OWI – Penalty Enhancers

Listen to this article

WI Supreme Court

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Charles L. Neil, IV,

Case No.: 2020 WI 15

Focus: OWI – Penalty Enhancers

Charles L. Neill, IV seeks review of the court of appeals decision affirming the judgment and order upholding his sentence for third-offense OWI. This appeal involves only the $4,800 fine Neill was ordered to pay. The issue presented requires the interpretation of the penalty enhancers in Wisconsin’s OWI statutes. Specifically, we consider how the penalty enhancers’ provisions requiring “doubling” and “quadrupling” of the fine for a third-offense OWI should be determined when multiple penalty enhancers apply. Neill faced two penalty enhancers: (1) having a minor passenger in his car, which requires doubling of the fine, and (2) driving with a high blood alcohol concentration, which requires quadrupling of his fine.

The court of appeals decided that the first penalty enhancer changes the “applicable minimum” fine Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(am)3 sets for third-offense OWI, and as a result, when applying the second penalty enhancer, a court must use this already-enhanced applicable minimum instead of the specific applicable minimum for third-offense OWI contained in § 346.65(2)(am)3.

We reject this interpretation. The statute’s text requires that each penalty enhancer use the specific “applicable minimum” contained in Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(am)3, which for third-offense OWI is $600. Accordingly, the court of appeals erred when it affirmed the $4,800 fine imposed by the circuit court. Because the text of § 346.65(2)(am)3 sets the minimum applicable fine at $600, both penalty enhancers must be calculated using $600 as the applicable minimum.

Neill’s first penalty enhancer for OWI with a minor passenger, Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(f)2, requires “the applicable fine” be doubled. Accordingly, the circuit court should have started with $600 and multiplied it by two for an enhanced fine of $1,200. Neill’s second penalty enhancer for OWI with a high BAC, Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(g)3, requires “the applicable fine” in § 346.65(2)(am)3 be quadrupled. Consequently, the circuit court should have started with $600 and multiplied it by four for an enhanced fine of $2,400. These two fines total $3,600, not $4,800. We reverse the decision of the court of appeals and remand with directions to amend the judgment to require Neill to pay a fine of $3,600.

Reversed and remanded

Concur:

Dissent:

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.