Under current Ohio DUI laws a warrant must be obtained from a judge if the motorist declines to submit a blood sample. The new bill would make the blood draw a requirement even without a warrant. Opponents of the plan point out that a repeat DUI offender could be stopped for any traffic infraction, not just suspicion of drunk driving, before being asked to submit a blood sample. Those states that have provisions for warrantless blood draws usually limit the action to situations where a driver involved in an accident involving an injury or fatality is suspected of impaired driving.

The Ohio chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is expected to challenge the new law on the basis of constitutionality.

If you have been arrested for DUI/OVI in Ohio, you will need to hire an Ohio DUI attorney for representation on your drunk driving charge.

In addition to increasing penalties for driving under the influence in Ohio, the law calls for establishing more alcohol treatment centers and providing financial assistance for alcohol rehabilitation of indigents. The treatment aspect has been received well as an effort to break the cycle of alcohol abuse and chronic drunk driving.

Statistics show that approximately 36,000 motorists in the state had at least five Ohio drunk driving convictions, and studies show that the use of ignition interlock devices reduces the incidents of repeat DUI offenses.

If you have been arrested for OVI in Ohio you need an experienced OH DUI attorney.

Ohio Senate Bill 17 would require those with two or more drunk driving convictions to submit to a blood or breath test to determine blood alcohol content (BAC). This would close a current legal loophole that allows motorists to refuse such tests and potentially avoid prosecution. A person found guilty of at least two Ohio DUI arrests in a six-year period would have their car impounded and their license suspended for at least a year. The Ohio Department of Public Safety would be required to maintain a registry of DUI offenders who have been arrested five or more times in the previous 20 years. This information would be made available to the public. A driver with three or more DUI convictions would be required to install an ignition interlock device.

The proposed legislation includes efforts to rehabilitate chronic alcohol abusers, such as mandatory alcohol treatment classes and use of alcohol monitoring devices to detect alcohol consumption.

Some of the measures outlined in SB17 are already at the disposal of the courts though the new law allows the penalties to be applied at an earlier point. The bill is currently being debated in the Senate. It must also go through the House before it could find its way to the governor.

The tests can include making the motorist show an ability to walk and turn without stumbling and watching the smoothness of eye movement. The most common standards for administering and scoring such tests come from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Previously, the High Court established that those federal standards must be adhered to by police officers when making a DUI arrest. In 2002, the Ohio General Assembly passed a law that loosened the rules. The law allows for the introduction of the results of a field sobriety test in court if the officer simply conducts the tests in ‘substantial compliance’ with the federal rules. The law was written in response to the dismissal of a DUI conviction in 2000 because the arresting officers did not follow the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards.

At issue is whether the Supreme Court of Ohio thinks lawmakers erred when making it acceptable to be in ‘substantial compliance’ with the rules rather than following them precisely. The law does not establish what ‘substantial’ means. Opponents, especially Ohio DUI defense attorneys, feel the looseness of the law shifts the rules of evidence from the court to the legislature. Proponents say it gives the judge room for allowing an arresting officer’s testimony.

The General Assembly sponsors of the law said it was needed because the NHTSA standards for field sobriety tests are too strict, making it relatively easy to get the results dismissed or barred during an Ohio DUI trial.