In Oklahoma, it is unlawful for any person to drive, operate, or be in actual physical control of a motor vehicle within this state, whether upon public roads, highways, streets, turnpikes, other public places or upon any private road, street, alley or lane which provides access to one or more single or multi-family dwellings, who is under the influence of any intoxicating substance other than alcohol which may render such person incapable of safely driving or operating a motor vehicle. Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 47, § 11-902 (West 2009).
In Oklahoma, it is a crime to operate a motor vehicle if one has any detectable amount of THC and/or its inactive metabolites in his/her blood, saliva, or urine. The law took effect on October 1, 2013.
The fact that any person charged with a violation of this section is or has been lawfully entitled to use alcohol or a controlled dangerous substance or any other intoxicating substance shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section. Id. § 8-1567(c).
- Any person who operates a motor vehicle upon the public roads, highways, streets, turnpikes or other public place or upon any private road, street, alley or lane which provides access to one or more single or multi-family dwellings within this state shall be deemed to have given consent to a test or tests of such person’s blood, saliva or urine for determining the presence or concentration of any intoxicating substance if arrested for any offense arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while the person was operating or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other intoxicating substance, or the combined influence of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance. Id. § 751.
- If a conscious person under arrest refuses to submit to testing of his or her blood or breath for the purpose of determining the alcohol concentration thereof, or to a test of his or her blood, saliva or urine for the purpose of determining the presence or concentration of any other intoxicating substance, none shall be given, but the Commissioner of Public Safety shall revoke the license to drive and any nonresident operating privilege. Id. § 753.
- First offense misdemeanor – Offender required to participate in a drug/alcohol assessment; imprisonment in jail for not less than ten (10) days nor more than one (1) year; fine of not more than One Thousand Dollars ($ 1,000.00). Id. § 11-902(C)(1).
- Second offense (within ten (10) years) felony – offender will be placed in the custody of the Department of Corrections fornot less than one (1) year and not to exceed five (5) years; fine of not more than Two-Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500). Id. § 11-902(C)(2).
- Second felony DUI conviction– treatment at offender’s expense; two hundred forty (240) hours of community service; use of an ignition interlock device; OR offender will be placed in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not less than one (1) year and not to exceed ten (10) years; fine of not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($ 5,000.00). Id. § 11-902(C)(3).
- Third or subsequent felony DUI conviction – not less than one (1) year of supervision and periodic testing at the defendant’sexpense; four hundred eighty (480) hours of community service; use of an ignition interlock device for a minimum of thirty (30)days; ORoffender will be placed in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not less than one (1) year and not to exceed twenty (20) years fine of not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($ 5,000.00). Id. § 11-902(C)(4).
Other Penalties & Penalty Enhancers
- When a person is eighteen (18) years of age or older and commits DUI with a child less than eighteen (18) years of age in the vehicle, the fine shall be enhanced to double the amount of the fine imposed for the underlying driving under the influence (DUI) violation which shall be in addition to any other penalties allowed by this section. Id. § 11-902(M)(1).
Oklahoma permits sobriety checkpoints under the state and federal Constitution.
- Roadblocks must be publicized beforehand; roadblocks must be well lit with signs. Geopfert v. State Ex Re., 884 P.2d 1218 (1994).
Phares v. Department of Public Safety, 507 P.2d 1225 (1973) — Motorist’s refusal to submit to chemical test until he had consulted with counsel was a “refusal” under statute.