343.305(8)(b)2.b.
b. Whether the person was informed of the options regarding tests under this section as required under sub.
(4).
343.305(8)(b)2.bm.
bm. Whether the person had a prohibited alcohol concentration or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood at the time the offense allegedly occurred.
343.305(8)(b)2.c.
c. Whether one or more tests were administered in accordance with this section.
343.305(8)(b)2.d.
d. If one or more tests were administered in accordance with this section, whether each of the test results for those tests indicate the person had a prohibited alcohol concentration or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.
343.305(8)(b)2.f.
f. Whether the person was driving or operating a commercial motor vehicle when the offense allegedly occurred.
343.305(8)(b)2.g.
g. Whether the person had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in a case in which subd.
4m. a. and
b. apply.
343.305(8)(b)3.
3. The hearing examiner shall conduct the administrative hearing in an informal manner. No testimony given by any witness may be used in any subsequent action or proceeding. The hearing examiner may permit testimony by telephone if the site of the administrative hearing is equipped with telephone facilities to allow multiple party conversations.
343.305(8)(b)4.
4. The hearing examiner shall consider and determine the reliability of all of the evidence presented at the administrative hearing. Statements and reports of law enforcement officers are subject to the same standards of credibility applied to all other evidence presented.
343.305(8)(b)4m.
4m. If, at the time the offense allegedly occurred, all of the following apply, the hearing officer shall determine whether the person had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol:
343.305(8)(b)4m.a.
a. A blood test administered in accordance with this section indicated that the person had a detectable amount of methamphetamine, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol but did not have a detectable amount of any other restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.
343.305(8)(b)4m.b.
b. No test administered in accordance with this section indicated that the person had a prohibited alcohol concentration.
343.305(8)(b)5.
5. If the hearing examiner finds that any of the following applies, the examiner shall order that the administrative suspension of the person's operating privilege be rescinded without payment of any fee under s.
343.21 (1) (j),
(jr), or
(n):
343.305(8)(b)5.a.
a. The criteria for administrative suspension have not been satisfied.
343.305(8)(b)5.b.
b. The person did not have a prohibited alcohol concentration or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood at the time the offense allegedly occurred.
343.305(8)(b)5.c.
c. In a case in which subd.
4m. a. and
b. apply, the person had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
343.305(8)(b)6.
6. If the hearing examiner finds that all of the following apply, the administrative suspension shall continue regardless of the type of vehicle driven or operated at the time of the violation:
343.305(8)(b)6.b.
b. The person had a prohibited alcohol concentration or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood at the time the offense allegedly occurred.
343.305(8)(b)6.c.
c. In a case in which subd.
4m. a. and
b. apply, the person did not have a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
343.305(8)(b)7.
7. The hearing examiner shall notify the person in writing of the hearing decision, of the right to judicial review and of the court's authority to issue a stay of the suspension under par.
(c). The administrative suspension is vacated and the person's operating privilege shall be automatically reinstated under s.
343.39 if the hearing examiner fails to mail this notice to the person within 30 days after the date of the notification under par.
(a).
343.305(8)(c)1.1. An individual aggrieved by the determination of the hearing examiner may have the determination reviewed by the court hearing the action relating to the applicable violation listed under sub.
(3) (a),
(am), or
(ar). If the individual seeks judicial review, he or she must file the request for judicial review with the court within 20 days of the issuance of the hearing examiner's decision. The court shall send a copy of that request to the department. The judicial review shall be conducted at the time of the trial of the underlying offense under s.
346.63. The prosecutor of the underlying offense shall represent the interests of the department.
343.305(8)(c)2.
2. The court shall order that the administrative suspension be either rescinded or sustained and forward its order to the department. The department shall vacate the administrative suspension under sub.
(7) unless, within 60 days of the date of the request for judicial review of the administrative hearing decision, the department has been notified of the result of the judicial review or of an order of the court entering a stay of the hearing examiner's order continuing the suspension.
343.305(8)(c)3.
3. Any party aggrieved by the order of a circuit court under subd.
2. may appeal to the court of appeals. Any party aggrieved by the order of a municipal court under subd. 2 may appeal to the circuit court for the county where the offense allegedly occurred.
343.305(8)(c)4.
4. A request for judicial review under this subsection does not stay any administrative suspension order.
343.305(8)(c)5.
5. If any court orders under this subsection that the administrative suspension of the person's operating privilege be rescinded, the person need not pay any fee under s.
343.21 (1) (j),
(jr), or
(n).
343.305(8)(d)
(d) A person who has his or her operating privilege administratively suspended under this subsection and sub.
(7) (a) is eligible for an occupational license under s.
343.10 at any time.
343.305(9)
(9) Refusals; notice and court hearing. 343.305(9)(a)(a) If a person refuses to take a test under sub.
(3) (a), the law enforcement officer shall immediately prepare a notice of intent to revoke, by court order under sub.
(10), the person's operating privilege. If the person was driving or operating a commercial motor vehicle, the officer shall issue an out-of-service order to the person for the 24 hours after the refusal and notify the department in the manner prescribed by the department. The officer shall issue a copy of the notice of intent to revoke the privilege to the person and submit or mail a copy to the circuit court for the county in which the arrest under sub.
(3) (a) was made or to the municipal court in the municipality in which the arrest was made if the arrest was for a violation of a municipal ordinance under sub.
(3) (a) and the municipality has a municipal court. The officer shall also mail a copy of the notice of intent to revoke to the attorney for that municipality or to the district attorney for that county, as appropriate, and to the department. Neither party is entitled to pretrial discovery in any refusal hearing, except that, if the defendant moves within 30 days after the initial appearance in person or by an attorney and shows cause therefor, the court may order that the defendant be allowed to inspect documents, including lists of names and addresses of witnesses, if available, and to test under s.
804.09, under such conditions as the court prescribes, any devices used by the plaintiff to determine whether a violation has been committed. The notice of intent to revoke the person's operating privilege shall contain substantially all of the following information:
343.305(9)(a)4.
4. That the person may request a hearing on the revocation within 10 days by mailing or delivering a written request to the court whose address is specified in the notice. If no request for a hearing is received within the 10-day period, the revocation period commences 30 days after the notice is issued.
343.305(9)(a)5.a.
a. Whether the officer had probable cause to believe the person was driving or operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, a controlled substance or a controlled substance analog or any combination of alcohol, a controlled substance and a controlled substance analog, under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders the person incapable of safely driving, or under the combined influence of alcohol and any other drug to a degree which renders the person incapable of safely driving, having a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, or having a prohibited alcohol concentration or, if the person was driving or operating a commercial motor vehicle, an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or more and whether the person was lawfully placed under arrest for violation of s.
346.63 (1),
(2m) or
(5) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith or s.
346.63 (2) or
(6),
940.09 (1) or
940.25.
343.305(9)(a)5.c.
c. Whether the person refused to permit the test. The person shall not be considered to have refused the test if it is shown by a preponderance of evidence that the refusal was due to a physical inability to submit to the test due to a physical disability or disease unrelated to the use of alcohol, controlled substances, controlled substance analogs or other drugs.
343.305(9)(a)6.
6. That, if it is determined that the person refused the test, there will be an order for the person to comply with assessment and a driver safety plan.
343.305(9)(am)
(am) If a person driving or operating or on duty time with respect to a commercial motor vehicle refuses a test under sub.
(3) (am), the law enforcement officer shall immediately issue an out-of-service order to the person for the 24 hours after the refusal and notify the department in the manner prescribed by the department, and prepare a notice of intent to revoke, by court order under sub.
(10), the person's operating privilege. The officer shall issue a copy of the notice of intent to revoke the privilege to the person and submit or mail a copy to the circuit court for the county in which the refusal is made or to the municipal court in the municipality in which the refusal is made if the person's refusal was in violation of a municipal ordinance and the municipality has a municipal court. The officer shall also mail a copy of the notice of intent to revoke to the attorney for that municipality or to the district attorney for that county, as appropriate, and to the department. Neither party is entitled to pretrial discovery in any refusal hearing, except that, if the defendant moves within 30 days after the initial appearance in person or by an attorney and shows cause therefor, the court may order that the defendant be allowed to inspect documents, including lists of names and addresses of witnesses, if available, and to test under s.
804.09, under such conditions as the court prescribes, any devices used by the plaintiff to determine whether a violation has been committed. The notice of intent to revoke the person's operating privilege shall contain substantially all of the following information:
343.305(9)(am)1.
1. That the officer has issued an out-of-service order to the person for the 24 hours after the refusal, specifying the date and time of issuance.
343.305(9)(am)4.
4. That the person may request a hearing on the revocation within 10 days by mailing or delivering a written request to the court whose address is specified in the notice. If no request for a hearing is received within the 10-day period, the revocation period commences 30 days after the notice is issued.
343.305(9)(am)5.a.
a. Whether the officer detected any presence of alcohol, controlled substance, controlled substance analog or other drug, or a combination thereof, on the person or had reason to believe that the person was violating or had violated s.
346.63 (7).
343.305(9)(am)5.c.
c. Whether the person refused to permit the test. The person shall not be considered to have refused the test if it is shown by a preponderance of evidence that the refusal was due to a physical inability to submit to the test due to a physical disability or disease unrelated to the use of alcohol, controlled substances, controlled substance analogs or other drugs.
343.305(9)(am)6.
6. That if it is determined that the person refused the test there will be an order for the person to comply with assessment and a driver safety plan.
343.305(9)(b)
(b) The use of the notice under par.
(a) or
(am) by a law enforcement officer in connection with the enforcement of this section is adequate process to give the appropriate court jurisdiction over the person.
343.305(9)(c)
(c) If a law enforcement officer informs the circuit or municipal court that a person has refused to submit to a test under sub.
(3) (a),
(am), or
(ar), the court shall be prepared to hold any requested hearing to determine if the refusal was proper. The scope of the hearing shall be limited to the issues outlined in par.
(a) 5. or
(am) 5. Section
967.055 applies to any hearing under this subsection.
343.305(9)(d)
(d) At the close of the hearing, or within 5 days thereafter, the court shall determine the issues under par.
(a) 5. or
(am) 5. If all issues are determined adversely to the person, the court shall proceed under sub.
(10). If one or more of the issues is determined favorably to the person, the court shall order that no action be taken on the operating privilege on account of the person's refusal to take the test in question. This section does not preclude the prosecution of the person for violation of s.
346.63 (1),
(2m),
(5) or
(7) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith, or s.
346.63 (2) or
(6),
940.09 (1) or
940.25.
343.305(10)(a)(a) If the court determines under sub.
(9) (d) that a person improperly refused to take a test or if the person does not request a hearing within 10 days after the person has been served with the notice of intent to revoke the person's operating privilege, the court shall proceed under this subsection. If no hearing was requested, the revocation period shall begin 30 days after the date of the refusal. If a hearing was requested, the revocation period shall commence 30 days after the date of refusal or immediately upon a final determination that the refusal was improper, whichever is later.
343.305(10)(b)1.1. Except as provided in subds.
3. and
4., the court shall revoke the person's operating privilege under this paragraph according to the number of previous suspensions, revocations or convictions that would be counted under s.
343.307 (2). Suspensions, revocations and convictions arising out of the same incident shall be counted as one. If a person has a conviction, suspension or revocation for any offense that is counted under s.
343.307 (2), that conviction, suspension or revocation shall count as a prior conviction, suspension or revocation under this subdivision.
343.305(10)(b)2.
2. Except as provided in subd.
3.,
4. or
4m., for the first improper refusal, the court shall revoke the person's operating privilege for one year. After the first 30 days of the revocation period, the person is eligible for an occupational license under s.
343.10.
343.305(10)(b)3.
3. Except as provided in subd.
4m., if the number of convictions under ss.
940.09 (1) and
940.25 in the person's lifetime, plus the total number of other convictions, suspensions, and revocations counted under s.
343.307 (2) within a 10-year period, equals 2, the court shall revoke the person's operating privilege for 2 years. After the first 90 days of the revocation period or, if the total number of convictions, suspensions, and revocations counted under this subdivision within any 5-year period equals 2 or more, after one year of the revocation period has elapsed, the person is eligible for an occupational license under s.
343.10 if he or she has completed the assessment and is complying with the driver safety plan.
343.305(10)(b)4.
4. Except as provided in subd.
4m., if the number of convictions under ss.
940.09 (1) and
940.25 in the person's lifetime, plus the total number of other convictions, suspensions, and revocations counted under s.
343.307 (2), equals 3 or more, the court shall revoke the person's operating privilege for 3 years. After the first 120 days of the revocation period or, if the total number of convictions, suspensions, and revocations counted under this subdivision within any 5-year period equals 2 or more, after one year of the revocation period has elapsed, the person is eligible for an occupational license under s.
343.10 if he or she has completed the assessment and is complying with the driver safety plan.
343.305(10)(b)4m.
4m. If there was a minor passenger under 16 years of age in the motor vehicle at the time of the incident that gave rise to the improper refusal, the applicable minimum and maximum revocation periods under subd.
2.,
3. or
4. for the improper refusal are doubled.
343.305(10)(b)5.
5. The time period under this paragraph shall be measured from the dates of the refusals or violations which resulted in revocations or convictions.
343.305(10)(c)1.1. Except as provided in subd.
1. a. or
b., the court shall order the person to submit to and comply with an assessment by an approved public treatment facility as defined in s.
51.45 (2) (c) for examination of the person's use of alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs and development of a driver safety plan for the person. The court shall notify the person and the department of transportation of the assessment order. The court shall also notify the person that noncompliance with assessment or the driver safety plan will result in license suspension until the person is in compliance. The assessment order shall:
343.305(10)(c)1.a.
a. If the person is a resident, refer the person to an approved public treatment facility in the county in which the person resides. The facility named in the order may provide for assessment of the person in another approved public treatment facility. The order shall provide that if the person is temporarily residing in another state, the facility named in the order may refer the person to an appropriate treatment facility in that state for assessment and development of a driver safety plan for the person satisfying the requirements of that state.
343.305(10)(c)1.b.
b. If the person is a nonresident, refer the person to an approved public treatment facility in this state. The order shall provide that the facility named in the order may refer the person to an appropriate treatment facility in the state in which the person resides for assessment and development of a driver safety plan for the person satisfying the requirements of that state.
343.305(10)(c)1.c.
c. Require a person who is referred to a treatment facility in another state under subd.
1. a. or
b. to furnish the department written verification of his or her compliance from the agency which administers the assessment and driver safety plan program. The person shall provide initial verification of compliance within 60 days after the date of his or her conviction. The requirement to furnish verification of compliance may be satisfied by receipt by the department of such verification from the agency which administers the assessment and driver safety plan program.
343.305(10)(c)2.
2. The department of health services shall establish standards for assessment procedures and the driver safety plan programs by rule. The department of health services shall establish by rule conflict of interest guidelines for providers.
343.305(10)(c)3.
3. Prior to developing a plan which specifies treatment, the facility shall make a finding that treatment is necessary and appropriate services are available. The facility shall submit a report of the assessment and the driver safety plan within 14 days to the county department under s.
51.42, the plan provider, the department of transportation and the person, except that upon request by the facility and the person, the county department may extend the period for assessment for not more than 20 additional workdays. The county department shall notify the department of transportation regarding any such extension.
343.305(10)(d)
(d) The assessment report shall order compliance with a driver safety plan. The report shall inform the person of the fee provisions under s.
46.03 (18) (f). The driver safety plan may include a component that makes the person aware of the effect of his or her offense on a victim and a victim's family. The driver safety plan may include treatment for the person's misuse, abuse or dependence on alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs, attendance at a school under s.
345.60, or both. If the plan requires inpatient treatment, the treatment shall not exceed 30 days. A driver safety plan under this paragraph shall include a termination date consistent with the plan which shall not extend beyond one year. The county department under s.
51.42 shall assure notification of the department of transportation and the person of the person's compliance or noncompliance with assessment and treatment. The school under s.
345.60 shall notify the department, the county department under s.
51.42 and the person of the person's compliance or noncompliance with the requirements of the school. Nonpayment of the assessment fee or, if the person has the ability to pay, nonpayment of the driver safety plan fee is noncompliance with the court order. If the department is notified of noncompliance, other than for nonpayment of the assessment fee or driver safety plan fee, it shall revoke the person's operating privilege until the county department under s.
51.42 or the school under s.
345.60 notifies the department that the person is in compliance with assessment or the driver safety plan. If the department is notified that a person has not paid the assessment fee, or that a person with the ability to pay has not paid the driver safety plan fee, the department shall suspend the person's operating privilege for a period of 2 years or until it receives notice that the person has paid the fee, whichever occurs first. The department shall notify the person of the suspension or revocation, the reason for the suspension or revocation and the person's right to a review. A person may request a review of a revocation based upon failure to comply with a driver safety plan within 10 days of notification. The review shall be handled by the subunit of the department of transportation designated by the secretary. The issues at the review are limited to whether the driver safety plan, if challenged, is appropriate and whether the person is in compliance with the assessment order or the driver safety plan. The review shall be conducted within 10 days after a request is received. If the driver safety plan is determined to be inappropriate, the department shall order a reassessment and if the person is otherwise eligible, the department shall reinstate the person's operating privilege. If the person is determined to be in compliance with the assessment or driver safety plan, and if the person is otherwise eligible, the department shall reinstate the person's operating privilege. If there is no decision within the 10-day period, the department shall issue an order reinstating the person's operating privilege until the review is completed, unless the delay is at the request of the person seeking the review.
343.305(10)(e)
(e) Notwithstanding par.
(c), if the court finds that the person is already covered by an assessment or is participating in a driver safety plan or has had evidence presented to it by a county department under s.
51.42 that the person has recently completed assessment, a driver safety plan or both, the court is not required to make an order under par.
(c). This paragraph does not prohibit the court from making an order under par.
(c), if it deems such an order advisable.
343.305(10)(em)
(em) One penalty for improperly refusing to submit to a test for intoxication regarding a person arrested for a violation of s.
346.63 (2m) or
(7) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith is revocation of the person's operating privilege for 6 months. If there was a minor passenger under 16 years of age in the motor vehicle at the time of the incident that gave rise to the improper refusal, the revocation period is 12 months. After the first 15 days of the revocation period, the person is eligible for an occupational license under s.
343.10. Any such improper refusal or revocation for the refusal does not count as a prior refusal or a prior revocation under this section or ss.
343.30 (1q),
343.307 and
346.65 (2). The person shall not be required to submit to and comply with any assessment or driver safety plan under pars.
(c) and
(d).
343.305(10)(f)
(f) The department may make any order which the court is authorized or required to make under this subsection if the court fails to do so.
343.305(10)(g)
(g) The court or department shall provide that the period of suspension or revocation imposed under this subsection or under sub.
(7) shall be reduced by any period of suspension or revocation previously served under s.
343.30 (1p) or
(1q) if both suspensions or revocations arose out of the same incident or occurrence. The court or department shall order that the period of suspension or revocation imposed under this subsection or sub.
(7) run concurrently with any time remaining on a suspension or revocation imposed under s.
343.30 (1p) or
(1q) arising out of the same incident or occurrence.
343.305(10g)
(10g) Suspensions and revocations; extensions. For any suspension or revocation the court orders under sub.
(10), the court shall extend the suspension or revocation period by the number of days to which the court sentences the person to imprisonment in a jail or prison.
343.305(10m)
(10m) Refusals; ignition interlock of a motor vehicle. The requirements and procedures for installation of an ignition interlock device under s.
343.301 apply when an operating privilege is revoked under sub.
(10).
343.305(11)
(11) Rules. The department shall promulgate rules under ch.
227 necessary to administer this section. The rules shall include provisions relating to the expeditious exchange of information under this section between the department and law enforcement agencies, circuit courts, municipal courts, attorneys who represent municipalities, district attorneys, and driver licensing agencies of other jurisdictions. The rules may not affect any provisions relating to court procedure.
343.305 History
History: 1987 a. 3,
27,
399;
1989 a. 7,
31,
56,
105,
359;
1991 a. 39,
251,
277;
1993 a. 16,
105,
315,
317,
491;
1995 a. 27 ss.
6412cnL,
9126 (19);
1995 a. 113,
269,
425,
426,
436,
448;
1997 a. 35,
84,
107,
191,
237,
290;
1999 a. 9,
32,
109;
2001 a. 16 ss.
3421m to
3423j,
4060gk,
4060hw,
4060hy;
2001 a. 104;
2003 a. 97,
199;
2005 a. 332,
413;
2007 a. 20 ss.
3303 to
3315,
9121 (6) (a);
2007 a. 136;
2009 a. 100,
103,
163;
2011 a. 120,
242;
2013 a. 36,
224;
2017 a. 331.
343.305 Cross-reference
Cross-reference: See also chs.
DHS 62 and
Trans 107 and
113, Wis. adm. code.
343.305 Annotation
Administration of a blood or breathalyzer test does not violate a defendant's privilege against self-incrimination. State v. Driver,
59 Wis. 2d 35,
207 N.W.2d 850 (1973).
343.305 Annotation
The implied consent law must be liberally construed to effectuate its policies since it was intended to facilitate the taking of tests for intoxication and not to inhibit the ability of the state to remove drunken drivers from the highway. Scales v. State,
64 Wis. 2d 485,
219 N.W.2d 286 (1974).
343.305 Annotation
Miranda warnings are not required when an arrested driver is asked to submit to a test for intoxication under the implied consent statute. State v. Bunders,
68 Wis. 2d 129,
227 N.W.2d 727 (1975).
343.305 Annotation
There is no right to counsel prior to submitting to an intoxication test. A driver is obliged to promptly take or refuse the test. State v. Neitzel,
95 Wis. 2d 191,
289 N.W.2d 828 (1980).
343.305 Annotation
The state need not prove that notices were sent to state officers under sub. (3) (b), 1985 stats. [now sub. (9) (a)]. State v. Polinski,
96 Wis. 2d 43,
291 N.W.2d 465 (1980).
343.305 Annotation
When an officer initially requested a breath test, it was not an irrevocable election preventing the officer from requesting a urine test instead. The driver's refusal to submit urine justified revocation of his driver's license. State v. Pawlow,
98 Wis. 2d 703,
298 N.W.2d 220 (Ct. App. 1980).
343.305 Annotation
The state need not affirmatively prove compliance with administrative code procedures as a foundation for admission of a breathalyzer test. City of New Berlin v. Wertz,
105 Wis. 2d 670,
314 N.W.2d 911 (Ct. App. 1981).
343.305 Annotation
When a driver pled guilty to the underlying OWI charge, a charge of refusing a test under s. 343.305, 1979 stats., was properly dismissed as unnecessary. State v. Brooks,
113 Wis. 2d 347,
335 N.W.2d 354 (1983).
343.305 Annotation
A breathalyzer approved in the administrative code has a prima facie presumption of accuracy. State v. Dwinell,
119 Wis. 2d 305,
349 N.W.2d 739 (Ct. App. 1984).
343.305 Annotation
When blood alcohol content is tested under statutory procedures, the results of the test are mandatorily admissible. The physical sample tested is not evidence intended, required, or even susceptible of being produced by state under s. 971.23. State v. Ehlen,
119 Wis. 2d 451,
351 N.W.2d 503 (1984).
