Drunk Driving DUI Law

Neysa Brown uses the Helton Drive/Florence Boulevard intersection every day and thinks about the tragedy that took place there more than 20 years ago.

Brown’s brother, 21-year-old Jason Latham, was turning from Helton Drive east onto Florence Boulevard when an 18-year-old driver ran a traffic light. Latham was killed, and the 18-year-old was convicted of manslaughter because he was driving drunk.

“It tore our family apart. No one is ever the same after something like that happens, and we’ll never be the same,” Brown said. “It’s been very hard on my parents; all of our lives changed.

“You never understand why, but the hope is that what comes from this is that it can be an education for someone and save someone else’s family from having to go through what we went through and will always be going through.”

Brown has become involved with the local and state chapters of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. She is opposed to any movement that would lower the legal drinking age.

“It shouldn’t be any lower than 21. No way,” Brown said.

In 1984, Congress enacted the Uniform Drinking Act, suggesting that 21 should be the uniform age for legal purchases and drinking of alcohol. By 1988, all 50 states had adopted the act.

According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, all states have retained that 21 drinking age policy despite some challenges in recent years by groups such as Choose Responsibility and the Amethyst Initiative, which have advocated lowering the legal drinking age.

“There are a few states – New Hampshire and Vermont – that have presented legislation to lower the legal drinking age, but so far that has not gone anywhere,” said Kelley Tway, a media specialist with the national MADD headquarters. “There are a few other states where it has been discussed, but there is nothing that is really gaining traction.”

Peggy Batey, the Alabama director of MADD, said there is no movement in the state Legislature that would lower the age of legal drinking.

One bill that has already passed the Alabama House and is on the Senate calendar addresses drinking and driving. The bill would require a person convicted of driving under the influence for a second time to install an ignition interlock breathalyzer on his car.

“They would have to blow into a computerized breathalyzer, which would be programed with their photo, and pass the test and present a photo ID before the car would start,” Batey said.

Batey said there are only three states that do not have some kind of interlock deterrent for drinking and driving: Alabama, South Dakota and Vermont.

“We’re hoping this will pass this year,” she said.

Franklin County District Attorney Joey Rushing said the ignition interlock bill was proposed in 2008. District attorneys and law enforcement across the state were proponents, but the bill didn’t pass. He said the bill has a stronger chance to become law this year.

He said it’s essential that some type of anti-DUI law is approved, especially with the recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling that does not allow prosecutors to use municipal DUI convictions to enhance a circuit court DUI charge.

“Unfortunately, the current case law is that a person could have 15 to 20 DUIs and all occurred within municipal court and they could not be used to enhance a current DUI charge,” Rushing said.

He said that in 2008, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that no municipal DUI charge can be used to enhance a current DUI charge to make it a felony “or even make it a second offense.”

“So, a person could have 20 DUI convictions and they would not constitute a felony charge because according to the Supreme Court, it is considered to be a municipal ordinance conviction rather than a DUI conviction,” Rushing said. “This is why the ignition interlock device would be a good deterrent for those who reach the second DUI conviction level.”

He said a person faces up to 10 years in prison after a fourth felony DUI conviction within a five-year period.

Batey said statistics indicate that the average person who drinks and drives will get away with it 87 to 100 times before they get caught.

“Underage drinking and drinking is socially acceptable. That’s just the unfortunate truth,” she said.

She said according to the National Center for Statistics, there were 1,207 fatalities in the state in 2006. Of those, 377 were DUI fatalities.

“In 2007, there were 1,110 fatalities, which was down, but the number of DUI fatalities increased to 389,” Batey said. “The last thing we want to do is lower the (legal drinking) age so it would make it easier for young people to get alcohol.”

Local statistics indicate that from 2005-07, there were 2,928 alcohol-related accidents in North Alabama. Of those, there were 1,795 injuries and 90 deaths – 319 were drivers under the age of 20.

“So, 11 percent of the drivers who were the principal cause of the alcohol-related accidents were under age,” said Don Watkins, of the North Alabama Highway Safety Office in Tuscumbia.

Tway said one argument for lowering the age is that it would cut down on binge drinking by young people on college campuses.

“We understand binge drinking is a problem, but it’s not just a problem on college campuses but everywhere, and lowering the drinking age is not going to help it. In fact, we believe it would just add to it,” Tway said.

Batey said MADD is not against drinking, “just drinking and driving.”

“The choice to drink is one thing, but to drink and drive is the wrong choice and one that can affect more than just the driver’s life,” Brown said. “We have a saying that no drink is worth the mourning after and too often that is what happens, mourning.”

Source