This study sought to answer several questions regarding 2007 Arizona legislation requiring ignition interlock for all offenders convicted of Driving-Under-the-Influence (DUI), including first time DUI offenders. At the time the law was passed, Arizona was only one of two States (New Mexico being the other) to require ignition interlock for first time offenders. Of particular focus in the study were the implications of the legislation for rural areas. The project staff obtained information from judges in rural Arizona jurisdictions that routinely hear DUI cases to obtain their impressions of the legislation. Several themes emerged from the interviews: * Judges perceived ignition interlock as a practical and effective sanction for DUI offenders. * Ignition interlock service providers were limited or non-existent in rural jurisdictions. * DUI sanctions were costly and may have served as a barrier for offenders attempting to get their licenses reinstated. ? Repeat DUI offenders were often charged as first-time offenders in rural jurisdictions. * Judges were aware of ignition interlock and current DUI laws, but were interested in additional training and information. The researchers also investigated charge reduction behaviour for convicted DUI offenders, before and after implementation of the legislation in both urban and rural jurisdictions. They found a historically increasing trend for charge reductions that was driven by charge reductions for Extreme and Felony DUIs. The trend for less serious offenders was flat in both urban and rural jurisdictions. The researchers concluded that judges have not modified their charge reduction behaviour toward less serious offenders despite the logistical burdens that the legislation places on DUI offenders, especially those in rural jurisdictions. (Author/publisher)
Abstract