall not
constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.”
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(B).
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902.
“It is unlawful and punishable as provided in this section for any
person to drive, operate, or be in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle within this state, . . . who: . . . [h]as any amount of a Schedule
I chemical or controlled substance, as defined in [63 Okl.St. Ann.
§ 2-204 ] or one of its metabolites or analogs in the person’s blood,
saliva, urine or any other bodily fluid at the time of a test . . . .”
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(A)(3).
Schedule I controlled substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of this
section is or has been lawfully entitled to use alcohol or a controlled
dangerous substance or any other intoxicating substance shall not
constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.”
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(B).
Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public roads,
highways, streets, turnpikes or other public place or upon any private
road, street, alley or lane which provides access to one or more single
or multi-family dwellings within Oklahoma. 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 751(A).
Test or tests of the person’s blood, saliva or urine.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 751(A).

Driver must be arrested for any offense arising out of acts alleged
to have been committed while in violation of drugged driving laws
or been involved in an accident that resulted in the “immediate
death or serious injury” of any person.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 751(A)(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OKLAHOMA
Implied consent –
basis for test
(continued)
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)

In addition, LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” that
driver was operating vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 751(A)(2).
 In cases where LEO has probable cause to believe the arrested
driver, while intoxicated, caused the death or serious physical
injury of another person, the LEO can compel a chemical test as if
he / she possessed a search warrant. 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 753(A).
 Any driver involved in accident resulting in “immediate death” or
sever bodily injury “shall submit to drug and alcohol testing as
soon as practicable” after the accident, if the driver “could be cited
for any traffic offense.” 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 10-104.
Evidence that a driver has refused a chemical test is admissible in any
trial of any criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to
have been committed while violating drugged driving laws.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 756.

Refusal with no prior revocations  driver’s license suspended for
180 days.
 Refusal with one prior revocation of license or conviction within
past 10 years driver’s license revoked for at least one year.
 Refusal with two or more prior license revocations within past 10
years driver’s license revoked for at least three years.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 6-205.1(A).
None.




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)



111
First conviction driver’s license suspended for 180 days.
Conviction with one prior license revocation within 10 years
driver’s license revoked for one year.
Conviction with two or more prior revocations within 10 years
driver’s license revoked for three years.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 6-205.1(B).
Court may order an offender to install IID on vehicle and use for a
period of up to two years. 22 Okl.St.Ann. § 991a(A)(1)(n).
First conviction misdemeanor; jail sentence of 10 days to one
years; fine up to $1,000.
Second conviction within 10 years felony; jail sentence of one
to five years; fine of up to $2,500.
Third conviction within 10 years felony; jail sentence of one to
ten years; fine up to $5,000; 240 hours community service.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OKLAHOMA
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
(continued)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
112

Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of up to 20 years; fine up to $5,000; 480 hours
community service. 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(C).
 Additional penalties if driver commits an offense while causing
personal injury or “great bodily injury” to another person.
47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-904.
If a driver aged 18 or older commits a violation with a person under
age 18 in the vehicle, the criminal fine is double the amount of the
fine imposed for the underlying driving under the influence (DUI)
violation. 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(L)(1).
Any person who is found guilty of a must be ordered to participate in
an alcohol and drug substance abuse evaluation and assessment
program and must follow all recommendations made in the
assessment and evaluation for treatment. 47 Okl.St.Ann. § 11-902(G).
Oklahoma does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Cripps v. State, --- P.3d ---, 2016 WL 3769476 (Okl. Ct. App. June
30, 2016) Oklahoma’s per se rule requiring non-consensual blood
testing (47 Okl.St.Ann. § 10-104) is constitutional under McNeely,
because the exigent circumstance justifying the rule is “the existence
of great bodily injury or a fatality”; the defendant-appellant has sought
review of this case by the U.S. Supreme Court.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OREGON
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
113
O.R.S. § 813.010.
“A person commits the offense of driving while under the influence of
intoxicants if the person drives a vehicle while the person: . . . [i]s
under the influence of . . . a controlled substance or an inhalant.”
O.R.S. § 813.010(1)(b).
Controlled substance.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon premises open to the
public or the highways of Oregon. O.R.S. § 813.131(1).
Chemical test of urine for the purpose of determining the presence of a
controlled substance or an inhalant in the person’s body.
O.R.S. § 813.131(1). A driver in Oregon also grants implied consent
to a breath test and, if receiving medical attention, a blood test, but
those two tests are for the purpose of determining alcohol content.
O.R.S. § 813.100.
 Driver must be arrested for driving while under the influence of
intoxicants and either: (1) involved in an accident resulting in
injury or property damage; or (2) taken a breath test which
discloses a BAC under 0.08.
 LEO must be certified as having at least eight hours of training in
recognition of drug impaired driving.
 LEO must have “a reasonable suspicion” that the person arrested
has been driving while under the influence. O.R.S. § 813.131.
Evidence of the person’s refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal
action, suit or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been
committed while the person was under the influence.
O.R.S. § 813.310.
 Refusal with no prior refusal or violation driver’s license
suspended for one year.
 Refusal with one or more prior refusals/violations in past five
years driver’s license suspended for three years.
O.R.S. § 813.420-430.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OREGON
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Refusal to take a chemical test is a “specific fine traffic violation,”
with a presumptive fine is $650. O.R.S. § 813.095. The fine can vary
between $500 and $1,000. O.R.S. § 813.130(f).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence up to one
year; minimum fine of $1,000.
 Second conviction Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence up to one
year; $1,500 minimum fine.
 Third conviction  Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence up to one
year; $2,000 minimum fine if not sentenced to jail.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class C felony; jail sentence of
90 days to five years; minimum fine of $2,000.
O.R.S. § 813.010; 813.011.
 As an alternative to jail, court can sentence a violator to 50-250
hours of community service. O.R.S. § 137.129.
 Additional penalties if driver commits a violation and causing
physical injury or serious physical injury to another person.
There is a maximum fine of $10,000 if a violation is committed while
a person under age 18 in the vehicle and the driver is at least three
years older than passenger. O.R.S. § 813.010(7).
In order for driving privileges to be reinstated, a person who has been
convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicants must
provide proof to the state Department of Transportation that the
person completed a treatment program to which the person was
referred under ORS 813.021. O.R.S. § 813.022.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
114
 First conviction driver’s license suspended for one year.
 Second conviction within five years driver’s license suspended
for three years.
 Third conviction within five years driver’s license suspended for
three years. O.R.S. § 813.400; ORS 809.428.
 State Department of Transportation must require offender to install
IID on any vehicle used for one to two years after ending date of
suspension or revocation, depending on the number of prior
occurrences. O.R.S. § 813.602(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
OREGON
115
Marijuana in
vehicle
Oregon allows both the recreational and medicinal use of marijuana.
State law, however, does not specifically address the use of marijuana
in a vehicle. By January 1, 2017, the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission has been directed to “examine available research, and
may conduct or commission new research, to investigate the influence
of marijuana on the ability of a person to drive a vehicle and on the
concentration of delta–9–tetrahydrocannabinol in a person’s blood, in
each case taking into account all relevant factors” and “present the
results of the research, including any recommendations for legislation,
to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to
judiciary.” 2015 Oregon Laws Chapter 614, § 172.
Selected state court
decisions
 State v. Hermanson, 278 Or.App. 570, 377 P.3d 688 (Or. Ct. App.
2016) in case of warrantless entry into home to collect blood,
state failed to show whether a warrant could reasonably have been
obtained without sacrificing evidence of the crime.
 State v. Mazzola, 356 Or. 804, 345 P.3d 424 (2015) “[i]mplicit in
ORS 813.010(1)(a) is the premise that, in an alcohol-based
prosecution, blood alcohol content is probative of whether a
defendant was impaired while driving. By contrast, the DUII
statute does not provide that chemical evidence of the presence of
drugs in a defendant’s system can establish that the defendant was
so impaired. Thus, in a prosecution under ORS 813.010(1)(b),
evidence that the defendant was impaired while driving typically
comes in other forms.”
 State v. Newman, 353 Or. 632, 302 P.3d 435 (2013) trial court
erred in excluding evidence that defendant may have been sleep
driving; under Oregon law, a driver must commit a volitional act
with respect to driving while intoxicated, and fact of sleep driving,
if established, might have led jury to acquit.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
PENNSYLVANIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
116
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802.
“An individual may not drive, operate or be in actual physical control
of the movement of a vehicle under any of the following
circumstances: . . . [t]he individual is under the influence of a drug or
combination of drugs to a degree which impairs the individual’s
ability to safely drive, operate or be in actual physical control of the
movement of the vehicle.” 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d)(2).
Drug or combination of drugs.
None. “The fact that a person charged with violating this chapter is or
has been legally entitled to use alcohol or controlled substances is not
a defense to a charge of violating this chapter.” 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3810.
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802.
“An individual may not drive, operate or be in actual physical control
of the movement of a vehicle under any of the following
circumstances: . . . [t]here is in the individual’s blood any amount of a:
(i) Schedule I controlled substance, as defined in the act of April 14,
1972 (P.L. 233, No. 64),1 known as The Controlled Substance, Drug,
Device and Cosmetic Act; (ii) Schedule II or Schedule III controlled
substance, as defined in The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and
Cosmetic Act, which has not been medically prescribed for the
individual; or (iii) metabolite of a substance under subparagraph (i) or
(ii).” 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d)(1).


Schedule I controlled substance or metabolite.
Schedule II or III controlled substance (or a metabolite) which has
not been medically prescribed for the person (or a metabolite).
 Pennsylvania has published the minimum levels of Schedule I, II
or III substances that must be present in blood for results to be
admissible in a criminal proceeding: Amphetamine (5 ng/ml);
Methamphetamine(5 ng/ml); Methadone (20 ng/ml); THC (1
ng/ml); Cocaine (5 ng/ml); Benzoylecgonine (5 ng/ml);
Phencyclidine (1 ng/ml); Codeine (5 ng/ml); Hydrocodone (5
ng/ml); Hydromorphone (2.5 ng/ml); 6-Monoacetylmorphine (2.5
ng/ml); Morphine (5 ng/ml); Oxycodone (5 ng/ml); Amobarbital
(40 ng/ml); Pentobarbital (40 ng/ml); Secobarbital (ng/ml).
41 Ps. B. 2295 (April 30, 2011).
Schedule II or III controlled substance has been medically prescribed
for the person. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d)(1).
Any person who drives, operates or is in actual physical control of the
movement of a vehicle in Pennsylvania. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1547(a).
One or more chemical tests of breath or blood.
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1547(a).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
PENNSYLVANIA
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” the person was either:
(1) operating the vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws; or (2)
involved in an accident in which any person was killed.
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1547(a).
The fact of refusal is admissible in any summary proceeding or
criminal proceeding in which the defendant is charged with a violation
of drugged driving laws. No presumptions arise from the refusal,
however. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1547(e).

Refusal with no prior conviction driver’s license suspended for
12 months.
 Refusal with at least one prior conviction driver’s license
suspended for 18 months. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1547.
If convicted, an offender who refused a chemical test faces higher
criminal penalties. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3804(c).



Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
117
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for 12 months; use of IID for one year.
Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
suspended for 18 months; use of IID for one year. 75 Pa.C.S.A. §
3804(e).
Any offender with a prior conviction in the past 10 years who
seeks restoration of driving privileges must have an IID installed
for the duration of the restricted driving period.
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3805(a).

First conviction jail sentence of 72 hours to six months; fine of
$1,000-$5,000; must comply with treatment requirements.
 Second conviction within 10 years first degree misdemeanor;
jail sentence of 90 days to five years; fine of $1,500-$10,000; must
comply with treatment requirements.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years first degree
misdemeanor; jail sentence of one to five years; fine of $2,500$10,000; must comply with treatment requirements. 75 Pa.C.S.A.
§ 3804(c).
 Additional penalties for committing a violation while causing
bodily injury, serious bodily injury or death of another person.
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3803(b).
Committing a violation with a person under age 18 in the vehicle is a
first degree misdemeanor. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3803(b)(5).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
PENNSYLVANIA
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
If a defendant is convicted or pleads guilty or no contest to a violation,
he/she must be evaluated to determine the extent of the involvement
with alcohol or other drug. The defendant must be subject to a full
assessment for alcohol or drug addiction if their offense is the second
one in 10 years. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3814.
Pennsylvania allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients. Pennsylvania law does not address specifically the
use of marijuana in a vehicle.




118
Commonwealth v. Carley, 141 A.3d 1287 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016)
holding that McNeely “does not incorporate a constitutional right
to refuse to consent to chemical testing in DUI cases.”
Commonwealth v. Myers, 118 A.3d 1122 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015)
affirming trial court’s suppression of evidence from warrantless
blood test because evidence because the commonwealth failed to
justify reason why no warrant was sought.
Commonwealth v. Hutchins, 42 A.3d 302 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012)
expert testimony would be necessary to reveal how (of if) the
results of driver’s blood test showing a marijuana “waste product”
metabolite provided any probative evidence as to whether driver
was under the influence while driving.
Sisinni v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, 31 A.3d
1254 (Pa. Common. Ct. 2011) provision in law that evidence of
refusal could not be used applied to criminal proceedings, and not
to civil proceedings concerning suspension of license.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
RHODE ISLAND
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
119
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.
“Whoever drives or otherwise operates any vehicle in the state while
under the influence of any intoxicating . . . drugs, . . .. or any
controlled substance as defined [by law], . . . . shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor . . . .” R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(a).
Drug or controlled substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with violating this section is,
or has been, legally entitled to . . . a drug shall not constitute a defense
against any charge of violating this section.”
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(b)(1).
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.
“Whoever drives, or otherwise operates, any vehicle in the state with a
blood presence of any scheduled controlled substance . . . shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor . . . .” R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(b)(2).
Scheduled controlled substance.
None.
Any person who operates a motor vehicle within Rhode Island.
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.1(a).
Chemical tests of breath, blood, and/or urine.
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.1(a).
LEO must have “reasonable grounds to believe” the driver was
operating the vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws.
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.1(a).
In a criminal proceeding, evidence that the defendant had refused to
submit to a chemical test is not be admissible unless the defendant
elects to testify. R.I. Gen.Laws 1956, § 31-27-2(c)(1).
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for six months to one
year.
 Second refusal within five years driver’s license suspended for
one to two years.
 Third or subsequent refusal within five years driver’s license
suspended for two to five years. R.I. Gen.Laws, § 31-27-2.1(b).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
RHODE ISLAND
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
 First refusal fine of $200-$500; 10-60 hours community service.
 Second refusal within five years misdemeanor; jail sentence up
to six months; fine of $600-$1,000; 60-100 hours community
service.
 Third refusal within five years jail sentence up to one year; fine
of $800-$1,000; at least 100 hours community service.
R.I. Gen.Laws, § 31-27-2.1(b).
 The constitutionality of this, however, has been called into question
by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North
Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which holds that a state cannot
place criminal penalty on a driver’s refusal to undergo a
warrantless blood test to determine alcohol concentration.
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 Second conviction within five years of “per se” provision
driver’s license suspended for one to two years.
 Second conviction within five years of under the influence
provision driver’s license suspended for two years.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years of “per se”
provision driver’s license suspended for two to three years.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years of under the
influence provision driver’s license suspended for three years.
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(d).
 Three-time offenders are required to operate a motor vehicle with
an IID for up to two years. R.I. Gen.Laws 1956, § 31-27-2(d)(3).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction of “per se” provision jail sentence up to one
year; fine of $100-$300; 10-60 hours community service.
 First conviction of under the influence provision jail sentence up
to one year; fine of $500; 20-60 hours community service.
 Second conviction within five years of “per se” provision jail
sentence of 10 days to one year; fine of $400.
 Second conviction within five years of under the influence
provision jail sentence of six months to one year; fine of $2,000.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years of “per se”
provision felony; jail sentence of one to three years; fine of $400.
 Third or subsequent conviction within five years of under the
influence provision felony; jail sentence of three to five years;
fine of $1,000-$5,000. R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(d).
 Additional penalties for causing the death of another person while
committing a violation or causing serious bodily injury to another
person while committing a violation. R.I. Gen.Laws, § 31-27-2.2;
R.I. Gen.Laws, § 31-27-2.6.
If a driver over age 18 commits a violation with a child under age 13
in the vehicle. R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(d)(5).
Child
endangerment
120
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
RHODE ISLAND
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
121
 Any person convicted may undergo a clinical assessment at the
community college of Rhode Island’s center for workforce and
community education. Should this assessment determine problems
of alcohol, drug abuse, or psychological problems associated with
alcoholic or drug abuse, the offender will be referred to an
appropriate treatment facility. R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(d)(8).
 Violators are required to attend a special course on driving while
intoxicated or under the influence of a controlled substance, and/or
participate in an alcohol or drug treatment program.
R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2(f)(2).
 Persons convicted of refusing a chemical test twice are required to
undergo alcohol and/or drug treatment.
Rhode Island allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain
registered patients. Operating a motor vehicle while having a
controlled substance in one’s possession can result in a license
suspension up to six months. This law, however, does not apply to:
(1) the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana; or (2) a person
who lawfully possess a controlled substance pursuant to a valid
prescription from a licensed doctor. R.I. Gen.Laws § 31-27-2.4.
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
SOUTH CAROLINA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
122
S.C. Code § 56-5-2930.
“It is unlawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle within this State
while . . . , under the influence of any other drug or a combination of
other drugs or substances which cause impairment to the extent that
the person’s faculties to drive a motor vehicle are materially and
appreciably impaired.” S.C. Code § 56-5-2930(A).
Any drug other than alcohol.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
A person who drives a motor vehicle in South Carolina.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2950(A).
Chemical tests of the person’s breath, blood, or urine.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2950(A).

Driver must have been arrested for an offense arising out of acts
alleged to have been committed while driving under the influence.
 Breath test must be offered before blood test, but a urine sample
can be requested if LEO has “reasonable suspicion” that the
person is under the influence of drugs other than alcohol.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2950(A).
Refusal of test can be used against defendant in court.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2950(B)(1).


First refusal driver’s license suspended for six months.
Refusal with prior conviction within past 10 years driver’s
license suspended for nine months.
 Refusal with two prior convictions within past 10 years driver’s
license suspended for 12 months.
 Refusal with three or more prior convictions within past 10
years driver’s license suspended for 15 months.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2951(I).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
SOUTH CAROLINA
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
123
First conviction driver’s license suspended for six months.
Second conviction within 10 years driver must enroll in IID
Program and use for two years.
Third conviction within 10 years driver must enroll in IID
Program and use for three years (four years if it is third conviction
within five years).
Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver must
enroll in IID program and use for lifetime.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2990.

First conviction jail sentence of 48 hours to 30 days or $400
fine; community service may be ordered instead of jail.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of five days to
one year; fine of $2,100-$5,100.
 Third conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 60 days to
three years; fine of $3,800-$6,300.
 Fourth of subsequent conviction within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of one to five years. S.C. Code § 56-5-2930(A).
 Felony driving under the influence occurs if a driver causes great
bodily injury or death while committing a violation.
S.C. Code § 56-5-2945(A).
If a driver aged 18 or older commits a violation with a child under age
16 in vehicle. S.C. Code § 56-5-2947.
An offender, regardless of number of prior offenses, must enroll in
and successfully complete an Alcohol and Drug Safety Action
Program certified by the Department of Alcohol and Other Drug
Abuse Services. An assessment of the extent and nature of the alcohol
and drug abuse problem of the applicant must be prepared and a plan
of education or treatment, or both, must be developed for the
applicant. S.C. Code § 56-5-2930(H).
South Carolina does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
SOUTH DAKOTA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
124
SDCL § 32-23-1.
 “No person may drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle while: . . . [u]nder the influence of . . . marijuana, or any
controlled drug or substance not obtained pursuant to a valid
prescription.” SDCL § 32-23-1(2).
 “No person may drive or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle while: . . . [u]nder the influence of any controlled drug or
substance obtained pursuant to a valid prescription, or any other
substance, to a degree which renders the person incapable of safely
driving.” SDCL § 32-23-1(3).
Marijuana; controlled drug or substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of § 32-23-1
is or has been prescribed a drug under the laws of this state is not a
defense against any charge of violating § 32-23-1.” SDCL § 32-23-6.
SDCL § 32-23-21.
“It is a Class 2 misdemeanor for any person under the age of twentyone years to drive, operate, or be in actual physical control of any
vehicle: . . . [a]fter having consumed marijuana or any controlled drug
or substance for as long as physical evidence of the consumption
remains present in the person’s body.” SDCL § 32-23-21(2).
For persons under age 21, marijuana or any controlled drug or
substance.
None.
Any person who operates any vehicle in North Dakota.
SDCL § 32-23-10.
Withdrawal of blood or other bodily substance and chemical analysis
of the person’s blood, breath, or other bodily substance.
SDCL § 32-23-10.
LEO may require driver to submit to blood test after arresting him/her
for a violation of drugged driving laws. SDCL § 32-23-10.
When a person stands trial for driving while under the influence of
alcohol or drugs, the refusal to consent to chemical testing is
admissible into evidence. SDCL § 19-19-513.
Driving privileges revoked for one year. SDCL §§ 32-23-11, 32-2318.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
SOUTH DAKOTA
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
None.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class 1 misdemeanor; jail sentence up to one
year; fine up to $2,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years Class 1 misdemeanor; jail
sentence of three days to one year; fine up to $2,000.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class 6 felony; jail sentence of
10 days to two years; fine up to $4,000.
 Fourth conviction within 10 years Class 5 felony; jail sentence of
20 days to five years; fine up to $10,000.
 Fifth or subsequent offense within 10 years Class 4 felony; jail
sentence of 20 days to 10 years; fine up to $20,000.
 Sixth or subsequent offense within 25 years, including two within
the past 10 years Class 4 felony; jail sentence of 20 days to 10
years; fine up to $20,000. SDCL § 32-23-4.9; SDCL § 22-6-1;
SDCL § 22-6-2.
 Driver who, while under the influence, operates a vehicle in such a
manner to case the serious bodily injury of another (including an
unborn child) commits vehicular battery. SDCL § 22-18-36.
It does not appear that South Dakota has a specific law relating to the
endangering of a child while driving under the influence.
Upon the successful completion of a court-approved chemical
dependency program, and proof of financial responsibility, a second
offender who has had their license revoked for a period of one year or
more may be permitted by the court to drive for the purposes of
employment, sobriety testing, attendance at school, or attendance at
counseling programs. SDCL § 32-23-3.
South Dakota does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
125
 First conviction driving privileges revoked for 30 days to one
year.
 Second conviction within 10 years driving privileges revoked for
at least one year.
 Third conviction within 10 years driving privileges revoked for
at least one year.
 Fourth conviction within 10 years driving privileges revoked for
at least two years.
 Fifth or subsequent offense within 10 years driving privileges
revoked for at least three years. SDCL §§ 32-23-2; 32-23-3;
32-23-4; 32-23-4.6; 32-23-4.7.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
SOUTH DAKOTA
Selected state court
decisions
126
 State v. Fischer, 875 N.W.2d 40 (S.D. 2016) reviewing the
totality of the circumstances under McNeely, exigent circumstances
existed such that warrantless blood draw at hospital prior to
medical care was reasonable.
 State v. Medicine, 865 N.W.2d 492 (S.D. 2015) language of DUI
advisement card presented to driver by LEO after arrest requesting
consent to blood test was coercive, and thus driver’s consent was
not valid.
 State v. Fierro, 853 N.W.2d 235 (S.D. 2014) implied consent
law (SDCL § 32-23-10), by itself, does not permit warrantless,
non-consensual blood draws in every case.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
TENNESSEE
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
127
T. C. A. § 55-10-401.
“It is unlawful for any person to drive or to be in physical control of
any automobile . . . while: . . . [u]nder the influence of any intoxicant,
marijuana, controlled substance, controlled substance analogue, drug,
substance affecting the central nervous system, or combination thereof
that impairs the driver’s ability to safely operate a motor vehicle by
depriving the driver of the clearness of mind and control of oneself
that the driver would otherwise possess.” T. C. A. § 55-10-401(1).
Any intoxicant, marijuana, controlled substance, controlled substance
analogue, drug or substance affecting the central nervous system.
None.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who drive a vehicle in Tennessee. T. C. A. § 55-10406(a).
Test or tests for the purpose of determining the drug content of the
person’s blood. T. C. A. § 55-10-406(a).

LEO must have “probable cause to believe” the person was
driving while under the influence of drugs.
T. C. A. § 55-10-406(a).
 Test can be requested by LEO who has “probable cause to
believe” that the driver of a motor vehicle involved in an accident
causing death or injury to another operated a vehicle while under
the influence. T. C. A. § 55-10-406(d)(5).
It appears that it is admissible, based upon court decisions. State v.
Ford, 721 S.W.2d 828 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986).

Refusal with no prior conviction in 10 years driver’s license
revoked for one year.
 Refusal with at least one conviction in last 10 years driver’s
license revoked for two years.
 Suspensions are longer if the prior conviction(s) involved serious
bodily injury. T. C. A. § 55-10-407(a).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
TENNESSEE
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
128
First conviction driver’s license suspended for one year.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for two years.
Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended for
six years.
Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
suspended for eight years. T. C. A. § 55-10-404.

First conviction jail sentence of 48 hours to one year; fine of
$350-$1,500; 24 hours community service.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 45 days to
one year; fine of $600-$3,500.
 Third conviction within 10 years of second conviction  jail
sentence of 120 days to one year; fine of $1,100-$10,000.
 Fourth or fifth conviction (within 10 years of most recent prior
conviction)  Class E felony; jail sentence of at least 150 days;
fine of $3,000-$15,000.
 Sixth or subsequent conviction (within 10 years of most recent
prior conviction) Class C felony; jail sentence of at least 150
days; fine of $3,000-$15,000.
T. C. A. § 55-10-402(a); T. C. A. § 55-10-403(a).
 Any violator can be ordered to be subject to transdermal,
electronic, GPS or other monitoring. T. C. A. § 55-10-402(d)(2).
 Driver commits vehicular assault if, as a result of their
intoxication, he/she recklessly causes serious bodily injury to
another person. T. C. A. § 39-13-106(a).
 Offender may be required to operate a vehicle equipped with IID.
Committing a violation while a child under age 18 is in the vehicle.
T. C. A. § 55-10-402(b)(1). In addition, there are additional criminal
enhancements in the case where the child under age 18 in the vehicle
is either seriously injured or killed. T. C. A. § 55-10-402(b)(2), (3).
An offender convicted of a second or subsequent offense may be
sentenced by the court, as a condition of probation, to participate in a
substance abuse treatment program. Prior to treatment, the offender
must complete a clinical substance abuse assessment.
T. C. A. § 55-10-402(a)(2)(B).
Tennessee does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
TEXAS
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
129
V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.04.
“A person commits an offense if the person is intoxicated while
operating a motor vehicle in a public place.” V.T.C.A., Penal Code
§ 49.04(a). “Intoxicated” is defined as “not having the normal use of
mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of . . . a
controlled substance, a drug, a dangerous drug . . . into the body.”
V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.01(2).
Controlled substance, drug or dangerous drug.
None. “[T]he fact that the defendant is or has been entitled to use the .
. . controlled substance, drug, dangerous drug, or other substance is
not a defense.” V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.10.
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Person operating a motor vehicle in a public place in Texas.
V.T.C.A., Transportation Code § 724.011(a).
Taking of one or more specimens of the person’s breath or blood for
analysis. V.T.C.A., Transportation Code § 724.011(a).
 Driver must be arrested for an offense and LEO must have
“reasonable grounds to believe” that the vehicle was operated while
driver was intoxicated. V.T.C.A., Transportation Code
§ 724.012(a).
 LEO can require test if driver arrested for any offense arising out of
operation of motor vehicle, if vehicle was involved in accident that
caused serious injury or death. V.T.C.A., Transportation Code
§ 724.012.
A person’s refusal of a request by an officer to submit to the taking of
a specimen of breath or blood, whether the refusal was express or the
result of an intentional failure to give the specimen, may be introduced
into evidence at the person’s trial. V.T.C.A., Transportation Code
§ 724.061.
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for 180 days.
 Refusal if one or more prior convictions in past 10 years driver’s
license suspended for two years. V.T.C.A., Transportation Code
§ 724.035.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
TEXAS
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
None.
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction Class B misdemeanor; jail sentence of three to
180 days; fine up to $2,000. V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.04(b).
 Second conviction (lifetime) Class A misdemeanor; jail sentence
of 30 days to one year; fine up to $4,000.
 Third conviction (lifetime) third-degree felony; jail sentence of
2-10 years; $10,000 fine.
 Additional criminal penalties if a driver causes a serious bodily
injury or death while committing an offense.
V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.07, 49.08.
 Person convicted may be ordered to perform community service.
Committing a violation with a passenger under age 15 in the vehicle.
V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.045.
A local community supervision and corrections department may
establish a treatment alternative to incarceration program in each
county served by the department according to standards adopted by
the division. V.T.C.A., Government Code § 76.017.
Texas does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
130
 First conviction driver’s license suspended 90 days to one year.
 Second conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for 180
days to two years.
 Third conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for one to
two years.
 If a conviction occurs within five years of a prior conviction, the
offender must have an IID installed for the duration of their license
suspension. V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 49.09(h); V.T.C.A.,
Transportation Code § 521.344.
 For a first offender, if a court places he/she on community
supervision, the court may require that the offender install an IID
on the vehicle. Texas C.C.P. Art. 42.12(13)(i).
 Weems v. State, 493 S.W.3d 574 (Tex. Ct. Crim. App. 2016)
finding warrantless blood draw not justified by exigent
circumstances even where defendant fled from scene and hid for 40
minutes, because there was a later delay of over two hours before
blood drawn where warrant could have been sought.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
TEXAS
Selected state court
decisions
(continued)
131
 Cole v. State, 490 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. Ct. Crim. App. 2016)
decided same date as Weems; court finds law enforcement
reasonable believed that obtaining a warrant would have
undermined efficacy of obtaining blood draw, where law
enforcement had to process large accident scene for several hours
before determining at-fault driver.
 State v. Villarreal, 475 S.W.3d 784 (Tx. Ct. Crim. App. 2015) in
a post-McNeely decision, agreeing with courts in other states that
“a nonconsensual search of a DWI suspect’s blood conducted
pursuant to the mandatory-blood-draw and implied-consent
provisions in the Transportation Code, when undertaken in the
absence of a warrant or any applicable exception to the warrant
requirement, violates the Fourth Amendment.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
UTAH
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
132
U.C.A. § 41-6a-502.
“A person may not operate or be in actual physical control of a vehicle
within this state if the person: . . . is under the influence of . . ., any
drug, . . . to a degree that renders the person incapable of safely
operating a vehicle.” U.C.A. § 41-6a-502(1)(b).
Any drug.
None. “The fact that a person charged with violating Section 41-6a502 is or has been legally entitled to use alcohol or a drug is not a
defense against any charge of violating Section 41-6a-502.”
U.C.A. § 41-6a-504.
U.C.A. § 41-6a-517.
“In cases not amounting to a violation of Section 41-6a-502, a person
may not operate or be in actual physical control of a motor vehicle
within this state if the person has any measurable controlled substance
or metabolite of a controlled substance in the person’s body.”
U.C.A. § 41-6a-517(2).
Controlled substance or metabolite of a controlled substance.
There is an affirmative defense if the controlled substance was: (1)
involuntarily ingested; (2) prescribed by a practitioner for use by the
driver; or (3) “otherwise legally ingested.” U.C.A. § 41-6a-517(3).
A person operating a motor vehicle in Utah.
U.C.A. § 41-6a-520(1)(a).
Chemical test or tests of the person’s breath, blood, urine, or oral
fluids. U.C.A. § 41-6a-520(1)(a).
LEO must have “grounds to believe” that a person has been operating
a motor vehicle in violation of drugged driving laws, and in order for
penalties for refusal to be applicable, the driver must have been placed
under arrest. U.C.A. § 41-6a-520(2)(a).
If a person under arrest refuses to submit to a chemical test, the
evidence of the refusal is admissible in any civil or criminal action or
proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while
driving in violation of drugged driving laws. U.C.A. § 41-6a-524.
 Refusal (age 21 or older) driver’s license revoked for 18 months.
 Refusal (under age 21) driver’s license revoked for two years or
until age 21, whichever is longer.
 Refusal with prior conviction within 10 years (age 21 or older)
driver’s license revoked for 36 months.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
UTAH
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
(continued)
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 Refusal with prior conviction within 10 years (under age 21)
driver’s license revoked for 36 months or until age 21, whichever is
longer. U.C.A. § 41-6a-521(1)(d).
None.







Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
133
First violation (driver age 21 or older) driver’s license
suspended for 120 days.
First violation (driver age 19-20) driver’s license suspended for
one year or until age 21, whichever is longer.
First violation (driver under 19) driver’s license suspended until
age 21.
Second violation within 10 years (driver age 21 or older)
driver’s license revoked for two years.
Second violation within 10 years (driver age 19-20) driver’s
license revoked for two years or until age 21, whichever is longer.
Second violation within 10 years (driver under 19) driver’s
license revoked until age 21. U.C.A. § 41-6a-509.
Court may require that any person who is convicted of violating
§ 41-6a-502 and granted probation operate a vehicle with an IID.
U.C.A. § 41-6a-518.

First conviction (DUI) Class B misdemeanor; jail sentence of 48
hours to six months; fine of $700-$1,000.
 Second conviction within 10 years (DUI) Class B misdemeanor;
jail sentence of 10 days to six months; fine of $800-$1,000.
 Third conviction within past 10 years (DUI) third-degree
felony; jail sentence up to five years; fine up to $5,000.
 Violation of “per se” statute Class B misdemeanor; jail sentence
up to six months and a fine up to $1,000. U.C.A. § 41-6a-503;
U.C.A. § 76-3-301; U.C.A. § 41-6a-505.
 Violation is a third-degree felony if an offender also causes serious
bodily injury to another. U.C.A. § 41-6a-503(2).
Criminal charge is Class A misdemeanor if either: (1) a driver of any
age commits a violation with passenger under age 16 in the vehicle; or
(2) a driver age 21 or older commits a violation with a passenger
under age 18 in the vehicle. U.C.A. § 41-6a-503(1).
First-time offenders must be ordered to a substance abuse screening,
and if necessary, an assessment. The court may order the offender to
treatment if it is determined to be necessary.
U.C.A. 1953 § 41-6a-505(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
UTAH
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Case law
134
Utah does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.
State v. Eberwein, 21 P.3d 1139 (Utah Ct. App. 2001) driver’s
admissions that prescription pills for pain in vehicle were his and that
he had ingested some were insufficient to provide that driver violated
“any measurable” controlled substance provision, where state did not
introduce tests detecting presence in blood or establishing substance in
pills.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VERMONT
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
135
23 V.S.A. § 1201.
“A person shall not operate, attempt to operate, or be in actual
physical control of any vehicle on a highway: . . . when the person is
under the influence of any other drug [besides alcohol] . . . .”
23 V.S.A. § 1201(a)(3).
Any drug. “Drug” means: (1) a regulated drug as defined in 18 V.S.A.
§ 4201; or (2) any substance or combination of substances, other than
alcohol, which affects the nervous system, brain, or muscles of a
person so as to impair, noticeably and appreciably, a person’s ability
to drive a vehicle safely. 23 V.S.A. § 1200(2).
None. “The fact that a person charged with a violation of this section
is or has been entitled to use a drug under the laws of this State shall
not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.”
23 V.S.A. § 1201(e).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Every person who operates or attempts to operate a vehicle on a
highway in Vermont. 23 V.S.A. § 1202(a)(1).
Evidentiary test of breath or blood. 23 V.S.A. § 1202(a).
 Breath test can be required by LEO if they have “reasonable
grounds to believe” that the driver was driving under the influence.
23 V.S.A. § 1202(a)(3).
 Blood test is available where breath test equipment is unavailable,
or LEO has “reasonable grounds to believe” that the driver is under
the influence of a drug other than alcohol. 23 V.S.A. § 1202(a)(2).
 Test is also required if the person is the surviving operator of a
motor vehicle involved in a fatal incident or collision or an incident
or collision resulting in serious bodily injury and LEO has
“reasonable grounds to believe” that the person has any amount of
alcohol or other drug in his or her system. 23 V.S.A. § 1202(a)(4).
Refusal can be introduced as evidence in a criminal proceeding.
23 V.S.A. § 1202(b).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VERMONT
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
 First conviction driver’s license suspended for 90 days.
23 V.S.A. § 1206.
 Second conviction (lifetime) driver’s license suspended for 18
months.
 Third or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
revoked for life. 23 V.S.A. § 1208.
 Eligible offenders may operate a vehicle during the suspension
period with the use of an IID. 23 V.S.A. § 1206(m).
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
 First conviction jail sentence up to two years; fine up to $750.
 Second conviction (lifetime) jail sentence up to two years; fine
up to $1,500; at least 200 hours community service.
 Third conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence up to five years;
fine up to $2,500.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction (lifetime) felony; jail sentence
up to 10 years; fine of up to $5,000. 23 V.S.A. § 1210.
 Additional penalties for causing accident that results in fatality or
serious bodily injury. 23 V.S.A. § 1206.
It does not appear that Vermont has a specific law relating to the
endangering of a child while driving under the influence.
In cases of a first offender, in order for a suspended license to be
reinstated, the driver must complete an assessment of the need for
treatment by a State-designated counselor, at the person’s own
expense, to determine whether reinstatement should be further
conditioned on satisfactory completion of a therapy program.
23 V.S.A. § 1209a(1)(A).
Vermont allows the medicinal use of marijuana by certain registered
patients. Vermont law, however, does not specifically address the use
of marijuana in a vehicle.
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana in
vehicle
136
 First refusal driver’s license suspended for up to six months.
23 V.S.A. § 1205(a)(1).
 Second refusal driver’s license suspended for 18 months.
 Third or subsequent refusal driver’s license suspended for life.
23 V.S.A. § 1205(m).
Driver can be charged with criminal refusal if the refusing driver: (1)
previously was convicted of a violation; or (2) was involved in an
accident resulting in serious injury or death. 23 V.S.A. § 1202(d)(6).
The constitutionality of this, however, has been called into question by
the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136
S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which holds that a state cannot place criminal
penalty on a driver’s refusal to undergo a warrantless blood test to
determine alcohol concentration.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VERMONT
Selected state court
decisions
137
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VIRGINIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
138
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-266.
“It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor
vehicle . . . while such person is under the influence of any narcotic
drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever
nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs
his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train
safely.” VA Code Ann. § 18.2-266.
Narcotic drug or self-administered intoxicant or drug.
None.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-266.
“It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor
vehicle . . . while such person has a blood concentration of any of the
following substances at a level that is equal to or greater than . . . .”
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-266.
Cocaine (0.02 mg/ml blood); Methamphetamine (0.1 mg/ml blood);
Phencyclidine (0.01 mg/ml blood); 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (0.1 mg/ml blood).
None.
Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon a highway in Virginia.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.2(A).
Samples of blood, or breath. VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.2(A).
Driver must be arrested for violation of drugged driving laws.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.2(A).
Evidence of a finding against the defendant under § 18.2-268.3 for his
unreasonable refusal to consent to a test is admissible into evidence,
but only “for the sole purpose of explaining the absence at trial of a
chemical test of such sample” and not evidence of guilt.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.10.
 Refusal with no prior convictions in 10 years  driver’s license
suspended for one year.
 Refusal with one prior conviction in past 10 years driver’s
license suspended for three years.
 Refusal with two prior convictions in past 10 years driver’s
license suspended for three years. VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.3(D).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VIRGINIA
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
 Refusal within 10 years of a prior conviction Class 2
misdemeanor; jail sentence up to six months; fine up to $1,000.
 Refusal within 10 years of two prior convictions Class 1
misdemeanor; jail sentence up to one year; fine up to $2,500.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-268.3(B); VA Code Ann. § 18.2-11.
 The constitutionality of this, however, has been called into question
by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Birchfield v. North
Dakota, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016), which holds that a state cannot
place criminal penalty on a driver’s refusal to undergo a
warrantless blood test to determine alcohol concentration.
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)





Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
139
First conviction driver’s license suspended for one year.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for three years.
Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
revoked indefinitely. VA Code Ann. § 46.2-391.
Localities may enact ordinances that make offender civilly liable
for up to $1,000 of EMS expenses in responding to an accident
arising out of a violation. VA Code Ann. § 15.2-1716.
As a condition of a restricted license, a court must prohibit an
offender from operating a motor vehicle without an IID for a
period up to the length of the license suspension.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-270.1.

First conviction Class 1 misdemeanor; fine of $250-$2,500; jail
sentence up to one year.
 Second conviction within five years jail sentence of one month
to one year; fine of 500-$2,500.
 Second conviction within five to 10 years jail sentence of 10
days to one year; fine of $500-$2,500.
 Third conviction within 10 years Class 6 felony; jail sentence of
at least 90 days (unless all three incidents within five years) and up
to five years; fine of $1,000-$2,500.
 Fourth or subsequent conviction within 10 years Class 6 felony;
jail sentence of one to five years; fine of $1,000-$2,500.
VA Code Ann. § 18.2-270; VA Code Ann. § 18.2-10.
 Class 6 felony if driver causes serious bodily injury while
committing a violation. VA Code Ann. § 18.2-51.4.
Committing a violation while a passenger age 17 or younger is in the
vehicle. VA Code Ann. § 18.2-270(D).
Any person convicted of a first or second offense is required to enter
into and successfully complete an alcohol safety action program in the
judicial district in which such charge is brought or in any other
judicial district upon such terms and conditions as the court may set
forth. VA Code Ann. § 18.2-271.1
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
VIRGINIA
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
Virginia does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of marijuana.


140
Case v. Commonwealth, 63 Va. App. 14, 753 S.E.2d 860 (Va. Ct.
App. 2014) although there is no mens rea requirement, driving
under the influence is not a strict liability offense, and such “where
applicable, the affirmative defense of unconsciousness due to
involuntary intoxication….would be available to a defendant.”
Jackson v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 630, 652 S.E.2d 111 (2007)
driver did not violate drugged driving laws where he was under
the influence of pain medication Dilaudid, because the drug was
not “self-administered” but instead was given to him at hospital
prior to discharge from emergency room.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WASHINGTON
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
141
RCWA 46.61.502.
“A person is guilty of driving while under the influence of
intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug if the person drives a
vehicle within this state: . . . [w]hile the person is under the influence
of or affected by intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug.”
RCWA 46.61.502(1)(c).
Marijuana or any drug.
None. “The fact that a person charged with a violation of this section
is or has been entitled to use a drug under the laws of this state shall
not constitute a defense against a charge of violating this section.”
RCWA 46.61.502(2).
 For drivers age 21 or older, “a person is guilty of driving while
under the influence of intoxicating liquor, marijuana, or any drug if
the person drives a vehicle within this state: . . . [t]he person has,
within two hours after driving, a THC concentration of 5.00 or
higher as shown by analysis of the person’s blood . . . .”
RCWA 46.61.502(1)(b).
 For drivers under age 21, “a person is guilty of driving or being in
physical control of a motor vehicle after consuming . . . marijuana
if the person . . . [h]as, within two hours after operating or being in
physical control of the motor vehicle . . . [a] THC concentration
above 0.00 but less than the concentration specified in RCW
46.61.502. RCWA 46.61.503(1)(b).
THC.
 For drivers age 21 or older, “it is an affirmative defense . . . that the
defendant consumed a sufficient quantity of marijuana after the
time of driving and before the administration of an analysis of the
person’s blood to cause the defendant’s THC concentration to be
5.00 or more within two hours after driving.”
RCWA 46.61.502(3)(b).
 For drivers under age 21, there is a similar affirmative defense.
RCWA 46.61.503(2).
Any person who operates a motor vehicle in Washington.
RCWA 46.20.308(1).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WASHINGTON
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
142
The implied consent statute appears to apply only to the testing of a
driver’s breath. RCWA 46.20.308(1). However, the law further
provides that nothing [in RCWA 46.20.308 ] (1), (2), or (3) . . .
precludes a law enforcement officer from obtaining a person’s blood
to test for . . . marijuana, or any drug, pursuant to a search warrant, a
valid waiver of the warrant requirement, when exigent circumstances
exist, or under any other authority of law.” RCWA 46.20.308(4).
In cases of a warrant, the LEO must have “reasonable grounds to
believe” that the driver is violating state drugged driving laws.
RCWA 46.20.308(4).
The refusal of a person to submit to a test of the alcohol or drug
concentration in the person’s blood or breath under RCW 46.20.308 is
admissible into evidence at a subsequent criminal trial.
RCWA 46.61.517.
 First refusal within seven years driver’s license revoked for one
year.
 Second refusal, or refusal with prior conviction, within seven
years driver’s license revoked for two years. RCWA 46.20.3101.
None.
 First conviction driver’s license suspended for 90 days.
 Second conviction within seven years driver’s license revoked
for two years.
 Third or subsequent conviction within seven years driver’s
license revoked for three years. RCWA 46.61.5055(9)(a).
 Use of IID is required. RCWA 46.20.720(1).
 First conviction gross misdemeanor; jail sentence of one day to
one year; fine of $350-$5,000.
 Second conviction within seven years jail sentence 30 days to
one year; 60 days of home monitoring; fine of $500-$5,000.
 Third or fourth conviction within seven years jail sentence of 90
days to one year; 120 days home monitoring; fine of $1,000$5,000.
 Fifth or subsequent conviction within 10 years Class B felony;
jail sentence up to five years; fine up to $10,000.
RCWA 46.61.5055
 Driver commits vehicular assault if they cause “substantial bodily
harm” to another while under the influence. RCWA 46.61.522.
Committing a violation while a passenger under age 16 is in the
vehicle. RCWA 46.61.5055(6).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WASHINGTON
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
143
An offender is subject to the alcohol assessment and treatment
provisions of RCW 46.61.5056. RCW 46.61.5055(8). A person
subject to alcohol assessment and treatment under RCW 46.61.5055
shall be required by the court to complete a course in an alcohol
information school approved by the department of social and health
services or to complete more intensive treatment in a substance use
disorder treatment program approved by the department of social and
health services, as determined by the court. RCWA 46.61.5056.
Washington allows the recreational and medicinal use of marijuana. It
is a traffic infraction for a person to: (1) keep marijuana in a vehicle
when the vehicle is upon a highway, unless it is in the trunk of the
vehicle, in some other area of the vehicle not normally occupied or
directly accessible by the driver or passengers if the vehicle does not
have a trunk, or unless the marijuana is in a package, container, or
receptacle that has not been opened, the seal broken, or contents
partially removed; (2) consume marijuana in a vehicle when the
vehicle is upon the public highway; or (3) place marijuana in a
container specifically labeled by the manufacturer of the container as
containing a non-marijuana substance. RCWA 46.61.745 (effective
September 26, 2015).
 City of Seattle v. Pearson, 192 Wash.App. 802, 369 P.3d 194
(Wash. Ct. App. 2016) natural dissipation of THC in driver’s
bloodstream alone does not constitute exigency sufficient to bypass
Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.
 State v. Morales, 173 Wash.2d 560, 269 P.3d 263 (2012) citing
to 1991 decision that state legislature has “mandated that vehicular
[assault] suspects submit to a blood test regardless of consent.”
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WEST VIRGINIA
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
144
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2.
 It is illegal to drive in an “impaired state.” “‘Impaired State’”
means a person: . . . [i]s under the influence of any controlled
substance; [or] [i]s under the influence of any other drug or
inhalant substance.” W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2(a)(1).
 It is illegal for “a habitual user of narcotic drugs or amphetamine or
any derivative thereof” to drive a vehicle.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2(g).
Controlled substance or any other drug or inhalant substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation . . . of this
section, . . . is or has been legally entitled to use . . . a controlled
substance or a drug does not constitute a defense against any
charge . . . .” W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2(p).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who drives a motor vehicle in West Virginia.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-4(a).
Preliminary breath analysis and a secondary chemical test of either his
or her blood or breath. W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-4(a).
Test must be incident to a lawful arrest and LEO must have “probable
cause to believe” the driver has committed a violation.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-4(c).
The refusal to submit to a blood test may be admissible at the court’s
discretion in a trial for the offense of driving while under the influence
of a controlled substance or drug. W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-4(d).
 First refusal driver’s license revoked for one year, or for 45 days
with an additional year use of IID.
 Second refusal driver’s license revoked for 10 years.
 Third or subsequent refusal driver’s license revoked for life.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-4(a).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WEST VIRGINIA
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)

Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)

Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
145


First conviction driver’s license revoked for six months or 15
days, plus 120 days use of IID.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
ten years.
Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years driver’s license
revoked for life. W. Va. Code, § 17C-5A-2.
First conviction (includes conviction of habitual user offense)
misdemeanor; jail sentence of up to six months; fine of $100-500.
 Second conviction within 10 years misdemeanor; jail sentence
of six to 12 months; fine of $1,000-$3,000.
 Third or subsequent conviction within 10 years felony; jail
sentence of two to five years; fine of $3,000-$5,000.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2
 Additional penalties if an offender commits a violation and causes
the death or serious bodily injury of another person.
W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2(b), (c).
Committing a violation with one or more “unemancipated minors”
under age 16 in the vehicle. W. Va. Code, § 17C-5-2(k).
The Department of Health and Human Resources, Division of
Alcoholism and Drug Abuse shall administer a comprehensive safety
and treatment program for persons whose licenses have been revoked
due to an offense. An offender must complete the program in order
for re-issuance of the license. W. Va. Code, § 17C-5A-3.
West Virginia does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
State v. Stone, 229 W.Va. 271, 728 S.E.2d 155 (2012) overrules
earlier W.V. Supreme Court case; if arrestee refuses to submit to
secondary chemical test, implied consent statute does not prevent LEO
from obtaining valid search warrant to compel test.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WISCONSIN
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense(s)
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
146
W.S.A. § 346.63.
“No person may drive or operate a motor vehicle while: . . . [u]nder
the influence of an intoxicant, a controlled substance, a controlled
substance analog or any combination of an intoxicant, a controlled
substance and a controlled substance analog, under the influence of
any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of
safely driving, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and
any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of
safely driving.” W.S.A. § 346.63(1)(a).
Controlled substance, controlled substance analog, or any other drug.
None.
W.S.A. § 346.63.
“No person may drive or operate a motor vehicle while . . . [t]he
person has a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in
his or her blood.” W.S.A. § 346.63(1)(am).
Restricted controlled substance, which means: (1) a controlled
substance included in schedule I other than a tetrahydrocannabinol;
(2) the heroin metabolite 6-monoacetylmorphine; (3) a controlled
substance analog, as defined in § 961.01(4m), of a controlled
substance; (4) cocaine or any of its metabolites; (5)
methamphetamine; or (6) delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
W.S.A. § 340.01(50m).
In an action under W.S.A. § 346.63(1)(am) that is based on a
detectable amount of methamphetamine, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid,
or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, there is a defense if the defendant
“proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the
incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for
methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, gammahydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.”
W.S.A. § 346.63(1)(d).
Any person who drives a motor vehicle on the public highways of
Wisconsin. W.S.A. § 343.305(2).
One or more tests of breath, blood or urine. W.S.A. § 343.305(2).
 LEO can request test if driver is arrested for a violation of drugged
driving laws. W.S.A. § 343.305(2).
 Test can be requested if driver is involved in accident causing great
bodily harm to another person and LEO detects any presence of
alcohol, or a controlled substance or analog. W.S.A. § 343.305(3).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WISCONSIN
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)
Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
147
Refusal to test can be used against driver in court.
W.S.A. § 343.305(5).
 First refusal driver’s license revoked for one year.
 Refusal with one prior conviction within 10 years driver’s
license revoked for two years.
 Refusal with two or more prior convictions within 10 years
driver’s license revoked for three years.
W.S.A. § 343.305(9), (10).
None.
 First conviction  driver’s license revoked for six to nine months.
 Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
12-18 months.
 Third or subsequent conviction (lifetime) driver’s license
revoked for two to three years.
 In all second or subsequent offenses and all cases of a test refusal,
all vehicles owned by the offender must be equipped with an IID
for not less than one year or more than the maximum period of
license revocation. W.S.A. § 343.301.
 First conviction  fine of $150-300.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of five days to
six months; fine of $350-$1,100.
 Third conviction (lifetime) jail sentence of 45 days to one year;
fine of $600-$2,000.
 Fourth conviction with none in prior five years (lifetime) jail
sentence of 60 days to one year; fine of $600-$2,000.
 Fourth conviction with one or more in past five years (lifetime)
Class H felony; jail sentence of six months to six years; fine of
$600-$10,000. W.S.A. § 346.65.
 Criminal offense to cause injury to another person while driving in
violation of drugged driving laws. W.S.A. § 346.63(2).
Criminal penalties are enhanced if a violation is committed with a
passenger under age 16 in vehicle. W.S.A. § 346.65.
In cases where driver has refused testing, the court must order the
person to submit to and comply with an assessment by an approved
public treatment facility for examination of the person's use of
alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs and
development of a driver safety plan for the person. W.S.A. § 343.305.
Wisconsin does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WISCONSIN
Selected state court
decisions.
148
 County of Milwaukee v. Shah, 2016 WL 4275582 (Wisc. Ct. App.
August 16, 2016) (unpublished) in an arrest that occurred prior
to the McNeely decision, court finds that under Wisconsin law at
the time, the dissipation of a controlled substance from the
bloodstream is an exigent circumstance that permits a warrantless,
non-consensual blood draw from a person arrested for operating a
motor vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance.
 State v. Luedtke, 362 Wis.2d 1, 863 N.W.2d 592 (2015)
“per se provision is a strict liability crime; “per se” provision is
constitutional as it satisfies rational basis scrutiny, “because no
“reliable measure” of impairment exists for many illicit drugs, the
legislature could have reasonably concluded that the more sensible
approach was to ban drivers from having any amount in their
systems.”
 State v. Tullberg, 359 Wis.2d 421, 857 N.W.2d 120 (2014)
reviewing specific facts of accident and determining that exigent
circumstances existed that justified the warrantless draw of blood
prior to arrest (but more than three hours after accident).
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WYOMING
DUI – statute(s)
DUI – standard
DUI - applicable
substances
DUI – affirmative
defense
Per se – statute(s)
Per se - standard
Per se – applicable
substances
Per se – affirmative
defense
Implied consent –
applicable drivers
Implied consent –
tests authorized
Implied consent –
basis for test
Implied consent –
evidence of refusal
Implied consent –
administrative /
civil penalty for
refusal
Implied consent –
criminal penalty
for refusal
149
W.S. § 31-5-233.
“No person shall drive or have actual physical control of any vehicle
within this state if the person: . . . to a degree which renders him
incapable of safely driving: . . . is under the influence of a controlled
substance . . . .” W.S. § 31-5-233(b)(iii).
Controlled substance.
None. “The fact that any person charged with a violation of
subsection (b) of this section is or has been entitled to use the
controlled substance under the laws of this state shall not constitute a
defense against any charge under subsection (b) of this section.”
W.S. § 31-5-233(d).
None.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Any person who drives or is in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle upon a public street or highway in Wyoming.
W.S. § 31-6-102(a).
A chemical test or tests of his blood, breath or urine.
W.S. § 31-6-102(a).
 Driver must be arrested for an alleged violation and LEO must
have “probable cause to believe” the driver is operating a vehicle
while under the influence.
 Driver can refuse test, unless there is “serious bodily injury or
death,” or a search warrant is issued. W.S. § 31-6-102(d).
No longer addressed by state law, after provision repealed in 2011.
Penalties for refusal of a chemical test were removed from Wyoming
law in 2011. Wyoming law now provides a means for a search
warrant to be remotely transmitted so that test can be compelled.
W.S. § 31-6-102(d).
None.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.
WYOMING
Conviction –
administrative /
civil penalty
(license suspension,
use of IID)




Conviction –
criminal penalties
(jail sentence, fines,
community service)
Child
endangerment
Treatment
Marijuana use in
vehicle
Selected state court
decisions
150
First conviction driver’s license suspended for 90 days.
Second conviction within 10 years driver’s license suspended
for one year. W.S. § 31-7-128.
Third conviction within 10 years driver’s license revoked for
three years. W.S. § 31-7-127.
For a second or subsequent conviction, an offender may operate
only vehicles equipped with IID. W.S. § 31-5-233(f).

First conviction misdemeanor; jail sentence up to six months;
fine up to $750.
 Second conviction within 10 years jail sentence of seven days to
six months; fine of $200-$750.
 Third conviction within 10 years jail sentence of 30 days to six
months; fine of $750-$3,000.
 Fourth conviction within 10 years felony; jail sentence of up to
seven years; fine up to $10,000. W.S. § 31-5-233(e).
 Additional criminal penalties if a driver causes serious bodily
injury to another person while committing a violation.
W.S. § 31-5-233(h).
Driver aged 18 or older committing a violation with a “child
passenger” in the vehicle. W.S. § 31-5-233(m).
Except as otherwise provided, a person convicted must be ordered to
receive a substance abuse assessment conducted by a certified
substance abuse provider at or before sentencing. W.S. § 31-5-233(e).
Wyoming does not allow the recreational or medicinal use of
marijuana.
Smith v. State, 311 P.3d 132 (Wyo. 2013) procedures contained in
provision in Wyoming law to allow for telephonic search warrants if
driver refuses to consent to test comply with Wyoming law requiring
affidavit for search warrant.
© 2016 Research is current as of August 30, 2016. In order to ensure that the information contained herein is as current as
possible, research is conducted using nationwide legal database software and individual state legislative websites. Please contact
Jon Woodruff at (703) 836-6100, ext. 100 or [email protected] with any additional updates or information that may be
relevant to this document. This document is intended for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or
opinion. Headquarters Office: THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS, 100½ East Main Street,
Suite C, Manchester, Iowa 52057.