NY State Senate Bill 2011-S3768B

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Assembly Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

Date of Action	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 24, 2012	referred to transportation delivered to assembly passed senate
Jan 23, 2012	advanced to third reading
Jan 19, 2012	2nd report cal.
Jan 18, 2012	1st report cal.50
Jan 04, 2012	referred to transportation returned to senate died in assembly
Jun 23, 2011	referred to transportation delivered to assembly passed senate
May 25, 2011	amended on third reading 3768b
May 02, 2011	advanced to third reading
Apr 13, 2011	2nd report cal.
Apr 12, 2011	1st report cal.375
Apr 07, 2011	print number 3768a
Apr 07, 2011	amend and recommit to transportation
Mar 03, 2011	referred to transportation

Votes

- Jan 24, 2012 - Floor Vote
  S3768B
  
  Aye
  
  60
  
  Nay
  
  0
  
  Absent
  
  0
  
  Excused
  
  1
  
  Abstained
  
  0
  - - Floor Vote: Jan 24, 2012
      
      aye (60)
      
      Adams
      
      Addabbo Jr.
      
      Alesi
      
      Avella
      
      Ball
      
      Bonacic
      
      Breslin
      
      Carlucci
      
      DeFrancisco
      
      Diaz
      
      Dilan
      
      Duane
      
      Espaillat
      
      Farley
      
      Flanagan
      
      Fuschillo
      
      Gallivan
      
      Gianaris
      
      Golden
      
      Griffo
      
      Grisanti
      
      Hannon
      
      Hassell-Thompson
      
      Huntley
      
      Johnson
      
      Kennedy
      
      Klein
      
      Krueger
      
      LaValle
      
      Lanza
      
      Larkin
      
      Little
      
      Marcellino
      
      Martins
      
      Maziarz
      
      McDonald
      
      Montgomery
      
      Nozzolio
      
      O'Mara
      
      Oppenheimer
      
      Parker
      
      Peralta
      
      Perkins
      
      Ranzenhofer
      
      Ritchie
      
      Rivera
      
      Robach
      
      Saland
      
      Sampson
      
      Savino
      
      Serrano
      
      Seward
      
      Skelos
      
      Smith
      
      Squadron
      
      Stavisky
      
      Stewart-Cousins
      
      Valesky
      
      Young
      
      Zeldin
      
      excused (1)
      
      Libous
  Jun 23, 2011 - Floor Vote
  S3768B
  
  Aye
  
  62
  
  Nay
  
  0
  
  Absent
  
  0
  
  Excused
  
  0
  
  Abstained
  
  0
  - - Floor Vote: Jun 23, 2011
      
      aye (62)
      
      Adams
      
      Addabbo Jr.
      
      Alesi
      
      Avella
      
      Ball
      
      Bonacic
      
      Breslin
      
      Carlucci
      
      DeFrancisco
      
      Diaz
      
      Dilan
      
      Duane
      
      Espaillat
      
      Farley
      
      Flanagan
      
      Fuschillo
      
      Gallivan
      
      Gianaris
      
      Golden
      
      Griffo
      
      Grisanti
      
      Hannon
      
      Hassell-Thompson
      
      Huntley
      
      Johnson
      
      Kennedy
      
      Klein
      
      Krueger
      
      Kruger
      
      LaValle
      
      Lanza
      
      Larkin
      
      Libous
      
      Little
      
      Marcellino
      
      Martins
      
      Maziarz
      
      McDonald
      
      Montgomery
      
      Nozzolio
      
      O'Mara
      
      Oppenheimer
      
      Parker
      
      Peralta
      
      Perkins
      
      Ranzenhofer
      
      Ritchie
      
      Rivera
      
      Robach
      
      Saland
      
      Sampson
      
      Savino
      
      Serrano
      
      Seward
      
      Skelos
      
      Smith
      
      Squadron
      
      Stavisky
      
      Stewart-Cousins
      
      Valesky
      
      Young
      
      Zeldin
  Jan 18, 2012 - Transportation Committee Vote
  S3768B
  
  Aye
  
  15
  
  Nay
  
  0
  
  Aye with Reservations
  
  3
  
  Absent
  
  0
  
  Excused
  
  1
  
  Abstained
  
  0
  - - Transportation Committee Vote: Jan 18, 2012
      
      aye (15)
      
      Diaz
      
      Dilan
      
      Fuschillo
      
      Johnson
      
      Kennedy
      
      Maziarz
      
      McDonald
      
      Nozzolio
      
      Ranzenhofer
      
      Robach
      
      Smith
      
      Stavisky
      
      Valesky
      
      Young
      
      Zeldin
      
      aye wr (3)
      
      Adams
      
      Perkins
      
      Squadron
      
      excused (1)
      
      Larkin
  Apr 12, 2011 - Transportation Committee Vote
  S3768B
  
  Aye
  
  15
  
  Nay
  
  0
  
  Aye with Reservations
  
  2
  
  Absent
  
  0
  
  Excused
  
  2
  
  Abstained
  
  0
  - - Transportation Committee Vote: Apr 12, 2011
      
      aye (15)
      
      Dilan
      
      Fuschillo
      
      Johnson
      
      Kennedy
      
      Larkin
      
      Maziarz
      
      McDonald
      
      Nozzolio
      
      Ranzenhofer
      
      Robach
      
      Smith
      
      Stavisky
      
      Valesky
      
      Young
      
      Zeldin
      
      aye wr (2)
      
      Adams
      
      Perkins
      
      excused (2)
      
      Diaz
      
      Squadron

Bill Amendments

Original

B (Active)

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2011-S3768 - Details

Current Committee:: Assembly Transportation
Law Section:: Vehicle and Traffic Law
Laws Affected:: Amd §1194, V & T L
Versions Introduced in 2013-2014 Legislative Session:: S757, S6263

2011-S3768 - Summary

Relates to compulsory chemical testing.

2011-S3768 - Sponsor Memo

                                BILL NUMBER:S3768

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
chemical tests

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this bill is to implement a "no refusal" policy in New
York State

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
This bill amends the section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law to
make mandatory the application to a court for an order to compel a
chemical test upon refusal by a motor vehicle operator suspected to
be under the influence to submit to such test.

EXISTING LAW:
Under current law, a police officer or district attorney may apply for
an order to compel upon refusal by an operator to submit to a
chemical test, but are not required to apply.

JUSTIFICATION:
Under current law, upon receipt of his or her driver license a
motorist is deemed to have given consent to submit to a chemical test
when reasonable cause exists to believe he or she is driving under

the influence. Should a motorist choose not to submit, he or she
faces a period license revocation and monetary penalties. Law
enforcement, however, faces the prospect of having to make a case
without what is often times the sole piece of objective evidence in a
DUI case.

Given the choice of a fine and period of revocation as against
providing substantial evidence of one's guilt in what could be a
criminal matter, it is no surprise that many times a motorist refuses
to submit to a chemical test. This legislation seeks to eliminate the
motorist's ability to choose in that instance by requiring that law
enforcement officers seek an order to compel where a motorist has
refused to submit and reasonable cause exists to believe that the
motorist is under the
influence. This bill would add real teeth to the "implied consent"
provision of the Vehicle and Traffic Law.

Under current law, the authority to apply to a court for an order to
compel submission to a chemical test already exists. This bill merely
makes such application mandatory upon a motorist's refusal. All
safeguards remain in place. A law enforcement officer must articulate
to a judge his or her reasonable cause for the belief that the
motorist was driving under the influence, and only when a judge is
satisfied that such cause exists will a court order be issued.

In December, U.S. Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood highlighted the
need for a national "no refusal" policy, calling on each state to
adopt such a policy. Presently, nine states implement no refusal
strategies at some level. New York's adoption of such a policy would
be a strong tool for law enforcement in the prevention of DUI and DUI
related tragedies.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

LOCAL FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediate.

2011-S3768 - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                  3768

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                              March 3, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sens. FUSCHILLO, HANNON, KLEIN, LARKIN -- read twice and
  ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee  on
  Transportation

AN  ACT  to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
  chemical tests

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.  The  paragraph heading and the opening paragraph of para-
graph (b) of subdivision 3 of section 1194 of the  vehicle  and  traffic
law,  as added by chapter 47 of the laws of 1988, are amended to read as
follows:
  When [authorized] REQUIRED.  Upon refusal by any person to submit to a
chemical test or any portion thereof as described above, [the test shall
not be given unless] a police officer or a district attorney, as defined
in subdivision thirty-two of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law,
[requests and obtains] SHALL REQUEST a court order to compel a person to
submit to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic or drug content  of
the person's blood upon a finding of reasonable cause to believe that:
  S 2. This act shall take effect immediately.





 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD09143-01-1

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2011-S3768A - Details

Current Committee:: Assembly Transportation
Law Section:: Vehicle and Traffic Law
Laws Affected:: Amd §1194, V & T L
Versions Introduced in 2013-2014 Legislative Session:: S757, S6263

2011-S3768A - Summary

Relates to compulsory chemical testing.

2011-S3768A - Sponsor Memo

                                BILL NUMBER:S3768A

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
chemical tests

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this bill is to implement a "no refusal" policy in New
York State

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
This bill amends the section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law to
make mandatory the application to a court for an order to compel a
chemical test upon refusal to submit to a chemical test by a motor
vehicle operator suspected to be under the influence when there has
been a death or serious bodily harm. It also would allow application
to the court in other instances of suspected DUI where the driver
has refused a chemical test.

EXISTING LAW:
Under current law, a police officer or district attorney may apply for
an order to compel upon refusal by an operator to submit to a
chemical test when there is serious bodily harm or death, but are not
required to apply. Law enforcement is not permitted to apply for an
order to compel where there is neither serious bodily harm nor death.

JUSTIFICATION:
Under current law, upon receipt of his or her driver license a
motorist is deemed to have given consent to submit to a chemical test
when reasonable cause exists to believe he or she is driving under
the influence - this is a condition of the privilege to drive. Should
a motorist choose not to submit. he or she faces a period of license
revocation and monetary penalties. Law enforcement, however. faces
the prospect of having to make a case without what is often times the
sole piece of objective evidence in a DUI case.

Given the choice of a fine and period of revocation, as against
providing substantial evidence of one's guilt in what could be a
criminal matter, it is no surprise that many times a motorist refuses
to submit to a chemical test. This legislation seeks to strengthen
law enforcement's hand in these situations. This bill would make
mandatory an application to the court for an order to compel when a
motorist suspected to be under the influence refuses a chemical test
in a situation where there has been death or serious bodily harm.
Additionally, it would allow applications to the court in any
situation in which law enforcement has a reasonable belief that a
motorist is driving under the influence and that motorist has refused
to submit to a chemical test. This bill would add real teeth to the
"implied consent" provision of the Vehicle and Traffic Law.

Presently, the authority to apply to a court for an order to compel
submission to a chemical test exists only in situations of death or
serious injury - and then it is discretionary. This bill makes an
application in such a situations mandatory if a motorist refuses to
submit to a chemical test and there exists a reasonable belief that
the motorist was under the influence. Additionally, present law does
not allow for applications to the court where a motorist refuses to
submit to a chemical test in situations where there is a reasonable
cause exists to believe the motorist is under the influence but in
which there has been no death or serious injury. This bill provides
that authority. In so amending the law, all judicial safeguards have
been preserved. A law enforcement officer must articulate to a judge
his or her reasonable cause for the belief that the motorist was
driving under the influence, and only when a judge is satisfied that
such cause exists will a court order be issued.

In December, U.S. Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood highlighted the
need for a national "no refusal" policy, calling on each state to
adopt such a policy. Presently, nine states implement no refusal
strategies at some level. New York's adoption of such a policy would
be a strong tool for law enforcement in the prevention of DUI and DUI
related tragedies.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

LOCAL FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediate.

2011-S3768A - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 3768--A

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                              March 3, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sens.  FUSCHILLO, HANNON, KLEIN, LARKIN, LAVALLE, OPPEN-
  HEIMER -- read twice and ordered  printed,  and  when  printed  to  be
  committed  to the Committee on Transportation -- committee discharged,
  bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended  and  recommitted  to  said
  committee

AN  ACT  to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
  chemical tests

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.  The  paragraph heading and the opening paragraph of para-
graph (b) of subdivision 3 of section 1194 of the  vehicle  and  traffic
law,  as  added by chapter 47 of the laws of 1988, are amended and a new
paragraph (b-1) is added to read as follows:
  When [authorized] REQUIRED.  Upon refusal by any person to submit to a
chemical test or any portion thereof as described above, [the test shall
not be given unless] a police officer or a district attorney, as defined
in subdivision thirty-two of section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law,
[requests and obtains] SHALL REQUEST a court order to compel a person to
submit to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic or drug content  of
the person's blood upon a finding of reasonable cause to believe that:
  (B-1) WHEN AUTHORIZED. UPON REFUSAL BY ANY PERSON TO SUBMIT TO A CHEM-
ICAL  TEST OR ANY PORTION THEREOF AS DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE TEST SHALL NOT
BE GIVEN UNLESS A POLICE OFFICER OR A DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AS  DEFINED  IN
SUBDIVISION  THIRTY-TWO  OF  SECTION 1.20 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW,
REQUESTS AND OBTAINS A COURT ORDER TO COMPEL A PERSON  TO  SUBMIT  TO  A
CHEMICAL TEST TO DETERMINE THE ALCOHOLIC OR DRUG CONTENT OF THE PERSON'S
BLOOD UPON A FINDING OF REASONABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT:
  (1)  A.  EITHER  SUCH  PERSON OPERATED THE VEHICLE IN VIOLATION OF ANY
SUBDIVISION OF SECTION ELEVEN HUNDRED NINETY-TWO OF THIS ARTICLE, OR

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD09143-03-1

S. 3768--A                          2

  B. A BREATH TEST ADMINISTERED BY A POLICE OFFICER IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH
PARAGRAPH  (B) OF SUBDIVISION ONE OF THIS SECTION INDICATES THAT ALCOHOL
HAS BEEN CONSUMED BY SUCH PERSON; AND
  (2) SUCH PERSON HAS BEEN PLACED UNDER LAWFUL ARREST; AND
  (3)  SUCH  PERSON  HAS  REFUSED  TO  SUBMIT  TO A CHEMICAL TEST OR ANY
PORTION THEREOF, REQUESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE  PROVISIONS  OF  PARA-
GRAPH  (A)  OF  SUBDIVISION  TWO  OF  THIS  SECTION OR IS UNABLE TO GIVE
CONSENT TO SUCH A TEST.
  S 2. Subparagraphs 1 and 2  of  paragraph  (b)  of  subdivision  2  of
section  1194  of the vehicle and traffic law, as amended by chapter 196
of the laws of 1996, are amended to read as follows:
  (1) If: (A) such person having been placed under arrest; or (B)  after
a  breath test indicates the presence of alcohol in the person's system;
or (C) with regard to a person under the age of  twenty-one,  there  are
reasonable  grounds  to  believe  that  such person has been operating a
motor vehicle after having consumed  alcohol  in  violation  of  section
eleven  hundred ninety-two-a of this article; and having thereafter been
requested to submit to such chemical test and having been informed  that
the  person's  license or permit to drive and any non-resident operating
privilege shall be immediately suspended and subsequently  revoked,  or,
for  operators under the age of twenty-one for whom there are reasonable
grounds to believe that such operator has been operating a motor vehicle
after having consumed alcohol in violation  of  section  eleven  hundred
ninety-two-a  of this article, shall be revoked for refusal to submit to
such chemical test or any portion thereof, whether or not the person  is
found  guilty  of  the  charge  for  which  such  person  is arrested or
detained, refuses to submit to such chemical test or any portion  there-
of, [unless a court order has been granted pursuant to subdivision three
of  this  section,  the test shall not be given and] a written report of
such refusal shall be immediately made by the police officer before whom
such refusal was made. Such report may be verified by having the  report
sworn  to, or by affixing to such report a form notice that false state-
ments made therein are punishable as a class A misdemeanor  pursuant  to
section  210.45  of the penal law and such form notice together with the
subscription of the deponent shall  constitute  a  verification  of  the
report.
  (2)  The  report  of  the  police  officer  shall set forth reasonable
grounds to believe such arrested person or such  detained  person  under
the  age  of twenty-one had been driving in violation of any subdivision
of section eleven hundred ninety-two or eleven hundred  ninety-two-a  of
this  article,  that  said person had refused to submit to such chemical
test, and [that no] WHETHER A chemical test was administered pursuant to
the requirements of subdivision three of this section. The report  shall
be  presented  to  the  court  upon  arraignment  of an arrested person,
provided, however, in the case of a person under the age of  twenty-one,
for  whom  a  test was authorized pursuant to the provisions of subpara-
graph two or three of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, and who has not
been placed under arrest for a violation of any  of  the  provisions  of
section  eleven hundred ninety-two of this article, such report shall be
forwarded to the commissioner within forty-eight hours in a manner to be
prescribed by the commissioner,  and  all  subsequent  proceedings  with
regard  to  refusal to submit to such chemical test by such person shall
be as set forth in subdivision three of section eleven  hundred  ninety-
four-a of this article.
  S 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

co-Sponsors

View additional co-sponsors

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Assembly Transportation
Law Section:: Vehicle and Traffic Law
Laws Affected:: Amd §1194, V & T L
Versions Introduced in 2013-2014 Legislative Session:: S757, S6263

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Summary

Relates to compulsory chemical testing.

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                BILL NUMBER:S3768B       REVISED 06/23/11

TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
chemical tests

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this bill is to provide the necessary tools to allow the
implementation of a "no refusal" policy in New York State

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
This bill amends the section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law to
allow application to a court to compel compliance with a chemical test
where a motorist is suspected to be under the influence and where the
driver has refused a chemical test.

EXISTING LAW:
Under current law, a police officer or district attorney may apply for
an order to compel upon refusal by an operator to submit to a chemical
test only when there is reasonable cause to believe the operator is DUI
and there is serious bodily harm or death. Law enforcement is not
permitted to apply for an order to compel where there is there is
reasonable cause, but neither serious bodily harm nor death.

JUSTIFICATION:
Under current law, upon receipt of his or her driver license a motorist

is deemed to have given consent to submit to a chemical test when
reasonable cause exists to believe he or she is driving under the influ-
ence - this is a condition of the privilege to drive. Should a motorist
choose not to submit, he or she faces a period of license revocation and
monetary penalties. Law enforcement, however, faces the prospect of
having to make a case without what is often times the sole piece of
objective evidence in a DUI case.

Given the choice of a fine and period of revocation, as against provid-
ing substantial evidence of one's guilt in what could be a criminal
matter, it is no surprise that many times a motorist refuses to submit
to a chemical test. This legislation seeks to strengthen law enforce-
ment's hand in these situations. This bill would make would allow appli-
cations to the court in any situation in which law enforcement has a
reasonable belief that a motorist is driving under the influence and
that motorist has refused to submit to a chemical test. This bill would
add real teeth to the "implied consent" provision of the Vehicle and
Traffic Law.

Presently, the authority to apply to a court for an order to compel
submission to a chemical test exists only in situations of death or
serious injury. This bill allow for applications to the court where a
motorist refuses to submit to a chemical test in situations where there
is a reasonable cause exists to believe the motorist is under the influ-
ence but in which there has been no death or serious injury.  In so

amending the law, all judicial safeguards have been preserved.  A law
enforcement officer must articulate to a judge his or her reasonable
cause for the belief that the motorist was driving under the influence,
and only when a judge is satisfied that such cause exists will a court
order be issued.

In December, U.S. Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood highlighted the
need for a national "no refusal" policy, calling on each state to adopt
such a policy. Presently, nine states implement no refusal strategies at
some level. New York's adoption of such a policy would be a strong tool
for law enforcement in the prevention of DUI and DUI related tragedies.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New bill

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

LOCAL FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediate.

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 3768--B
    Cal. No. 375

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                              March 3, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sens.  FUSCHILLO, HANNON, KLEIN, LARKIN, LAVALLE, OPPEN-
  HEIMER -- read twice and ordered  printed,  and  when  printed  to  be
  committed  to the Committee on Transportation -- committee discharged,
  bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended  and  recommitted  to  said
  committee  -- reported favorably from said committee, ordered to first
  and second report, ordered to a third  reading,  amended  and  ordered
  reprinted, retaining its place in the order of third reading

AN  ACT  to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to compulsory
  chemical tests

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.    Paragraph  (b)  of subdivision 3 of section 1194 of the
vehicle and traffic law, as added by chapter 47 of the laws of 1988,  is
amended to read as follows:
  (b)  When authorized. Upon refusal by any person to submit to a chemi-
cal test or any portion thereof as described above, the test  shall  not
be  given  unless a police officer or a district attorney, as defined in
subdivision thirty-two of section 1.20 of the  criminal  procedure  law,
requests  and  obtains  a  court order to compel a person to submit to a
chemical test to determine the alcoholic or drug content of the person's
blood upon a finding of reasonable cause to believe that:
  (1) [such person was the operator of a motor vehicle and in the course
of such operation a  person  other  than  the  operator  was  killed  or
suffered  serious  physical  injury  as  defined in section 10.00 of the
penal law; and
  (2)] a. either such person operated the vehicle in  violation  of  any
subdivision of section eleven hundred ninety-two of this article, or
  b.  a  breath test administered by a police officer in accordance with
paragraph (b) of subdivision one of this section indicates that  alcohol
has been consumed by such person; and
  [(3)] (2) such person has been placed under lawful arrest; and

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.

                                                           LBD09143-04-1

S. 3768--B                          2

  [(4)]  (3) such person has refused to submit to a chemical test or any
portion thereof, requested in accordance with the  provisions  of  para-
graph  (a)  of  subdivision  two  of  this  section or is unable to give
consent to such a test.
  S  2.  Subparagraphs  1  and  2  of  paragraph (b) of subdivision 2 of
section 1194 of the vehicle and traffic law, as amended by  chapter  196
of the laws of 1996, are amended to read as follows:
  (1)  If: (A) such person having been placed under arrest; or (B) after
a breath test indicates the presence of alcohol in the person's  system;
or  (C)  with  regard to a person under the age of twenty-one, there are
reasonable grounds to believe that such  person  has  been  operating  a
motor  vehicle  after  having  consumed  alcohol in violation of section
eleven hundred ninety-two-a of this article; and having thereafter  been
requested  to submit to such chemical test and having been informed that
the person's license or permit to drive and any  non-resident  operating
privilege  shall  be immediately suspended and subsequently revoked, or,
for operators under the age of twenty-one for whom there are  reasonable
grounds to believe that such operator has been operating a motor vehicle
after  having  consumed  alcohol  in violation of section eleven hundred
ninety-two-a of this article, shall be revoked for refusal to submit  to
such  chemical test or any portion thereof, whether or not the person is
found guilty of  the  charge  for  which  such  person  is  arrested  or
detained,  refuses to submit to such chemical test or any portion there-
of, [unless a court order has been granted pursuant to subdivision three
of this section, the test shall not be given and] a  written  report  of
such refusal shall be immediately made by the police officer before whom
such  refusal was made. Such report may be verified by having the report
sworn to, or by affixing to such report a form notice that false  state-
ments  made  therein are punishable as a class A misdemeanor pursuant to
section 210.45 of the penal law and such form notice together  with  the
subscription  of  the  deponent  shall  constitute a verification of the
report.
  (2) The report of  the  police  officer  shall  set  forth  reasonable
grounds  to  believe  such arrested person or such detained person under
the age of twenty-one had been driving in violation of  any  subdivision
of  section  eleven hundred ninety-two or eleven hundred ninety-two-a of
this article[,] AND that said person had refused to submit to such chem-
ical test[, and that no chemical test was administered pursuant  to  the
requirements  of subdivision three of this section]. The report shall be
presented to the court upon arraignment of an arrested person, provided,
however, in the case of a person under the age of twenty-one, for whom a
test was authorized pursuant to the provisions of  subparagraph  two  or
three  of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, and who has not been placed
under arrest for a violation of any of the provisions of section  eleven
hundred  ninety-two  of  this article, such report shall be forwarded to
the commissioner within forty-eight hours in a manner to  be  prescribed
by  the  commissioner,  and  all  subsequent  proceedings with regard to
refusal to submit to such chemical test by such person shall be  as  set
forth  in  subdivision  three of section eleven hundred ninety-four-a of
this article.
  S 3. This act shall take effect immediately.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Find your Senator and share your views on important issues.

Do you support this bill?

Senate Bill S3768B

Sponsored By

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Assembly Committee

Actions

Votes

Jan 24, 2012 - Floor Vote

Floor Vote: Jan 24, 2012

Jun 23, 2011 - Floor Vote

Floor Vote: Jun 23, 2011

Jan 18, 2012 - Transportation Committee Vote

Transportation Committee Vote: Jan 18, 2012

Apr 12, 2011 - Transportation Committee Vote

Transportation Committee Vote: Apr 12, 2011

Bill Amendments

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768 - Details

2011-S3768 - Summary

2011-S3768 - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768A - Details

2011-S3768A - Summary

2011-S3768A - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768A - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Details

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments

Do you support this bill?

Get Status Alerts for 2011-S3768B

Senate Bill S3768B

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Assembly Committee

Actions

Votes

Bill Amendments

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768 - Details

2011-S3768 - Summary

2011-S3768 - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768A - Details

2011-S3768A - Summary

2011-S3768A - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768A - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Details

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Summary

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2011-S3768B (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments