The potential impact and legal feasibility of requiring alcohol testing of all drivers in fatal crashes in Virginia.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates
...

to

...
Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
...
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

ROSA P serves as an archival repository of USDOT-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other information authored or co-authored by USDOT or funded partners. As a repository, ROSA P retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i

The potential impact and legal feasibility of requiring alcohol testing of all drivers in fatal crashes in Virginia.



English
Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Creators:
    Beaton, Jason S
  • Corporate Creators:
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
    VTRC 06-R7
  • Resource Type:
    Tech Report
  • Geographical Coverage:
    Virginia
  • Edition:
    Final report.
  • Corporate Publisher:
    Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC)
  • Abstract:
    This report addresses how the Code of Virginia can be changed to improve Virginia's rate of testing for blood alcohol concentration (BAC) among drivers involved in crashes where there is a fatality. Currently, the implied consent statute in the Code mandates that a BAC test be conducted only after an arrest has been made. A review of U.S. Supreme Court cases and state law demonstrates that there are three options for modifying the implied consent statute. The first option is to require BAC testing of all drivers involved in a crash where there is a fatality but allow the results to be admissible in court as evidence against the dri ver only if probable cause exists independent of the test results. However, because a challenge to such a statute would present a constitutional search and seizure issue of first impression in Virginia's courts, the outcome of such a challenge cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty. The second option is to require BAC testing of all drivers involved in a crash where there is a fatality and some level of suspicion that does not amount to probable cause that the driver was committing the offense of driving under the influence of alcohol. However, although such a law is more likely to be upheld, there is still some risk that it would be found unconstitutional. If the Virginia legislature is risk-averse and is unwilling to make a change that might be declared unconstitutional by the courts, the third option is to amend the Code to require BAC testing where there is probable cause to believe that the driver is under the influence and a person has been seriously or fatally injured. Although this approach would be constitutionally safer, it would not be as effective as the first and second options for increasing the rate of BAC testing
  • Format:
    PDF
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:
    Filetype[PDF-323.78 KB]

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov