Driver’s License Consequences

Whenever someone is arrested for a DUI there is inevitably some confusion on the separation of the criminal and civil consequences of the charge. While each states’ laws regarding the driver’s license consequences differ, this page will attempt to explain the difference between the two and the reasons for the separation from the typical criminal penalties.

See Also Wikipedia Article on Driver's License Administrative Suspensions.

Introduction

With the advent of civil driver’s license consequences, an arrest for a DUI/DWI became a unique criminal charge different from any other criminal charge, including driving related offenses. What made it different was that after the state legislatures passed the implied consent laws and imposed civil consequences for DUI/DWI charges, you now had two separate cases to deal with, both with different standards, procedures and even judges/decision makers.

What brought this on? A variety of factors contributed to this legislation, but mainly it was the nature of DUI’s themselves and the difficulties in prosecuting the offense that brought about the additional civil penalties.

Before the advent of chemical testing, DUI’s were prosecuted with evidence such as the officer’s testimony about the driver’s physical appearance, his driving pattern and the results of the driver’s field sobriety test. But prosecutors had a hard time obtaining convictions with this evidence alone because a good defense attorney can put holes in even the most experienced police officer’s testimony regarding such factors.

Chemical testing greatly enhanced the police and prosecutor’s ability to prove intoxication, but there were still problems with these cases, as defense attorneys were knowledgeable about the problems with chemical tests and their accuracy. In addition, since DUI cases were difficult to prove many of the cases were plea bargained to lesser charges, like careless and imprudent driving. This made it difficult to track repeat offenders.

In 1964 a study was conducted known as “The Grand Rapids Study” that set out to determine how a driver’s blood alcohol concentration affected his chances of being in a crash, the share of drivers on the road who had been drinking and the type of person who drives after drinking¹. One of the major accomplishments of the Grand Rapids Study was establishing the scientific foundation for “Per Se” legislation, which made it a crime to have a blood alcohol level at or above the legal limit. The study also served to validate the Breathalyzer's effectiveness and accuracy. For the first time, it was possible to measure a person's blood alcohol concentration instantaneously without invasive procedures. This made it even easier for prosecutors to prove guilt, but many drivers were refusing chemical test altogether, bringing the prosecutors back to square one.

Implied Consent

This was the reason the legislatures passed the “Implied Consent Laws” which brought about the administrative driver’s license suspensions. Basically, the implied consent law says that since the state considers driving a privilege and not a right, you implicitly agree to submit to a chemical test if requested by a law enforcement officer. Blood alcohol test results that are at or above the legal limit or a refusal to submit to the test will result in civil sanctions (a license suspension). These civil sanctions are completely independent and separate from any criminal sanctions that may result from your arrest. The implied consent laws effectively closed the refusal loophole.

Criminal vs. Civil Standards

This is where the majority of confusion comes in. Most people have a hard time understanding (and rightly so) that a single criminal charge will result in not only a criminal case, but another case in which their license to drive is at stake as well. Most people assume that a license suspension is part of the criminal punishment (which it almost always is as well).

“That can’t be right, what about double jeopardy?”

Double jeopardy applies to being charged with the same crime twice. That is prohibited by the United States Constitution. This is different because the administrative case seeking to suspend your license is civil in nature and does not fall under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (at least that is the lawmakers’ argument).

You face two different cases, with two different standards. The burden of proof (the obligation to prove the allegations presented to the Court) for the criminal case is the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, which most people are familiar with from the news and television.

The burden of proof for the administrative case is the civil burden of proof or the “preponderance of evidence” standard. A civil case, such as a breach of contract case or a personal injury action would adopt this standard. This is also the standard applied in most administrative license hearings. This basically means the prosecution has the obligation to prove “it is more likely than not” that you either refused the chemical test or the results were at or above the legal limit.

Conclusion

The dual case framework of DUI/DWI cases is confusing to most laypersons and it takes a firm grasp of the current DUI/DWI law to effectively defend both cases. If you’ve been arrested for a DUI/DWI the state will undoubtedly be in the process of trying to suspend your license. Every state has a time limitation in which to appeal the suspension of your license or the suspension becomes automatic without any recourse. It is extremely important to retain a qualified attorney from your area immediately to protect your interest and your driver’s license.