343.307 Prior convictions, suspensions or revocations to be counted as offenses.
343.307
343.307 Prior convictions, suspensions or revocations to be counted as offenses.343.307(1)
(1) The court shall count the following to determine the length of a revocation under s. 343.30 (1q) (b) and to determine the penalty under ss. 114.09 (2) and 346.65 (2):343.307(1)(a)
(a) Convictions for violations under s. 346.63 (1), or a local ordinance in conformity with that section.343.307(1)(b)
(b) Convictions for violations of a law of a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band in this state in conformity with s. 346.63 (1).343.307(1)(c)
(c) Convictions for violations under s. 346.63 (2) or 940.25, or s. 940.09 where the offense involved the use of a vehicle.343.307(1)(d)
(d) Convictions under the law of another jurisdiction that prohibits a person from refusing chemical testing or using a motor vehicle while intoxicated or under the influence of a controlled substance or controlled substance analog, or a combination thereof; with an excess or specified range of alcohol concentration; while under the influence of any drug to a degree that renders the person incapable of safely driving; or while having a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, as those or substantially similar terms are used in that jurisdiction's laws.343.307(1)(e)
(e) Operating privilege suspensions or revocations under the law of another jurisdiction arising out of a refusal to submit to chemical testing.343.307(1)(f)
(f) Revocations under s. 343.305 (10).343.307(1)(g)
(g) Convictions for violations under s. 114.09 (1) (b) 1. or 1m.343.307(2)
(2) The court shall count the following to determine the length of a revocation under s. 343.305 (10) and to determine the penalty under s. 346.65 (2j) and to determine the prohibited alcohol concentration under s. 340.01 (46m):343.307(2)(a)
(a) Convictions for violations under s. 346.63 (1) or (5), or a local ordinance in conformity with either section.343.307(2)(b)
(b) Convictions for violations of a law of a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band in this state in conformity with s. 346.63 (1) or (5).343.307(2)(c)
(c) Convictions for violations under s. 346.63 (2) or (6).343.307(2)(d)
(d) Convictions under the law of another jurisdiction that is in substantial conformity with 49 CFR 383.51 (b) Table 1, items (1) to (4).343.307(2)(e)
(e) Convictions under the law of another jurisdiction that prohibits a person from refusing chemical testing or using a motor vehicle while intoxicated or under the influence of a controlled substance or controlled substance analog, or a combination thereof; with an excess or specified range of alcohol concentration; while under the influence of any drug to a degree that renders the person incapable of safely driving; or while having a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, as those or substantially similar terms are used in that jurisdiction's laws.343.307(2)(f)
(f) Operating privilege suspensions or revocations under the law of another jurisdiction arising out of a refusal to submit to chemical testing.343.307(2)(g)
(g) Revocations under s. 343.305 (10).343.307(2)(h)
(h) Convictions for violations under s. 940.09 (1) or 940.25.343.307(3)
(3) If the same elements of the offense must be proven under a local ordinance or under a law of a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band in this state as under s. 346.63 (1) (a), (am), or (b), any combination of s. 346.63 (1) (a), (am), or (b), or s. 346.63 (5), the local ordinance or the law of a federally recognized American Indian tribe or band in this state shall be considered to be in conformity with s. 346.63 (1) (a), (am), or (b), any combination of s. 346.63 (1) (a), (am), or (b), or s. 346.63 (5), for purposes of ss. 343.30 (1q) (b) 1., 343.305 (10) (b) 1. and 346.65 (2) and (2j).343.307 - ANNOT.
History: 1977 c. 193; 1981 c. 20, 184; 1985 a. 80, 337; 1987 a. 3; 1989 a. 105, 271, 359; 1991 a. 39, 277; 1995 a. 448; 1997 a. 84; 2003 a. 33, 97; 2007 a. 20; 2009 a. 276.343.307 - ANNOT.
An Illinois court's placement of an OWI offender under court supervision is a conviction that is counted as a prior offense under sub. (1) (d) when charging an OWI suspect in Wisconsin. Placement under court supervision as a result of a determination that the defendant violated or failed to comply with the law in a court of original jurisdiction meets the definition of conviction under s. 340.01 (9r). State v. List, 2004 WI App 230, 277 Wis. 2d 836, 691 N.W.2d 366, 03-3149.343.307 - ANNOT.
This section controls over the definition of conviction in s. 340.01 (9r), a more general statute. Sub. (1) (d) lists the type of convictions under the law of another jurisdiction that are to be counted when determining the penalty to be imposed under s. 346.65 (2) and counts a conviction that prohibits a person from refusing chemical testing. Sub. (1) (e) separately and specifically provides only one type of revocation and only one type of suspension under the law of another jurisdiction that is to be counted when determining the penalty to be imposed pursuant to s. 346.65 (2): a revocation or suspension arising out of a refusal to submit to chemical testing. State v. Machgan, 2007 WI App 263, 306 Wis. 2d 752, 743 N.W.2d 832, 06-2836.343.307 - ANNOT.
An Illinois "zero tolerance" summary suspension, which may be imposed if a driver under age 21 has been arrested for any traffic violation, provided there is probable cause to believe the driver consumed some amount of alcohol and refuses testing or submits and the test reveals a blood-alcohol concentration greater than zero, does not count as a prior conviction under this section. State v. Carter, 2009 WI App 156, ___ Wis. 2d ___, 775 N.W.2d 297, 08-3144.343.307 - ANNOT.
The final phrase of sub. (1) (d), "as those or substantially similar terms are used in that jurisdiction's laws," indicates the broad scope of that provision. When determining a penalty, Wisconsin counts prior offenses committed in states with OWI statutes that differ significantly from Wisconsin's. "Substantially similar" simply emphasizes that the out-of-state statute need only prohibit conduct similar to the list of prohibited conduct in sub. (1) (d). State v. Puchacz, 2010 WI App 30, ___ Wis. 2d ___, ___ N.W.2d ___, 09-0840.