1. Interlocks in New Mexico Richard Roth, PhD Executive Director, Impact DWI Citizen Lobbyist and Research Consultant Supported by PIRE, NHTSA, RWJ, and NM TSB RichardRoth2300@msn.comRichardRoth2300@msn.com, 471-4764, www.impactdwi.org www.impactdwi.org MADD DWI Technology Symposium, June 2006

2. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 2 An Ignition Interlock is an Electronic Probation Officer Dedicated Probation Officer in Front Seat On duty 24 hours per day Tests and Records daily BAC’s Allows only Alcohol-Free Persons to Drive. Reports All Violations to the Court Costs Offender only $2.30 per day. (1 less drink per day)

3. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 3 Interlocks are Effective, Cost-Effective and Fair Interlocks reduce DWI re-arrests by 40-90% They reduce the economic impact of drunk driving by $3 to $7 for every $1 of cost. Interlocks are perceived as a fair sanction by 85% of over 3000 offenders surveyed...But they only work if you get them installed.

4. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 4 Does an Interlock Law or Program Reduce DWI Re- Arrests? Yes, if interlocks get installed. No, if interlocks do not get installed.

5. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 5 Motivation Continuum For DWI Offenders to Install Interlocks Under Existing and Possible Laws From Incentives to Mandates From Carrots to Sticks

6. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 6 Carrots Legal Driving Privileges 1.Early license reinstatement 2.License reinstatement requirement. 3.How soon after arrest?

7. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 7 Sticks: Judicial Mandates Optional or Mandatory Some or All offenders To avoid immobilization, impoundment or forfeiture of vehicle on arrest To avoid house arrest, warrant, or jail on conviction

8. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 8 New Mexico Interlock Laws 1999 Optional for 2 nd and 3 rd DWI. 2002 Mandatory for all Aggravated and Subsequent DWI. Indigent Fund 2003 Ignition Interlock License Act: ….an alternative to revocation. 2005 Mandatory Interlocks for all DWIs: 1yr for 1 st ; 2 for 2 nd ; 3 for 3 rd ; Lifetime for 4+

9. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 9 Estimate

10. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 10

11. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 11 19631 DWI Arrests in 2002 in NM 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5+ Our biggest Problem! 1 st offenders. This segment is growing each year. Our laws have targeted multiple offenders.. We need to reach these persons BEFORE they offend.

12. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 12

13. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 13 Recidivism of First Offenders in New Mexico N 1461 17166 Average Installation Time =.47 yrs

14. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 14 Court Mandated Interlocks Reduce the Recidivism of First Offenders

15. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 15 Comparison Groups Interlocked Groups Interlocks are Effective with Court Mandated Offenders

16. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 16 Comparison Groups Interlocked Groups Interlocks are Effective with Volunteers ie. Not court-mandated

17. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 17 22.5% 6.0 % (3 or more DWI convictions in 10 years)

18. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 18 A study of DWI offenders arrested between Jan 2003 and June, 2005. 5707 offenders installed interlocks 3036 of the 5707 removed their interlocks before end of study, June 30, 2005 38,105 persons were arrested for DWI but did not install interlocks

19. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 19 90 Days was the minimum revocation time and the maximum jail time for first offenders days Installed after 1/1/03 and removed before July 05

20. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 20 8% 3% 5707 38,105 Jan 2003-June 2005

21. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 21

22. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 22

23. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 23 Revised June 15, 2006 Note:Still missing data from one distributor.

24. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 24 Missing data from one distributor

25. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 25 Missing data from one distributor

26. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 26 This graph only includes installations by convicted persons New Mexico Counties New Mexico State Santa Fe County Santa Fe Magistrate Court Same State…….. Same Law… Different Counties and Judges Wide Range of Installation Rates

27. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 27

28. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 28 8.0% Before 6.7% After A 16% Reduction Statewide recidivism decreased when Interlocks became mandatory.

29. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 29 8.7% Before 6.2% After A 29% Reduction Before After

30. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 30 Goals Get Interlocks into the vehicles of all those arrested for DWI as soon as possible after arrest. Keep interlocks installed until there is evidence of Alcohol Free Driving for a year.

31. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 31 Recommendations 1.Immobilization or Interlock between DWI arrest and adjudication. 2.Mandatory Interlock for at least one year for all convicted offenders with immobilization as the only alternative. 3.Compliance Based Removal. Requirement: No recorded BAC >.04 by any driver for a year. 4.Interlock License as an Alternative to Revocation. 5.An Indigent Fund with objective standards.

32. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 32 Loopholes in NM DWI Laws A.Interlocks are not mandatory for all convicted DWI’s (Fixed 2005) B.License Revocation is too short. (90 days for 1 st DWI) (Better 2005) C.Mandatory Interlock Period not long enough for some. (Better 2005) D.Interlocks not mandated between Arrest and Adjudication. Some arrested DWI offenders endanger the public and others abscond. E.Some offenders do not install when mandated to do so. F.Technicalities result in not-guilty G.No alternative sanction for “Not Driving” and “No Vehicle” excuses. H.Some interlocked offenders drive non-interlocked vehicles. I.Some interlocks are removed before end of Mandate. J.No uniform standard for Indigency K.No Central Supervision of Interlock Program

33. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 33 Legislative Proposals 1.Immobilization or Interlock on arrest for DWI (DWI offenders are a flight risk and a danger to the public and the vehicle is hazard to the public) 2.To insure no drinking during probation, mandate sobrieter, biweekly (random)urine tests, or interlock. 3.House arrest as an alternative to interlock for those who claim “no vehicle” or “not driving”

34. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 34 AlcoholTaxIncrease.org Raise the Alcohol Excise Tax by about 10cents per drink and make it uniform. 25 cents per ounce of alcohol in any alcoholic beverage. This would help to pay for the prevention, treatment, enforcement, and adjudication that presently comes out of the general fund for alcohol crimes and adiction.

35. Richard RothMADD Technology Symposium June 2006 35 Key Contributors to NM’s Interlock Laws, Implementation, and Research Mike Sandoval, NM Traffic Safety Bureau Rachel O’Connor, NM DWI Tsarina` Jim Davis, NM Div of Government Research NM Legislators. Especially: Phil Griego, Kent Cravens, Ken Martinez, and Patsy Trujillo Governors Johnson and Richardson PIRE Colleagues: Paul Marques and Bob Voas Jim Frank, NHTSA NM Interlock Providers: ACS,ADS,CST,Draeger, Guardian, Lifesafer, and Smart Start NM: TSB, MVD, DOT, AOC, DFA, DPS, MADD NM Judges and prosecuting attorneys.