Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate passes bill tightening use of plea‑in‑abeyance for DUI cases, adds sunset and treatment oversight
Summary
The Senate approved First Substitute SB20 to limit plea‑in‑abeyance in DUI cases, strengthen screening/treatment requirements, restrict expungement, and require a sunset review in February 2006; supporters said the measure emphasizes accountability and aims to reduce recidivism.
The Utah Senate on Feb. 2 approved First Substitute Senate Bill 20, a measure that restricts the use of plea‑in‑abeyance (plea in advance) in DUI cases and builds in treatment and accountability safeguards. Sponsor Senator Walker said the change is designed to expand treatment‑based alternatives while keeping repeat offenders accountable.
"This bill ... further restricts the use of plea in advance," Walker said in floor remarks explaining the measure’s treatment‑centered features, including screening and assessment, a required education or treatment incentive program, regular court reviews, and random drug and alcohol testing. The bill also specifies that a prosecutor is not required to offer a plea in advance in any DUI case.
Under the bill, plea‑in‑abeyance is barred when certain conditions apply: if the defendant’s record contains a conviction or an unresolved arrest that could enhance a subsequent DUI; when the offender caused bodily injury or property damage in the current case; when the offender’s blood or breath alcohol concentration is 0.16 or higher; or when a passenger under 18 was present. The measure also limits opportunities for expungement — imposing a 10‑year waiting period and explicitly prohibiting expungement for automobile homicide and felony DUI convictions.
Walker said the University of Utah research and the statewide prosecutors’ association supported structuring the program as a two‑year test period with oversight. "It's truly heavy on accountability," she said, noting the bill includes a sunset so lawmakers can evaluate results. The sunset date is February 2006; a committee report is expected in February 2005 during the trial period.
Senators who spoke in favor noted that DUI courts and treatment programs have reduced repeat offending in other jurisdictions, while others urged careful follow‑up and data collection during the sunset period. The Senate recorded a roll‑call result of 28 ayes, no nays and 1 absent on the vote reported on the floor; the bill was put on the third‑reading calendar for final action.
The bill leaves prosecutors discretion and adds reporting and review requirements; if the post‑enactment review suggests the program reduces recidivism, the Legislature could renew the statute before the sunset date.
