NCJ Number
197512
Date Published
September 2002
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This document provides an overview of laws relating to Implied Consent and the suspension of a driver’s license in drunk driving cases in the State of Wisconsin.
Abstract
Under current law, a person driving or operating a motor vehicle on public highways is deemed to have given consent to one or more tests of breath, blood, or urine to determine the presence of alcohol or controlled substances. Any such tests must be administered upon request of a law enforcement officer if this officer has probable cause to believe that the person is driving while intoxicated. A preliminary breath screening test (PBT) may be used by the officer for the purpose of deciding whether the person should be arrested for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) violation; and whether to request chemical tests as authorized under the Implied Consent law. If a person refuses to take a chemical test, the officer must immediately take possession of the person’s license and prepare a notice of intent to revoke the person’s operating privilege. If the person submits to chemical testing and the results indicate a prohibited alcohol concentration, the officer must take possession of the person’s license and forward it to the Department of Transportation (DOT). The person’s operating privilege is then administratively suspended for 6 months. The person may request that DOT review the administrative suspension within 10 days after notification. The DOT must hold a hearing regarding the suspension within 30 days after the date of notification. The person may present evidence and may be represented by counsel. If the hearing examiner finds that the criteria for administrative suspension have not been satisfied or that the person did not have a prohibited alcohol concentration at the time the offense allegedly occurred, the examiner must order that the administrative suspension be rescinded. The hearing examiner must notify the person in writing of the hearing decision, of the right to judicial review, and of the court’s authority to issue a stay of the suspension. An individual aggrieved by the determination of the hearing examiner may have the determination reviewed by the court hearing.