53 RI Bar J., No. 6, Pg. 11 (May/June 2005). The Potential Impact Of State v. Delbonis On Prior Drunk Driving Convictions From 2000 to 2003.

• Author: Richard S. Humphrey, Esq., Robert H. Humphrey, Esq., And Stefanie A. Murphy

Rhode Island Bar Journal

Volume 53.

53 RI Bar J., No. 6, Pg. 11 (May/June 2005).

The Potential Impact Of State v. Delbonis On Prior Drunk Driving Convictions From 2000 to 2003

May/June 2005 pg. 11

The Potential Impact Of State v. Delbonis On Prior Drunk Driving Convictions From 2000 to 2003Richard S. Humphrey, Esq., Robert H. Humphrey, Esq., And Stefanie A. MurphyRichard S. Humphrey, Esq. and Robert H. Humphrey, Esq. practice law in Tiverton.

Stephanie A. Murphy is a third-year law student at Roger Williams University School of Law.

1. Introduction

   Late last term, the Rhode Island Supreme Court issued its decision in State v. DelBonis, 862 A.2d 760 (R.I. 2004). The decision affirmed what many trial judges had already concluded - that the Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) statute (R.I. Gen Laws 31-27-2), in effect from roughly 2000 to 2003, did not impose a criminal penalty for drunk driving cases based solely on observation/opinion evidence. In other words, in the absence of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) evidence, a motorist could not be criminally sentenced because the penalty for violating the law was tied to a specific BAC. If a sentence cannot be imposed, there can be no crime.

2. State V. Delbonis

   In DelBonis, there was no evidence - by way of direct evidence, circumstantial evidence or expert testimony - demonstrating the defendant's BAC was .1 percent or greater. Nonetheless, the trial court justice "imposed sanctions for what he characterized as non-breathalyzer conviction." Id. at 770. The Supreme Court vacated the conviction and remanded the case with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal for the defendant. Mr. DelBonis should not have been convicted (or punished) because, under the previous DWI statute, a penalty could not be applied without evidence of Mr. DelBonis' BAC.

   The DelBonis Court zeroed in on the not-so-subtle distinctions of DWI offenses when it stated:

   . . . the Legislature created two categories of DUI [Driving Under the Influence] offenses: civil violations, if the offender's BAC is .08 percent or greater but less than .1 percent; and misdemeanor offenses, when his or her BAC is .1 percent or greater. In addition to explicitly setting for the elements of a misdemeanor offense of DUI that is tied to an offender's BAC, the statute's penalty section was also significantly amended to provide for a...