Motivating DWI Offenders To Install Interlocks: What Works? Richard Roth, Paul Marques, Robert Voas Pacific Institute For Research and Evaluation Funded by NHTSA Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Profile—United States New Mexico                                                                                                                                                                                         Profile—United States New Mexico is located in the South West of the United States. It has a population of 1.9 million and 1.3 million licensed drivers. 20% of the licensed drivers have been arrested at least once for DWI in the last 21 years. Each year 20,000 are arrested for DWI, 12,500 are convicted, and in the last two years about 3000 have installed ignition interlocks. New Mexico 1.9 M Population 20,000 DWI Arrests/year 1.3 M Licensed Drivers 3000 Interlocks/year Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Does an Interlock Law or Program Reduce DWI Re-Arrests? Yes, if interlocks get installed. No, if interlocks do not get installed. First of all, I want to say that interlocks laws and programs can reduce DWI arrests. But only is they result in interlocks getting installed. Laws and Programs do not reduce recidivism, installed interlocks do. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

From Incentives to Mandates From Carrots to Sticks Motivation Continuum For DWI Offenders to Install Interlocks Under Existing and Possible Laws From Incentives to Mandates From Carrots to Sticks So what aspects of Laws and Programs result in interlocks actually getting installed. There clearly is a Motivation Continuum….From Incentives to Mandates….from Carrots to Sticks. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Carrots Legal Driving Privileges Early License Reinstatement License Reinstatement Requirement. Interlock License Available immediately after arrest. (NM) Some examples of carrots are 1. Reducing the length of the license revocation period..For example from 2 years to 1 year if the offender installs an interlock in the second year. 2. The next step up in motivation would be to require a period of driving with an interlock before one could receive an unrestricted license. 3. An even greater motivation would be the immediate availability, after a DWI arrest, of legal driving in an interlocked vehicle (and that’s what we have in New Mexico) Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Sticks: Judicial Mandates Optional Sentence for Multiple Offenders Optional Sentence for High BAC Mandatory Sentence for Some Mandatory Sentence for All To avoid house arrest, warrant, or jail To avoid immobilization, impoundment or forfeiture of vehicle Moving up in the motivation continuum we get to the Sticks, Judicial Mandates. The first is having a period of Ignition Interlock as an optional sentence for Multiple Offenders. Next is as an optional sentence for high BAC. Then as the stick gets bigger..A Mandatory sentence for some offenders, … eg. In NM for High BaC or subsequent offenders. Next is as a Mandatory sentence for all convicted offenders. But even at this level….there is a lot of wiggle room in most laws and programs we will see. One way to close many of them is to provide, as the only alternative to interlock, House Arrest, jail, with an enforced warrant program. Finally an even bigger stick would be loss of vehicle by immobilization, impoundment or forfeiture. And even this strongest stick would not reach those who are arrested but not convicted. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

20,039 DWI Arrests in 2004 in NM Our laws have targeted multiple offenders. Now what sort of effect might these measures produce? Several things are clear from this pie chart of DWI arrests in New Mexico. 1. Most of those arrested are 1st offenders. 2. Subsequent offender laws, even mandatory ones would at best reduce the recidivism of 3rd and above offenders. In NM, and elsewhere, most of our DWI laws have targeted multiple offenders. But first offenders and their recidivism are our biggest problems. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

12,699 DWI Convictions in 2004 in NM The picture for those CONVICTED of DWI is similar…but an even greater fraction of offenders are 1st and 2nd. So laws that would use interlocks to reduce the recidivism of offenders after their 2nd offense would at most reach 17% of convicted offenders in NM … Moreover, because of the plea bargaining process, many 2nd and 3rd convictions are pled down to 1st convictions and therefore even though they appear in the 2nd and 3rd slices of this NM pie, they would not be subject to the legal sanctions for 2nd and 3rd offenders. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Percent Rearrested Within 2 Years Our Laws have Targeted Multiple offenders. Percent Rearrested Within 2 Years Here is more evidence that our laws, at least in NM, have targeted multiple offenders to the exclusion of first offenders. For each year from 1990 to 2000, this chart shows the fraction of those arrested who are rearrested within 2 years. You can see that the 2 year recidivism for multiple offenders has decreased much more than that of first offenders. Our laws have had the largest effect on the smallest group of offenders and had much less of an effect on the recidivism of 1st offenders who are more than half of the group each year. Largest Reduction (37%-20%) in Smallest Group (5+). Smallest Reduction (15% to 11%) in Largest Group (1st) Roth What Works Annecy 2005

New Mexico Interlock Laws 1999 Optional for 2nd and 3rd DWI. (July 1,1999) 2002 Mandatory for all Aggravated (High BAC) and Subsequent DWI. (Jan 1, 2003) 2003 Indigent Fund 2003 Ignition Interlock License Act: ….an alternative to revocation. (June 1, 2003) 2005 Mandatory Interlocks For All DWIs: 1yr for 1st ; 2 yrs for 2nd ; 3 yrs for 3rd ; Lifetime for 4+ Now here’s what we have done in New Mexico. Our interlock laws have spanned the Motivation Continuum from Small Carrots to Big Sticks. In 1999 I drafted and lobbied for a big-stick law to mandate interlocks for all convicted offenders, but the legislature turned it into the twig of an optional judicial sentence for second and third offenders. Under this law fewer than 150 interlocks were installed per year for 3 ½ years. In 2002, we finally passed a Mandatory Judicial Sanction, but not for all. The loopholes included 1. omitting low BAC first offenders, 2. those who pled down to that charge, 3. those who successfully pled “no vehicle” or “not driving” and 4. those who just did not do what the judge ordered … Plus many judges refused to mandate interlocks for offenders who were revoked and could not drive legally. 3. We also instituted an indigent fund supported by a surcharge on the non-indigent interlocked offenders. 4. In 2003, To correct some of the loopholes, I drafted and the legislature passed the “Ignition Interlock License Act” which is a complete alternative to hard revocation. That is, immediately after an arrest and license revocation, a revoked offender is eligible for an interlock license that allows legal driving in an insured, interlocked vehicle. 5. And finally this year, I drafted and NM passed a law mandating interlocks for all convicted DWIs: 1yr for first conviction, 2 years for second, 3 years for 3rd and lifetime with 5 year review for 4th offenders. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Cumulative Interlock Installation in NM 2732 / year 2732 / year Interlock Licensing Act An alternative to revocation Mandatory for aggravated and subsequent convictions Optional for 2nd and 3rd conviction This slide shows the effect of the NM laws on installation of interlocks. Under the optional mandate for 2nd and 3rd offenders, only 500 interlocks were installed in 3.5 years, a rate of 137 per year. When the Mandatory law for high BAC and subsequent offenders became law on January 1, 2003 the rate jumped to 1000 per year. When the Ignition Interlock License went into effect in June, 2003, the installation rate jumped again to about 3000 per year. The Interlock License Act both overcame the reluctance of judges to mandate interlocks for those who could not drive legally and gave the carrot of legal driving to offenders. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ignition Interlock Installation Rates Under Various Laws in NM Here is a simpler view of the same jumps in the rate of interlock installation that resulted under the different laws. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ignition Interlock Installation Rates Under Various Laws in NM Estimate On June 17 of this year, the NM mandated interlocks for all convicted offenders and closed the loopholes of “not driving” by mandating an Ignition Interlock License rather than mandating “an interlock in all vehicles driven by the offender” This is my estimate of the number of installations in the next year, another big jump. But.. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ignition Interlock Installation Rates Under Various Laws in NM ..We still have a way to go to reach the goal of interlocks in the vehicles of all convicted offenders. And if we believe that all arrested DWI offenders should be interlocked, then the goal is even higher… Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ignition Interlock Installation Rates Under Various Laws in NM If you believe as I do that Interlocks are the most effective, cost-effective, and fair sanction for DWI offenders then you can see on this chart that there is lots of room for improvement. Now how does NM compare to other states and what variation is there among Counties and Courts in New Mexico. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ignition Interlocks Currently Installed per Million Residents Data From Richard Freund, CEO Lifesafer Plot by Richard Roth 5/27/2004 Ignition Interlocks Currently Installed per Million Residents This chart shows that NM already has more interlocks per capita than any other state…if the data that I got from Richard Freund was correct. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Interlock Installation Per DWI Conviction in 2004 This graph only includes installations by convicted persons Same State…….. Same Law… Different Counties and Judges Wide Range of Installation Rates New Mexico Counties This chart shows the wide variation in interlock installations per convicted offender among counties and courts in New Mexico..under the same laws. The state average is 12%. Only 7 of the 33 counties in the state are above the state average. In Santa Fe County, where I live, 45% offenders convicted in 2004 installed interlocks before July 1, 2005. And the 3 judges in Santa Fe Magistrate court managed to get 66% of the 701 persons they convicted in 2004 to install interlocks. Laws alone do not get interlocks installed. The Santa Fe Magistrate Court Judges simply mandated interlocks for all convicted offenders with House Arrest at offender expense as the only alternative. Unfortunately these same judges usually mandated interlocks for only 90 days, the maximum jail term for first offenders. Amazingly they did not realize that the law said “1 year”, not “up to 1 year” and the probation period is not limited to the maximum jail term. New Mexico State Santa Fe Magistrate Court Santa Fe County Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Interlock Licenses issued by MVD Since the Ignition Interlock License Act became Law in 2003, over 5500 licenses have been granted by MVD and the rate in 2005 is over 3000 per year. This represents the number of DWI offenders who are able to drive legally when sober. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Loopholes To Judicial Mandates Pleas to lesser charge and sanction. “No Vehicle” “Not Driving” No Indigent Fund: “Cannot afford it” Non-compliance with sentence. Arrest but no Adjudication. Dismissal on Technicality. Here are some loopholes in judicial mandates; Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Interlock Laws Problems Optional for early license reinstatement Mandatory for license reinstatement Judicial Option for Some DWI’s Judicial Mandate for Some DWI’s Judicial Mandate for All DWI’s Most Drive during ALR. Driving without license is less expensive. Judges rarely use costly optional sanctions. Pleas, Loopholes, and License Availability This shows some of the reasons that Carrots and Sticks do not result in interlocks being installed. Even a minimum period of revocation teaches offenders that they can get by with driving without a license…and it is obvious to them that doing so is much cheaper and less bother than installing an interlock. Costly Optional Judicial mandates are rarely used by judges at least in NM. Finally judicial mandates, even for ALL DWIs, often have loopholes which offenders exploit. And then there are the 25% to 40% of offenders who do not get convicted. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Laws and Judicial Options Things to Consider Administrative or Judicial. Mandatory or Optional. Applicable to 1st, 2nd, 3rd …… Duration Availability of License Loopholes Support for Indigents Here are some things to consider in proposing laws. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

Ideal Ignition Interlock Laws Mandatory Interlock for at least one year for all convicted offenders with immobilization as the only alternative Interlock License as an Alternative to Revocation An Indigent Fund with objective standards Compliance Based Removal. No recorded BAC > .04 by any driver for a year. Immobilization or Interlock between DWI arrest and adjudication. And finally here is my recommendation for Ideal Ignition Interlock Laws: 1. Mandatory interlocks for at least 1 year for all convicted DWIs with immobilization as the only alternative. 2nd The an Ignition Interlock License as a complete alternative to revocation. (the best carrot for offenders and essential for judges to mandate interlocks) 3rd. a fund to support the cost of interlocks for the objectively indigent, supported by a surcharge on non-indigent offenders. We have almost achieved these first three in NM. We do not have immobilization as the only alternative to interlock and our indigent fund does not have an objective standard. There are 2 more components of the set of Ideal Laws: First, Compliance Based Removal, the requirement of at least a continuous year of alcohol-free driving in the interlocked vehicle as evidenced by no recorded BAC > 0.04 by any driver of the vehicle. And secondly to reach everyone arrested, I recommend immobilization or interlock of the vehicles of all persons arrested for DWIs (because the offenders are flight risks and their vehicles are danger to the public as evidenced by the number of additional DWI arrests between their original arrest and its adjudication. Roth What Works Annecy 2005

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. In conclusion, the ideal program would 1 Get Interlocks into the vehicles of ALL those arrested for DWI as soon as possible after arrest, and 2 keep them installed until there is evidence of Alcohol-Free Driving for a year. Roth What Works Annecy 2005