Contact Us
Toll Free (561) 500-5000
Partners Available 24/7 (561) 557-8686
#1 Fastest Growing Law Firm
Top Rated Lawyers
National DUI Defense
AV Preeminent 2023
Client Champion 2023 Martindale-Hubbell

Ignition Interlock Device

Under Florida Statute Section 316.193(2), an Ignition Interlock Device (IID) is required for all repeat DUI offenders in two circumstances:

  • if the offender’s BAC is 0.15 or higher; or
  • if children under 18 are in the vehicle at the time of the offense.

For a first DUI offense in Florida, the court is permitted to, but not required, to require the ignition interlock device for up to 6 months. For most first DUIs in West Palm Beach, in Palm Beach County, FL, the court will not typically require the installation of the ignition interlock device when it is not required by statute. Also, for the First DUI Program in Palm Beach County, the IID is not typically required as a condition of completing the program.

Before starting a vehicle with an IID installed, the driver must blow into a tube. If the IID detects a BAC above the pre-set maximum level, the IID will prevent the vehicle from starting.

Additionally, modern IIDs conduct randomized tests while the vehicle is being operated in order to help ensure that the driver did not use another person’s breath sample to start the car, or did not begin drinking after starting the vehicle. If the IID detects BAC above the pre-set level during one of these tests, the IID will not stop or disable the engine but will record the violation.

When violations occur, the IID must be checked and reset by the IID servicer and the record will be sent to the proper authorities. The offending driver pays for the installation, maintenance, and monitoring of the IID.

If a person is unable to afford the IID, then the court may order that any portion of a fine paid to be counted against installation costs. See 316.1937(2)(d), F.S. The cost (plus tax) to the driver for an ignition interlock device in Florida includes:

  • $75.00 for installation;
  • $72.50 for monthly monitoring and calibration; and
  • $100 refundable deposit or a $5 monthly insurance charge.

Circumvention of the IID in s. 316.1937, F.S.

To prevent attempts to circumvent the IID, s. 316.1937, F.S., prohibits the following acts:

  • tampering with or circumventing the operation of an IID;
  • requesting or soliciting another person to blow into the IID for the purpose of starting or operating the motor vehicle;
  • blowing into an IID for the purpose of starting or operating the motor vehicle for another; and
  • knowingly leasing or lending a motor vehicle to a person who has been required to have an IID installed on his or her motor vehicle.

The penalties for a violation of the prohibition against circumventing the IID requires a one-year driver license suspension. A subsequent violation of the above during the same period of IID installation carries a five-year license suspension.

If a person commits any of the prohibited acts specified above and is not a licensed driver, he or she will be subject to a fine between $250 and $500 for each violation.

This article was last updated on Friday, November 5, 2016.

Get Powerful Legal Support Today

✓ Over 1,000 5-Star Reviews in Florida
✓ Harness the power of former government lawyers, a former felony special unit prosecutor, and a former major crimes Public Defender
(561) 500-5000 Text us a message now
Your First Line of Defense’
(561) 500-5000

Thousands of Big Wins in Florida

Felony Possession Of Controlled Substance and DUI (Second Offense w/in 5)
The Defendant was charged with Felony Possession of Controlled Substance, punishable by 5 years in prison, and Driving Under the Influence, a second DUI offense within five years of a prior DUI conviction which carries a mandatory jail sentence and a five-year driver’s license revocation. The Defendant’s vehicle was stopped by Officer Malave of the Sunrise Police Department for repeatedly stopping and starting his vehicle near an intersection and for violating a flashing yellow light by stopping and remaining stationary at the intersection. Officer Malave approached the vehicle and made contact with the Defendant. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the Officer noticed that the defendant had the strong odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot and watery eyes, slurred speech ; and the Defendant was incapable of formulating complete sentences. The Defendant would nod off in mid-sentence and was completely incoherent at times. After making those observations, Officer Malave, a female called for the assistance of two male officer’s due to the Defendant’s condition and physical size. The male officers loudly ordered the Defendant out of the car on multiple occasions, but the Defendant would not comply. The Officers attempted to forcibly remove the Defendant from the vehicle, but the Defendant resisted those efforts by bracing, pulling and stiffening his body so that the officers could not move him. The Defendant was slammed to the ground, which the officers took as a refusal to perform roadside exercises and then incorrectly read the Defendant implied consent, which only applies to breath tests. Officers noticed that there ere three cans of beer in the vehicle as well. The Defendant was arrested for DUI and was NOT taken to the Breath Testing Facility and DUI Room, but only the Broward County Main Jail. The Defendant was never asked to submit to a breath test. After the Defendant’s arrest, Officers discovered 27 pills located in a tackle box in the Defendant’s vehicle which ultimately were revealed to be anabolic steroids. Partner, Lawrence Meltzer of Meltzer & Bell prepared for trial. During preparation, the firm filed several Motions in Limine (Motions to Exclude Evidence) that asked the court to exclude any reference to roadside exercises or the Defendant’s alleged refusal top perform them as the Defendant was not offered the roadside exercises and, thus, never refused them. Additionally, the court was asked to exclude any mention of a refusal to submit to a breath test or failure to give on as, again, one was never offered. Finally, the court was asked to prohibit the State from discussing the anabolic steroids as such pills, although a controlled substance, are not those of an impairing or intoxicating nature. After receiving the Motion, the state conceded and was compelled to drop all DUI related charges. Meltzer & Bell was also able to have all felony drug charges dropped as well.
Read More
Result:  Not Guilty
Driving Under the Influence
The Defendant was charged with Driving Under the Influence. Officers of the Davie Police Department were alerted by a concerned citizen that our client was leaving The Billiard Club, a pool bar, in an extremely intoxicated state and about to drive. The Officer approached the vehicle as the car was in reverse, ordered the Defendant to stop the vehicle and conducted a wellness check and noticed the Defendant had bloodshot eyes, the odor of an alcoholic beverage, and extremely slurred speech. Based on those observations, the officer asked the Defendant to perform roadside sobriety exercises, to which the defendant refused. The Defendant was placed under arrest for DUI and was asked to submit to a breath test, but, again refused. Lawrence Meltzer of Meltzer and Bell began to prepare for trial and researched case law in an effort to suppress or throw out the stop of the Defendant’s vehicle and all evidence that followed the stop as being unconstitutional and based upon a lack of reasonable suspicion as the Defendant had done nothing to justify her vehicle being stopped. The firm and Mr. Meltzer researched a similar factual scenario in State v. Sliviak in which the stop was suppressed based upon a lack of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity in an almost identical situation. This case law was presented to the State prior to trial. Upon receiving it, the State agreed and dropped the DUI charge.
Read More
Result:  Charges Dropped
REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO TESTING
The Defendant was observed by Officer Troy Murdock of the Coral Springs Police Department traveling 55 in a 40mph and weaving uncontrollably to the extent traffic began to slow in order to evade her. The officer activated his emergency lights in order to stop the Defendant, however, she did not until she was forced to because of a traffic backup at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Coral Springs Drive. Upon making contact with the Defendant, the officer noticed the defendant to have an extremely strong odor of an alcoholic beverage; that she could not handle or identify her vehicle documentation and that her speech was extremely slurred and that she was disoriented to the point where she was nodding off in front of the officer. When asked if she knew how fast she was moving the defendant responded by saying “I was doing 99.9”. The Defendant was asked to exit the vehicle and could not place the car in park. Upon exiting the vehicle, the Defendant almost fell into oncoming traffic and had to be saved by the officer. The Defendant could not maintain her balance and was disheveled in her appearance. The defendant refused to perform roadside exercises and later refused a breath test. The defendant had previously been arrested for DUI and previously had her licensed suspended for refusing a breath test and admitted to “having some vodkas”. Meltzer & Bell, once again, proceeded to trial. At trial, our attorneys were able to demonstrate that the officer was not truthful in his testimony through the use of photographs and google satellite photos, and based upon the testimony of the client.
Read More
Result:  DUI Dismissed
View All

This past year I bought myself a new toy. It’s the third bike I’ve owned, so ‘Im familiar with the tickets that come with it. So far Steven Bell, Esq. has had my reckless driving reduced to a $50 fine and driving school-no points and a complete dismissal of criminal charges. Had my driving without a license dropped-no points. And a 30 over speeding ticket to a fine and driving school-no points. I’d have to say this law-firm handles their own. If your looking for a stress free way of handling your tickets call Meltzer and Bell PA, “The Traffic Stop”.

L.J.
19 Aug 2023

Meltzer and Bell, P.A., “The Traffic Stop,” really went above and beyond in their representation of me in Osceola County on my speeding ticket. They may possibly be THE BEST traffic lawyers I’ve ever encountered. Be sure to send your friends and family to the Meltzer and Bell, P.A., “The Traffic Stop,” for their traffic ticket and DUI needs. I can’t believe that they got the result that they did. Quite simply, they are the most professional firm that I have ever dealt with, and their level of expertise and communication is unparalleled.

I sincerely thank you for everything.

J.N.
27 Jul 2023

I just had to commend you on the outstanding job you did on behalf of your client in court yesterday. If my clients were ever to ask me if I know of a good DUI defense attorney, I know to whom I can refer them!

A.A.
14 Jun 2023

I just wanted to thank you for taking care of my ticket for me. I am thrilled with the outcome and I will definitely refer you to all my family and friends! Thank you so much!

C.W.
05 May 2023

Thank you Meltzer and Bell, The Traffic Stop, for handling my recent accident case. You did an amazing job in getting my case dismissed and saved me TONS of money in the long run. I will always recommend your services to anyone who wants the job done right!

K.R.
25 Apr 2023
DUI
515 N Flagler Dr #240
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561) 557-8686
Directions
110 SE 6th St Suite 1749
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
(954) 765-6585
Directions
1 SE Ocean Boulevard
Stuart, FL 34994
(772) 248-1215
Directions
18851 NE 29th Ave #750
Aventura, FL 33180
(772) 291-2534
Directions
211 S 2nd St
Fort Pierce, FL 34950
(954) 765-6585
Directions
Call Us
Text Us

Contact Us

Call (561) 500-5000 or fill out the form below to get in touch with one of our attorneys.