CERTIFIED DEFENSIVE DRIVING SCHOOLS; NOTICE
Rep. Jim Weiers

The court’s prerogative to contract with a primary defensive driving school provider is eliminated. The court is prohibited from promoting or favoring a particular defensive driving school.

A violator may attend any defensive driving school that complies with the court’s automation and reporting requirements. A violator may attend another Supreme Court certified defensive driving school on application to the court if the violator shows that attending any of the defensive driving schools that comply with the court automation and reporting requirements creates a hardship.

A law enforcement officer or a jurisdiction issuing a civil traffic citation must provide notice to the violator that the person may attend any of the Supreme Court certified driving schools, if eligible.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. § 28-3393

Court Impact:  A.R.S. 28-3393 is amended to remove the courts ability to contract with specific driving schools as primary providers. Allows that an eligible defendant who elects to attend DDS may attend any school that is certified by the Supreme Court and complies with the courts automation requirements. The citing officer must give the defendant notice that they may attend DDS and a court may not promote particular DDS providers over other certified schools. New codes for the Arizona of Judicial Administration have been drafted for comment to implement with the changes.

Back to Top

MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY, VEHICLE EQUIPMENT
Rep. Biggs

The statute regarding limitations of hours placed on motor carriers or private carrier drivers found in Title 23, Labor, is repealed.

Changes to laws dealing with additional lighting on a bus, truck, truck tractor, trailer, semi-trailer and pole trailer are enacted. Changes to some of the laws dealing with required brake equipment are enacted.

Changes to certain definitions in Title 28, Chapter 14 are also enacted. However, there is a conflict with Chapter 147 regarding the definition of “commercial motor vehicle” and “lightweight motor vehicle”

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §§ 23-286.01, 28-929, 28-931, 28-935, 28-945, 28-952, 28-956, 28-5201, 28-5204
Statute repealed:  A.R.S. §23-286

Court Impact:  Adds additional safety equipment requirements for trucks, buses, tractors, and pole trailers. Changes to definitions include striking the definition of "Declared gross weight" and reducing the weight for a "Lightweight motor vehicle" from twenty thousand pounds to eighteen thousand pounds. Definitions section is amended but does not conform to the changes in 28-5201 as amended by Chapter 147.

Back to Top

SCHOOL CROSSINGS
Rep. Biggs

The doubling of civil penalties for violations in a school crossing zone is only required if signage is present indicating that the civil penalty will be doubled. The statute is reorganized, with separate subsections for violations with the “fines doubled” sign present and for violations without the “fines doubled” violations present.

Conforming changes are made to A.R.S. § 28-672, Causing serious injury or death by a moving violation, § 28-675, Causing death by use of a vehicle and § 28-676, Causing serious injury by use of a vehicle.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §§ 28-672, 28-675, 28-676 and 28-797

Court Impact:  Establishes new violations for school zone crossings that increases the civil penalty by the amount of the base fine, if the required signage is present. Surcharges do not apply to the increased penalty. The bill splits former 28-797E and adds the existing violation as 28-797(F), also adds new violations as sections 28-797(H) and 28-797(I). Additional assessment for H and I are equal to base fine and are not subject to surcharges. The change requires the court to update their automation system.

Back to Top

COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES; TRAILERS
Rep. Biggs

The definition of “commercial motor vehicle” is revised in both Title 28, Chapter 6, Traffic Regulation and Chapter 14, Motor Carrier Safety. The definitions are not identical. For the purposes of Title 28, Chapter 14, the definition of “motor carrier” encompasses a commercial motor vehicle only. The applicability of Title 28, Chapter 14, centering on the revised definition of “commercial motor vehicle” is redefined.

There is a conflict with Chapter 142 regarding the definition of “Commercial Motor Vehicle” and “Lightweight Motor Vehicle.”

An equipment violation listed in Title 28, Chapter 14, unless requiring an out of service order, is classified as a civil traffic violation.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §§ 28-601, 28-5201, 28-5202, 28-5204, 28-5240, 28-5242, 28-5432,
Statutes created:  A.R.S. §§ 28-1111, 28-5245

Court Impact:  A.R.S. 28-5245 is added to specify that an equipment violation of this chapter (or any rule adopted pursuant to this chapter) is a civil traffic violation unless the violation requires issuance of an out-of-service order pursuant to section 28-5241. Equipment violations may pertain to safety violations or hazardous material violations and courts will need to determine if an out of service order has been issued to determine if the violation is a misdemeanor. Definitions section is amended but does not conform to the changes in 28-5201 as amended by Chapter 142.

Makes all R-17 equipment violations civil traffic violations unless the vehicle is given an "out of service order" in which case the charge is a misdemeanor violation. The change requires the court to update their automation system.

Creates civil traffic violations for commercial motor vehicle for equipment violations in Title 28, Chapter 14. See chapter142.

Back to Top

BUDGET RECONCILIATION; CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Rep. Burns

Numerous statutory and session law changes relating to the justice system in order to comply with the FY 2009 budget outlined in HB 2209 are enacted. In pertinent part, HB 2210 does the following:

Filing Fees

• Increases civil filing fees in Justice of the Peace (JP) courts and superior courts by 44% and directs a portion of JP filing fees to the Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan (EORP). Copy fees remain at the current statutory amount of $0.50. The Supreme Court is also permitted to increase these civil fees in the future in an amount not to exceed inflation.
• Allows the Supreme Court to increase various appellate fees.

Time Payment Fee

• Repeals the statute that would have returned the Time Payment Fee (TPF) to $12 on January 1, 2010. In effect, this will continue the TPF at $20 indefinitely.

Probation; GPS

• Allows the court to impose a fee on any probationer required to be on global position monitoring (GPS) for a violation of A.R.S. § 13-604.01 (dangerous crimes against children). The fee is intended to offset the cost of the GPS monitoring and must be deposited in the county’s Adult Probation Services Fund. HB 2210 requires the Administrative Office of the Courts to charge the county’s APS Fund an amount established annually by the AOC to cover a proportional share of the cost of providing GPS monitoring services.

Court Opinions

• Removes the statutory language requiring the Supreme Court to cover the cost of publishing court opinions for specific agencies. Keeps language that allows any entity to request a copy of opinions as long as the entity pays the contracted price for the copy.

JP Salaries

• Continues to fund the state share of JP salaries at 38.5%, requiring the county to cover the other 61.5%.
• Requires the presiding judge of each court to charge a person attending defensive driving school a $45.00 surcharge. The defensive driving school is required to transmit the surcharge to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund.

OUI/DUI

• Allocates the portion of the assessment currently deposited in the state general fund to the newly created public safety and equipment fund.

Extreme DUI

• Resolves the sentencing conflict in Chapters 195 and 219 from last year by removing the authority of the judge to suspend any portion of the minimum jail sentence in an extreme DUI. Note that Chapter 256 contains an identical provision with a delayed effective date of January 1, 2009, however, with Chapter 286 this provision is effective on September.

Photo Enforcement, Service of Citation, Court Diversion

• The DPS is required to enter into a contract or contracts with vendors to establish a state photo enforcement system.
• Enforcement is related to Title 28, Chapter 3, Article 3 (§28-641 – 28-654) and Article 6 (§28-701 – 28-710).
• Civil Penalty for violating one of the above sections cited through the photo enforcement system is $165.
• No surcharge is imposed except the 10% clean elections surcharge required by the Arizona Constitution.
• The citations are not included in judicial productivity credits until July 1, 2009.
• A photo enforcement fund is established consisting of penalties paid on citations or notices of violation issued through the system.
• $250,000 is appropriated to DPS each quarter, the remainder is deposited in the state general fund.
• MVD is prohibited of using a finding of responsibility on a citation or notice of violation cited through the system in determining whether a person’s driver license should be suspended or revoked
• A court is prohibited from transmitting the abstract of a finding of responsibility of the violations to MVD.
• Permits a civil violation issued pursuant to §41-1722 to be issued through a notice of violation.
• If a person fails to respond to the notice of violation or denies responsibility a citation if filed into the applicable court.
• The Supreme Court is required to establish rules governing the issuance, service and processing of the notice of violation, including rules allowing a person to admit responsibility before a citation if filed into court.

Photo enforcement fund; appropriation

• $4,056,600 is appropriated to the AOC for the processing of state photo enforcement citations.
  Court diversion fee

Court diversion fee

• Requires the presiding judge of each court to charge a $45.00 surcharge if a person attends defensive driving school.
• The driving school must collect the surcharge and transmit it to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund.

Statutes Amended: A.R.S. §5-395.01, §5-395.01 as amended by Laws 2008, 5-396, 5-397, 12-108, 12-119.01, 12-267, 12-284 as amended by Laws 2008, 13-902, 22-281, 28-1381, 28-1382, 28-1383, 28-1593, 28-3396, 28-8284, 28-8286, 28-8287, 28-8288, 38-810 as amended by Laws 2008, 41-3541, 41-3542, 41-3014.16, Laws 2000, Ch. 293, §598, Laws 2000, Ch. 193, §599
Statutes Created: A.R.S. §41-1722, 41-1723
Statutes Repealed: A.R.S. §12-116, as amended by Laws 2006, Ch. 369, §2, 28-1382 as amended by Laws 2007, Ch. 195, §3

Court Impact: Increases fees in the superior and justice court and allows the supreme court to increase the fees in the future in an amount not to exceed the consumer price index based on the increase in CPI from the last calendar year in which the last increase occurred. Provides for distribution of justice court fees based on county population. Also allows the supreme court to adjust the fees charged for filing in the supreme court. Requires the AOC to charge each probation department a proportional fee to cover the cost of monitoring devices required by 13-902. The charges are offset by fees imposed on the probationer. Continues the time payment fee at the current $20 level indefinitely and the state share of JP salaries at 38.9%. Requires the presiding judge of a court to establish an additional $45 surcharge for attendance at a defensive driving school. The fee to be collected by the school for deposit with the state treasurer.

Establishes a statewide photo enforcement program for civil traffic violations. The violation may be disposed of prior to the complaint being filed in court according to rules established by the supreme court. Allows a person paid to act on behalf of a traffic enforcement agency to issue the traffic complaint. Requires DPS to select a vendor for the statewide photo enforcement system, prescribes a penalty of $165 plus a 10% surcharge for clean elections, establishes a photo enforcement fund and prohibits these violations from being reported to MVD. Also establishes the Public Safety Equipment Fund and amends OUI, DUI and FUI statutes to provide extra assessments formerly sent to the general fund to be sent to the Public Safety Equipment Fund. Prohibits state photo enforcement citations from be included in justice court judicial productivity credit calculations for fiscal year 2008-2009.

Establishes a new receivable for fees imposed on probationers sentenced for a dangerous crime against children for GPS monitoring. Courts should be aware of the effect of this bill prohibiting disposition reporting to MVD. The changes require courts to update their automation system. A.R.S. § 5-395.01 has a delayed effective date of 1/1/09.

Back to Top

USER FEES; OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES
Sen. Linda Gray

In pertinent part, the current off-highway vehicle (OHV) violation section is expanded by making it a Class 3 misdemeanor for a person to drive an OHV:

• Off an existing road, trail or route in a manner that causes damage to wildlife habitat, riparian areas, cultural or natural resources or property improvements
• On roads, trails, routes or areas closed as indicated in rule or by proper posting (if private land)
• Over unimproved roads, trails, routes or areas unless driving on roads, trails, routes or areas where driving is allowed
• In a manner that damages the environment (as specified)

It is also a Class 3 misdemeanor to:

• Fail to drive an OHV on a road, trail, route or area opened as indicated by the governing entity
• Place or remove a regulatory sign governing OHV use, if the person is not authorized to do so.

OHVs are required to be equipped with specific devices relating to safety and noise dissipation. A violation of the equipment requirements is classified as a civil traffic violation. Any person that owns an OHV, all-terrain vehicle or off-road recreational motor vehicle must apply for a license plate for the vehicle.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. § 32-2065, 36-2901.03, 36-2912
Statutes Created: A.R.S. §36-2912.04, 36-2981.01, 41-3016.28
Statutes Repealed: A.R.S. § 28-1171, 28-1174, 28-1175, and 28-1176

Court Impact: A number of restrictions relating to driving off highway vehicles are added to Title 28 Courts should be aware of the effect of this bill that adds A.R.S. § 28-1174A1 as a class 2 misdemeanor, A.R.S. § 28-1174A2-A4, B, C and D as class 3 misdemeanors, A.R.S. § 28-1179A1-A5 and B as civil traffic violations, and A.R.S. § 28-2512A as a civil traffic violation. All (off highway) violations of Title 28, Chapter 3, Article 20 not classified as misdemeanors are civil traffic offenses, see A.R.S. § 28-1181. The changes require courts to update their automation system.

Back to Top