Alexander B. Ramey - Miami Traffic Ticket Attorney

Ignition Interlock

Home
Traffic Ticket Defense
SunPass Defense
Florida Criminal Defense
DUI Defense
Lawyer Profile
FAQs
Track Your Case
Contact Us
KENDALL OFFICE
9995 SW 72nd St.,
Suite 204
Miami, FL 33173 
 
NORTH MIAMI
11730 Biscayne Blvd.,
Suite 203
Miami, FL  33181
 
HIALEAH OFFICE
600 Palm Ave
Suite B
Hialeah FL 33010
  Call (305) 598-4490

Traduzca a Español

FLORIDA IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE

interlock.jpg

YOU HAVE 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE DMV LETTER TO FIGHT THE DMV IF THEY IMPOSE THE INTERLOCK WITHOUT A COURT ORDER.

Do not delay. Contact an experienced attorney as soon as possible!


Recently, the Department of Motor Vehicles has begun to require the imposition of an interlock device in the vehicles of those convicted of Driving under the Influence who blew over a .15 BAC.

 

There is a possibility that this requirement is incorrect. If you were convicted of a DUI between July 1, 2002 and July 1, 2003 AND the Judge did not order the imposition of an interlock device in your car, then the DMV CANNOT impose that requirement.


316.1937 Ignition interlock devices, requiring; unlawful acts.


In addition to any other authorized penalties, the court may require that any person who is convicted of driving under the influence in violation of s. 316.193
shall not operate a motor vehicle unless that vehicle is equipped with a functioning ignition interlock device certified by the department as provided in s. 316.1938, and installed in such a manner that the vehicle will not start if the operator's blood alcohol level is in excess of 0.05 percent or as otherwise specified by the court. The court may require the use of an approved ignition interlock device for a period of not less than 6 months, if the person is permitted to operate a motor vehicle, whether or not the privilege to operate a motor vehicle is restricted, as determined by the court. The court, however, shall order placement of an ignition interlock device in those circumstances required by s. 316.193.


If the court imposes the use of an ignition interlock device, the court shall: (a) Stipulate on the record the requirement for, and the period of, the use of a certified ignition interlock device. (b) Order that the records of the department reflect such requirement. (c) Order that an ignition interlock device be installed, as the court may determine necessary, on any vehicle owned or operated by the person. (d) Determine the person's ability to pay for installation of the device if the person claims inability to pay. If the court determines that the person is unable to pay for installation of the device, the court may order that any portion of a fine paid by the person for a violation of s. 316.193 shall be allocated to defray the costs of installing the device. (e) Require proof of installation of the device and periodic reporting to the department for verification of the operation of the device in the person's vehicle.


If the court imposes the use of an ignition interlock device on a person whose driving privilege is not suspended or revoked, the court shall require the person to provide proof of compliance to the department within 30 days. If the person fails to provide proof of installation within that period, absent a finding by the court of good cause for that failure which is entered in the court record, the court shall notify the department.


If the court imposes the use of an ignition interlock device on a person whose driving privilege is suspended or revoked for a period of less than 3 years, the department shall require proof of compliance before reinstatement of the person's driving privilege.

(a) In addition to any other provision of law, upon conviction of a violation of this section the department shall revoke the person's driving privilege for 1 year from the date of conviction. Upon conviction of a separate violation of this section during the same period of required use of an ignition interlock device, the department shall revoke the person's driving privilege for 5 years from the date of conviction. (b) Any person convicted of a violation of subsection (6) who does not have a driver's license shall, in addition to any other penalty provided by law, pay a fine of not less than $250 or more than $500 per each such violation. In the event that the person is unable to pay any such fine, the fine shall become a lien against the motor vehicle used in violation of subsection (6) and payment shall be made pursuant to s. 316.3025(4).


(a) It is unlawful to tamper with, or to circumvent the operation of, a court-ordered ignition interlock device. (b) It is unlawful for any person whose driving privilege is restricted pursuant to this section to request or solicit any other person to blow into an ignition interlock device or to start a motor vehicle equipped with the device for the purpose of providing the person so restricted with an operable motor vehicle. (c) It is unlawful to blow into an ignition interlock device or to start a motor vehicle equipped with the device for the purpose of providing an operable motor vehicle to a person whose driving privilege is restricted pursuant to this section. (d)
It is unlawful to knowingly lease or lend a motor vehicle to a person who has had his or her driving privilege restricted as provided in this section, unless the vehicle is equipped with a functioning, certified ignition interlock device. Any person whose driving privilege is restricted under a condition of probation requiring an ignition interlock device shall notify any other person who leases or loans a motor vehicle to him or her of such driving restriction.


Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, if a person is required to operate a motor vehicle in the course and scope of his or her employment and if the vehicle is owned by the employer, the person may operate that vehicle without installation of an approved ignition interlock device if the employer has been notified of such driving privilege restriction and if proof of that notification is with the vehicle. This employment exemption does not apply, however, if the business entity which owns the vehicle is owned or controlled by the person whose driving privilege has been restricted.


In addition to the penalties provided in this section, a violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.

DUI in Hialeah, DUI in Coral Gables, DUI in Pinecrest, DUI in South Miami, DUI in Homestead, DUI in Florida, DUI in FL

WE COVER BREVARD, BROWARD, COLLIER, GLADES, HENDRY, INDIAN RIVER, LEE, MARTIN, MIAMI-DADE, MONROE, OKEECHOBEE, OSCEOLA, PALM BEACH, AND ST. LUCIE COUNTIES. IF YOU RECEIVED A TRAFFIC TICKET IN ANOTHER FLORIDA COUNTY CLICK HERE, AND AN ATTORNEY IN THAT COUNTY CONTACT YOU SHORTLY.

[Miami Traffic Ticket Attorney] [ Miami Traffic Ticket Lawyer]
[
Miami Criminal Law] [Miami Speeding Ticket] [Miami Dade Traffic Tickets]

The hiring of a DUI lawyer, traffic ticket lawyer, or criminal lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be neither formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.

 "I have been practicing law in the area of traffic ticket defense for over ten years. I have defended thousand of clients in Miami and the surrounding areas. Let me defend your traffic ticket." Alexander B. Ramey, Traffic Ticket Attorney

Traffic Ticket Attorney and Traffic Violation Lawyer. Serving Broward, Glades, Indian River,
Lee, Martin, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie
Counties.