ND House amends DUI bill with even tougher penalties

The first offense was amended to include a fine of $500 and an order to an addiction evaluation for a BAC of at least .008. A BAC of at least .015, or in the case of a resfusal to submit to a chemical test, the sentence must include at least 10 days imprisonment, a $750 fine, an evaluation and a probation that includes the 24/7 program.

For the third offense in 10 years, the sentence will now include 180 days of imprisonment, rather than 60 days, and the fine for a fourth offense was raised from $1,000 to $3,000.

Amendments to HB 1302 also allow the court to sentence the individual to imprisonment and an alcohol treatment program. Upon completion of the program, the department can release the individual and place them on probation or for placement in another treatment facility.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Tim Heise


  • Opinion8ed

    This will not stop people from driving drunk. Every person who does drive after drinking does not kill someone. The counseling thing is a joke, to think that someone who might drink occasionally then make the bad choice of driving to possibly get jail time is ridiculous. Instead of throwing the money into a big pile to fund things that have nothing to do with that person drinking, collect alcohol violation fines and put them in a pot so that ANYONE can call a cab for FREE to get home safely after enjoying a legal pasttime. The I intended circumstances to the spouse and children will be devastating, it will destroy the ability of some people to ever get employment. I do not even drink and am a designated driver in my household. I have drove after drinking in years past and never killed anyone, neither did you!

    • awfulorv

      Those are good ideas you’ve got there. I’m almost certain I was told something similar to what you propose is to be implemented this coming Feb. 29th.

  • broadway Joe

    there are civil courts that were designed to handle situations where someone was drunk and killed another. this bill is a joke and I agree that it will not stop drunk driving.

  • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

    I wonder what the “unintended consequences” will be.

    • slackwarerobert

      legislators writing and passing bills locked away in prison where we can’t stop them.

  • slackwarerobert

    What a stupid idea. You don’t refuse to take the test, you ask for a lawyer, then you refuse to answer questions, and remain silent. Any lawyer worth a dam will not show up for a few hours so your blood will pass. Everytime I have been hauled in they ask me to blow in the tube, so I don’t have to. But .008, I think you can get that without even drinking.

  • slackwarerobert

    A better idea is to make everyone pass the road test while drunk. If you can control your vehicle drunk, when sober you won’t have any problem. That will get rid of 99% of the wrecks that tie up traffic.