Relates to requiring offenders to bear the cost of installation and maintenance of a court-ordered ignition interlock device

Section 2 of the bill adds the language, "at their own personal expense" to amends VTL § 1193(1) (c), relating to the maintenance and installation of ignition interlock devices.

Section 3 of the bill amends VTL § 1198, subdivision 2, to add the language, "the cost of which shall be borne by the offender."

Section 4 of the bill amends section 1198 of the vehicle and traffic law to remove the language that (unless the court determines such person is financially unable to afford such cost whereupon such cost may be imposed pursuant to a payment plan or waived. In the event of such waiver, the cost of such device shall be borne in accordance with regulations issues under paragraph (g) of subdivision one of section eleven hundred ninety-three of this article or pursuant to such other agreement as may be entered into for provision of the device. Such cost shall be considered a fine for the purpose of subdivision five of section 420.10 of the criminal procedure law. Such cost shall not replace, but shall instead be in addition to, any fines, surcharges, or other costs imposed pursuant to this chapter or other applicable laws.)

Section 5 of the bill amends section 259-c of the executive law to require as a mandatory condition of release, that such person install and maintain at their own personal expense an ignition interlock device.

Section 6 of the bill amends Section 60.21 of the penal law to require that the cost of the installation and maintenance of a functioning ignition interlock device shall be borne by the offender.

Section 7 of the bill provides the effective date.

Statement in support

Last year, the legislature historically passed chapter 496 of laws of 2009, which created the crime of aggravated driving while intoxicated with a child. That legislation made it a felony for an individual to drive while intoxicated with children in the car because that adult made a conscious decision to put those children at risk of harm or death. It also required person convicted to install and maintain an ignition interlock device that will prevent such person from driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the further because such devices prevent recidivism by those who drive drunk.

Unfortunately, the legislation included ambiguous language that the cost of the ignition interlock device shall be borne by the offender unless such offender is determined by the court to be financially unable to afford the cost. This language is causing confusion for municipalities and the state, as it is not clear who would pay for these interlock devices if the offender cannot afford it. This new bill will provide clarity and put the burden squarely where it belongs on the offender to purchase the interlock device.

Driving a motor vehicle on public roads is a privilege, not a right, and that privilege can be taken away or modified based on certain conduct, including drunk driving. If a motorist chooses to violate the law, and drive drunk with a child in their vehicle, regardless of their income, then they should be prepared to face the consequences including large fines and expenses associated with installing a breath-monitoring device and potential loss of driving privileges and incarceration.

As a state, we are facing a multi-billion deficit, we should not be wasting money purchasing ignition interlock devices at an estimated $100 per month for violators whom courts determine cannot afford them. It is patently unfair to make law-abiding citizens foot the bill for these offenders.

Budget implications

This bill would not impose any costs on the state or localities.

Effective date

Immediately, with provisions.