I've noticed through looking at various county clerk websites that a majority of arrests are vehicle related with the primary one being Driving Under the Influence or Driving While Intoxicated.

While a DUI is considered a misdemeanor, I was wondering if judges imposed stiffer sentences/penalties for those offenders as opposed to offenders charged with a felony? I can't imagine how tired the courts must be of seeing the same charge and even the same faces pass through there all the time. For those in the know, is that usually the case? Stiffer penalties?

Driving under the influence is not a misdemeanor here in Ontario, it is zero tolerance siituation as far as driving while intoxicated is concerned. I would consider losing ones licence a pretty stiff penalty, especially if vehicular manslaughter is involved because of a DUI.

I've noticed through looking at various county clerk websites that a majority of arrests are vehicle related with the primary one being Driving Under the Influence or Driving While Intoxicated.

While a DUI is considered a misdemeanor, I was wondering if judges imposed stiffer sentences/penalties for those offenders as opposed to offenders charged with a felony? I can't imagine how tired the courts must be of seeing the same charge and even the same faces pass through there all the time. For those in the know, is that usually the case? Stiffer penalties?

Just for clarification here, are you asking about people being imposed a stiffer penalty for a DUI because they have already been convicted of some other kind of felony that had nothing to do with driving under the influence?

By the way, where I live, which is in Illinois, a DUI may be considered a felony if certain conditions exist.

Just for clarification here, are you asking about people being imposed a stiffer penalty for a DUI because they have already been convicted of some other kind of felony that had nothing to do with driving under the influence?

By the way, where I live, which is in Illinois, a DUI may be considered a felony if certain conditions exist.

I'm asking if DUI offenders (primarily first-timers) are given harsher punishments because of the rate of the arrests involved with DUI. It seems that courtrooms are flooded with DUI offenders and re-offenders more so than any other types of offenders.

The question arose while I was looking at several clerk of court sites under arrests and was astonished to see how many DUI arrests have been made compared to let's say petty theft, battery, etc..

At least in the states in the US where I have been a officer or worked with the courts, first time DUI people get almost no punishment what so ever. Few ever see a day of jail unless they were held by police on the day they were arrested. Many may have their license suspended, but just keep driving anyway. They will normally have a fine to pay and be put on probation. Second and third time are finally getting harder punishmnents but still not near hard enough

Hello in:

I think you are suggesting (or wondering if) judges are getting tired of seeing so many DUI cases and have taken the situation in hand and are starting to hand out stiffer sentences to first time offenders in the hope of preventing a second time.

Frankly, I think judges see the same crimes (in addition to DUI) every day. I don't think that fact changes the way the hand out sentences. At least I hope not.

That would actually be a legislative task, and I think most judges think it is too. So, I think judges will continue to hand out the same sentences they always have until the law changes.

excon