Saturday, August 28, 2010

Florida's Department of Motor Vehicles recently changed its policy on temporary licenses for drivers accused of driving under the influence (DUI). The new rule is well-intentioned -- but flawed.

In our opinion, this new policy represents a needless burden on drivers accused of DUI, especially those who must drive a car or truck as a requirement of their employment.

Under the new rule, the accused must petition the court for a temporary and severely limited driver's license just to travel to and from work -- even if a law enforcement officer fails to show up to participate in the defendant's scheduled license hearing. Under the old rule, a limited, temporary license was automatically granted if the law enforcement officer did not show up to object.

Frankly, we prefer the old rule. In our opinion, the overriding issue is justice, not procedure. The court has more than sufficient discretion to keep potentially dangerous drivers or habitual drunks off our roads, whether or not an officer testifies.

Our objection simply reflects the fact that in too many cases, and for a myriad of reasons, the law officer is not always available to attend the accused's hearing. As a consequence, drivers accused of DUI may lose their ability to get to their jobs -- and possibly their source of income as a result -- despite the absence of compelling testimony against them.

In short, the new rule harbors the possibility of being grossly unfair -- in a worst-case scenario, a defendant deprived of income could be rendered homeless before having his or her day in court.

The Department of Motor Vehicles has always been, and continues to be, diligent about its responsibility for highway safety. It is a never-ending task made ever more difficult as population growth inevitably adds more and more traffic to our roadways.

But this time, we believe the department's new ruling may do more harm than good.

-- The Citizen