The bill was drafted by Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, who says the reason why the bill didn't get past the Assembly's Appropriations Committee was because the new law would have sent more DUI offenders to prison. The bill called for increasing the number of people eligible for felony DUI prison sentences, which could further crowd the prisons in California. Sending more people to prison would ultimately cost the state more money at a time when there's already an estimated $19 billion deficit.
According to an analysis of the law, Jerry Hill's bill would have cost the state at least $10 million per year, as stated in the San Mateo County Times. Los Angeles DUI attorneys were among the people that also opposed the bill for other reasons. Lawyers argue that taking away a person's license for life does not give a repeat DUI offender incentive to get sober. The American Civil Liberties Union and California DUI Lawyers Association were among the groups that opposed the bill for this reason and favored a change to bring a life revocation down to a 10-year license revocation.
"It will give a little more justice to people who deserve their licenses back," Joshua Dale, executive director of the California DUI Lawyers Association, told San Mateo County Times. "'Three strikes, you're out' doesn't work."
Related Resources:
-
License Suspension and Revocation (FindLaw)
-
California DUI Law (FindLaw)
-
See a Los Angeles DUI Attorney (FindLaw)
ShareThis
