Howard - DUI PCA

HOWARD

PROSECUTION ALLEGATIONS

Your Honour, the defendant was observed to be travelling in a south-westerly direction on Sixth Avenue at Royston Park approaching the intersection of Sixth and Lambert Road, Royston Park.

Two uniformed police officers on duty observed the defendant mount and drive across the roundabout.

When stopped and spoken to by police she was observed to be grossly affected by alcohol, unable to speak clearly, unable to respond competently to what was being said to her and very unsteady on her feet.

The defendant was asked whether she knew where she was. The defendant responded that she thought she was on Fifth Avenue.

The police officers indicated that she had travelled across a roundabout, striking a small striped sign. The defendant stated that she thought that she was on Fifth Avenue and didn’t think there was a roundabout there.

A breath test resulted in a reading of 0.15%. The defendant was cooperative but appeared bewildered and uncertain of her surroundings.

The defendant has two prior convictions. The first relates to a speeding offence in January 2009. The second relates to a speeding offence in August 2008.

She was given an instant loss of licence for 6 months. The vehicle was impounded and police are seeking $903.60.

NOTE: IN THESE MATTERS, IF A PERSON IS CHARGED WITH DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND PLEADS GUILTY, THE PCA CHARGE IS WITHDRAWN.

DEFENCE SUBMISSIONS

Your Honour, the defendant is a 20 year old female law/economics student attending the Adelaide University. She commenced her degree in March 2010.

She lives at home with her parents at Marden and was hosting a party while her parents were away. The defendant was driving a friend home to a neighbouring suburb following the party. She unfortunately has very little recollection of the events surrounding this incident. The defendant had been drinking champagne. She believes she may not have had anything to eat, as she was busy hosting the party.

The defendant is financially dependent upon her parents. She earns approximately $120 per week in a waitressing job in a café in the City. Owing $3,000 for damage to her car, she has undertaken to recompense her parents for this amount.

The defendant is concerned about the effect of her conviction upon her ability to be admitted to the Bar upon completion of her law degree.

She is socially embarrassed by the occurrence of this incident and is very regretful of her behaviour.

/ COMPLAINT
Magistrates Court of South Australia
Summary Procedure Act, 1921
Sections 49 / Court Use
date filed
Complainant
Name: THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER OF THE POLICE FORCE
Address:ADELAIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION
Defendant
Name: HOWARD, Hula DOB......
Address:21 Cobalt Street
MARDEN, SA
Offence details

The Complaint of a Member of the Police Force of Adelaide this 24th

day of July 2012 who states that Hula Howard of 21 Cobalt Street, Marden on the same day at Royston Park
Drove a vehicle, namely a motor vehicle, on a road, namely Sixth Avenue while under the influence of intoxicating liquor as to be incapable of exercising effective control of the vehicle.
Section 47 of the Road Traffic Act 1961.
2.On the 15th day of March 2012 at Hindmarsh drove a motor vehicle on a road, namely Sixth Avenue, Royston Park, while there was present in her blood a prescribed concentration of alcohol.
It was further alleged that the prescribed concentration of alcohol was .15 grams in a hundred millilitres of blood.
Section 47B of the Road Traffic Act, 1961.
Other orders sought (forfeiture, compensation, additional penalty, destruction or the like – Rule 15.03)
......
DateComplainant Witness
(Registrar, Deputy Registrar or Justice of the Peace)
(Not required if Complainant is a Public Authority)

Road Traffic Act 1961

47—Driving under the influence

(1) A person must not—

(a) drive a vehicle; or

(b) attempt to put a vehicle in motion,

while so much under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug as to be incapable of exercising effective control of the vehicle.

Penalty:

(a) if the vehicle concerned was a motor vehicle—

(i) for a first offence—

(A) a fine of not less than $1 100 and not more than $1600; or

(B) imprisonment for not more than 3months; and

(ii) for a subsequent offence—

(A) a fine of not less than $1900 and not more than $2900; or

(B) imprisonment for not more than 6months;

(b) if the vehicle concerned was not a motor vehicle—$500.

(2) For the purposes of subsection(1), a person is incapable ofexercising effective control of a vehicle if, owing to the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug, the use of any mental or physical faculty of that person is lost or appreciably impaired.

(3) Where a court convicts a person of an offence against subsection(1) in which the vehicle concerned was a motor vehicle, the following provisions apply:

(a) the court must order that the person be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence—

(i) in the case of a first offence—for such period, being not less than twelve months as the court thinks fit; or

(ii) in the case of a subsequent offence—for such period, being not less than three years, as the court thinks fit;

(b) the disqualification prescribed by paragraph(a) cannot be reduced or mitigated in any way or be substituted by any other penalty or sentence unless, in the case of a first offence, the court is satisfied, by evidence given on oath, that the offence is trifling, in which case it may order a period of disqualification that is less than the prescribed minimum period but not less than one month;

(d) if the person is the holder of a driver's licence—the disqualification operates to cancel the licence as from the commencement of the period of disqualification;

(e) the court may, if it thinks fit to do so, order that conditions imposed by section 81A or 81AB of the Motor Vehicles Act1959 on any driver's licence issued to the person after the period of disqualification be effective for a period greater than the period prescribed by that section.

(4) In determining whether an offence is a first or subsequent offence for the purposes of this section, any previous drink driving offence or drug driving offence for which the defendant has been convicted will be taken into account, but only if the previous offence was committed within the prescribed period immediately preceding the date on which the offence under consideration was committed.

47B—Driving while having prescribed concentration of alcohol in blood

(1) A person must not—

(a) drive a motor vehicle; or

(b) attempt to put a motor vehicle in motion,

while there is present in his or her blood the prescribed concentration ofalcohol as defined in section47A.

Penalty:

(a) for a first offence—

(i) being a category 1 offence—$1 100;

(ii) being a category 2 offence—a fine of not less than $900 and not more than $1300;

(iii) being a category 3 offence—a fine of not less than $1100 and not more than $1600;

(b) for a second offence—

(i) being a category 1 offence—$1 100;

(ii) being a category 2 offence—a fine of not less than $1100 and not more than $1600;

(iii) being a category 3 offence—a fine of not less than $1600 and not more than $2400;

(i) being a category 1 offence—$1 100;

(ii) being a category 2 offence—a fine of not less than $1500 and not more than $2200;

(iii) being a category 3 offence—a fine of not less than $1900 and not more than $2900.

(3) Where a court convicts a person of an offence against subsection(1), the following provisions apply:

(a) the court must order that the person be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence—

(i) in the case of a first offence—

(AA) being a category 1 offence—for such period, being not less than 3months, as the court thinks fit;

(A) being a category 2 offence—for such period, being not less than 6 months, as the court thinks fit;

(B) being a category 3 offence—for such period, being not less than 12 months, as the court thinks fit;

(ii) in the case of a second offence—

(A) being a category 1 offence—for such period, being not less than 6 months, as the court thinks fit;

(B) being a category 2 offence—for such period, being not less than 12 months, as the court thinks fit;

(iii) in the case of a third offence—

(A) being a category 1 offence—for such period, being not less than 9 months, as the court thinks fit;

(B) being a category 2 offence—for such period, being not less than 2 years, as the court thinks fit;

(iv) in the case of a subsequent offence—

(A) being a category 1 offence—for such period, being not less than 12 months, as the court thinks fit;

(B) being a category 2 offence—for such period, being not less than 2 years, as the court thinks fit;

(d) if the person is the holder of a driver's licence—the disqualification operates to cancel the licence as from the commencement of the period of disqualification;

(4) In determining whether an offence is a first, second, third or subsequent offence for the purposes of this section (other than subsection(5)), any previous drinkdriving offence or drug driving offence for which the defendant has been convicted will be taken into account, but only if the previous offence was committed within the prescribed period immediately preceding the date on which the offence under consideration was committed.

(5) If a person aged 16 years or more is alleged to have committed a category 1 offence that is a first offence, the person cannot be prosecuted for that offence unless he or she has been given an expiation notice under the Expiation of Offences Act1996 in respect of the offence and allowed the opportunity to expiate the offence in accordance with that Act.

(6) In determining whether a category 1 offence is a first offence for the purposes of subsection(5), any previous drink driving offence or drug driving offence for which the defendant has been convicted or that the defendant has expiated will be taken into account, but only if the previous offence was committed or alleged to have been committed within the prescribed period immediately preceding the date on which the offence under consideration was allegedly committed.