THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, December 12, 1994 TAG: 9412120060
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B2 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS
LENGTH: Medium: 54 lines
The first people in Virginia to lose their driver's license on the spot after being arrested for drunken driving may well be New Year's Eve revelers who have gone over their limit.
Beginning Jan. 1, if a suspected drunken driver's blood alcohol content is 0.08 percent or higher or if the driver refuses to take a blood-alcohol test, a magistrate issuing a drunken driving warrant will seize the suspect's license. The local General District Court will hold the license for a week.
The change is part of a package of laws passed by the 1994 General Assembly to combat drunken driving.
More than 30 states already have such a law, said Del. John J. ``Butch'' Davies, D-Culpeper, a member of the committee that crafted the legislation.
Out-of-state drivers will not lose their licenses but would be barred from driving within Virginia for a week, said Vince Burgess, transportation safety administrator for the Department of Motor Vehicles.
The new law also ends the option of using blood tests to determine blood-alcohol content. Advances in technology have made Breathalyzers more accurate, Davies said.
Some critics worried the law might infringe on the due process rights of suspects by suspending the license without the driver having been convicted of anything.
``It has been upheld in court challenges in other jurisdictions,'' Davies said. ``We were very careful to model the law after those jurisdictions where it was upheld.''
Diana Salmon, past president of the central Virginia chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said suspects are granted due process by having an independent magistrate decide whether to issue a warrant.
Other states which have similar laws have seen dramatic declines in the number of repeat offenders, Davies said. The General Assembly was slow to warm to the idea until it saw positive results in other states, particularly North Carolina and Maryland.
Salmon said MADD would like to see a longer revocation period - perhaps a month. Some states have revocation periods of as long as six months.
Davies said he thinks a week is long enough to teach drivers a lesson.
``It alters their ability to do things normally,'' Davies said. ``It places on other people around them the task of getting them around.''
Based on a survey of other states' administrative revocation programs, the General Assembly found that the effect on repeat offenders is not connected with the length of the suspension.
KEYWORDS: DRUNKEN DRIVING by CNB