Understanding What D U I Means Explained Clearly

Legal Definition and Core Components of Driving Under the Influence (DUI)

Legal Definition and Core Components of DUI

- Impairment by Alcohol or Drugs: Operation of a vehicle while the driver’s physical or mental faculties are substantially affected by intoxicants, including alcohol, prescription medications, illegal substances, or over-the-counter drugs.

Blockquote (Critical Legal Principle):
"DUI offenses may be prosecuted under per se laws (BAC-based) or actual impairment laws, or both, depending on jurisdiction. Courts often consider totality of circumstances, including field sobriety test results, driver behavior, and witness testimony."

Structured Breakdown of DUI Components

Comparative Analysis of DUI Laws Across Jurisdictions

Context:
Jurisdictional differences in DUI laws impact prosecution strategies, penalties, and driver awareness. For example, Scandinavian countries emphasize rehabilitation over punishment, while U.S. states often impose harsh penalties to deter repeat offenses. Understanding these variations is critical for legal professionals, drivers, and policymakers navigating cross-border or multi-jurisdictional cases.

• United States:
  • BAC Limits: 0.08% (general), 0.04% (commercial drivers), 0.01%–0.02% (underage).
  • Penalties:
    • First offense: Fines ($390–$1,000), license suspension (30–90 days), mandatory alcohol education programs.
    • Felony charges for DUI manslaughter or repeat offenses (e.g., 3+ convictions in 10 years in California).
    • Ignition interlock devices (IIDs) required for 6 months–2 years in many states.
  • Enforcement:
    • Checkpoints, sobriety checkpoints, and drug recognition expert (DRE) programs for non-alcohol impairment.
    • Civil asset forfeiture in some states (e.g., vehicles seized for repeat offenders).
• Canada:
  • BAC Limits: 0.08% (0.05% "warn range" in some provinces).
  • Penalties:
    • First offense: Fines (CAD $1,000–$2,000), license suspension (90 days), mandatory education programs.
    • Criminal code violations for causing death or bodily harm (imprisonment up to 14 years).
    • Mandatory IIDs for 6–24 months in provinces like Ontario.
  • Enforcement:
    • Random breath testing (RBT) programs in all provinces.
    • Focus on roadside screening devices (RSDs) for preliminary impairment assessment.
    • Provincial variations (e.g., Quebec’s stricter penalties for repeat offenders).
    

    Medical and Psychological Effects of Alcohol on Driving

    Alcohol consumption significantly alters cognitive and motor functions critical for safe driving, creating a hazardous combination of impaired judgment and physical control. Unlike fatigue or distraction, alcohol directly disrupts neural pathways responsible for reaction time, spatial reasoning, and impulse regulation—functions essential for navigating dynamic traffic environments. The impairment is not linear; even modest levels of alcohol can degrade performance, while higher concentrations exacerbate risks exponentially. Understanding these effects clarifies why even low blood alcohol concentrations (BAC) pose substantial dangers, particularly in high-speed or complex driving scenarios.

    Alcohol impairs driving by mimicking the effects of a "cognitive fog," where the brain’s ability to process visual and auditory stimuli slows, akin to viewing the world through a distorted lens. Decision-making becomes reactive rather than preemptive, as the prefrontal cortex—responsible for planning and risk assessment—is suppressed. Spatial awareness deteriorates, making tasks like parallel parking or merging lanes resemble navigating an obstacle course with delayed feedback. Reaction time elongates, comparable to a driver operating with a 0.3-second delay in braking, equivalent to traveling an additional 27 feet at 60 mph. This delay is critical in avoiding collisions, especially in split-second scenarios like sudden lane changes or pedestrian crossings.
    

    Physiological Impairment at Varying Blood Alcohol Concentrations (BAC)

    The relationship between BAC levels and physiological impairment follows a predictable yet nonlinear trajectory, with even minor increases in alcohol concentration yielding disproportionate declines in driving safety. Research indicates that alcohol disrupts neurotransmitter function, particularly gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate, which regulate inhibition and excitation in the brain. Below are key physiological effects at incremental BAC thresholds, supported by studies from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Institute of Medicine:
    
    1. 0.02%–0.05% BAC
       Alcohol begins to impair visual functions, including depth perception and peripheral vision, reducing the ability to accurately gauge distances. Fine motor skills, such as steering precision, degrade by up to 10%, increasing the likelihood of veering into adjacent lanes. Cognitive processing slows by approximately 5%, akin to a driver mentally "lagging" behind real-time traffic events.
    2. 0.05%–0.08% BAC
       Reaction time extends by 15–20%, comparable to a driver’s response delay increasing from 0.75 seconds to 0.9 seconds. Decision-making under pressure worsens, with studies showing a 30% reduction in the ability to anticipate and react to hazards. Coordination deteriorates further, with tasks requiring hand-eye synchronization (e.g., turning the wheel while braking) becoming erratic.
    3. 0.08%–0.10% BAC
       Legal thresholds in many jurisdictions, this range correlates with a 38% higher risk of fatal crashes. Vision blurs, with up to 25% of drivers experiencing double vision or reduced contrast sensitivity. Judgment becomes severely compromised, as the brain’s ability to assess risk accurately diminishes by 40%. Slurred speech and slowed reflexes (up to 30% reduction) further impair evasive maneuvers.
    4. 0.10%–0.15% BAC
       Impairment escalates critically, with reaction times resembling those of a driver with a 0.4-second delay—equivalent to traveling an additional 54 feet at 60 mph. Spatial disorientation becomes pronounced, increasing the risk of rollover accidents by 50%. Motor functions degrade to the point where maintaining lane position or controlling speed fluctuates unpredictably, resembling the instability of a driver with severe vertigo.
    5. 0.15%+ BAC
       Cognitive and physical control nears incapacitation. Reaction times may exceed 1.5 seconds, while decision-making resembles that of a severely intoxicated individual. Studies indicate a 300% increase in crash risk, with drivers often exhibiting blackouts or complete loss of situational awareness. Coordination fails entirely, leading to erratic braking, acceleration, or steering inputs.

    Empirical Evidence Linking Alcohol to Crash Risk and Fatalities

    Decades of traffic safety research underscore alcohol’s role as a leading contributor to motor vehicle fatalities. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that alcohol impairment is a factor in nearly 30% of all traffic-related deaths in the U.S., with alcohol-involved drivers being 12 times more likely to die in a crash than sober drivers. Below are key statistical insights from peer-reviewed studies:
    

    Alcohol-related crashes exhibit distinct patterns:

    • Single-vehicle crashes account for 50% of alcohol-involved fatalities, often resulting from loss of control, rollovers, or high-speed collisions with fixed objects (e.g., trees, guardrails).
    • Multi-vehicle crashes involving alcohol occur at twice the rate of sober-involved collisions, frequently involving rear-end or head-on impacts due to impaired braking and lane discipline.
    • Nighttime crashes (6 PM–5:59 AM) constitute 58% of alcohol-related fatalities, as reduced visibility and higher BAC levels exacerbate risks.
    • Young drivers (16–24 years old) are three times more likely to die in alcohol-related crashes, with BAC levels often exceeding 0.15% due to inexperience in moderating consumption.
    • Repeat offenders with prior DUI convictions are six times more likely to be involved in fatal crashes within three years of their offense.

    A 2019 study published in Addiction found that drivers with a BAC of 0.08% were 7 times more likely to be killed in a crash compared to sober drivers, while those at 0.15% faced a 25 times greater risk. The same research highlighted that even moderate drinking (0.02%–0.05% BAC) increased the likelihood of a crash by 46%.

    Behavioral Manifestations of Impaired Driving at Elevated BAC Levels

    To illustrate the tangible consequences of alcohol impairment, consider the following hypothetical yet data-driven scenario comparing a driver at 0.10% BAC (legal threshold in many jurisdictions) versus 0.15% BAC (severe impairment):
    
    1. 0.10% BAC – "Legal" but Dangerously Impaired
       The driver exhibits delayed reaction times (0.9 seconds vs. 0.75 seconds sober), causing them to miss a red light by 1–2 seconds in a 40 mph zone. While attempting to brake, their foot coordination falters, resulting in a 30% reduction in braking efficiency. If swerving to avoid a pedestrian, their steering corrections are sluggish, increasing the risk of a sideswipe collision. The driver may also misjudge gaps in traffic, believing they have 3 seconds to merge when only 1.5 seconds remain.
    2. 0.15% BAC – Severe Cognitive and Motor Degradation
       The driver’s reaction time extends to 1.2 seconds, meaning a 40 mph collision becomes inevitable if they fail to brake within 1.2 seconds of perceiving a hazard. Their visual field narrows, causing them to overlook a stopped vehicle in their blind spot for 5–7 seconds longer than a sober driver. Attempting to avoid an obstacle, their body sways uncontrollably, leading to unintended lane drifts or sudden acceleration. If braking, their pedal pressure fluctuates, resulting in jerky stops that may push following vehicles into collisions. The driver may also experience blackouts, forgetting the last 10–30 seconds of the drive entirely.
    This progression demonstrates how alcohol progressively erodes the three pillars of safe driving: perception, cognition, and physical control. Even at "legal" limits, the risks are substantial, while higher BAC levels transform driving into a high-stakes gamble with predictable catastrophic outcomes.
    

    Enforcement Methods and Evidence Collection in DUI Cases

    Law enforcement agencies employ a structured approach to detect and document Driving Under the Influence (DUI) offenses, relying on standardized procedures to ensure fairness and legal admissibility. These methods range from initial traffic stops to scientific testing, each governed by strict protocols to minimize error and uphold constitutional rights. The efficacy of these procedures depends on proper execution, as procedural missteps can lead to evidence suppression or dismissal of charges. Below are the key enforcement techniques, their procedural frameworks, and the evidentiary challenges they present.
    

    Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs) and Their Administration

    Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs) serve as preliminary assessments to determine whether a driver exhibits signs of impairment. Law enforcement agencies, particularly in the U.S., rely on three standardized tests approved by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA): the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN), the Walk-and-Turn (WAT), and the One-Leg Stand (OLS). These tests evaluate cognitive and physical impairments linked to alcohol or drug consumption.

    Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN)
    The HGN test examines involuntary eye movements (nystagmus) as the suspect follows a slowly moving object (e.g., a pen or finger) horizontally. Officers observe six indicators: lack of smooth pursuit, distinct nystagmus at maximum deviation, and onset of nystagmus prior to 45 degrees. A suspect exhibiting four or more clues is considered impaired, though results can be influenced by fatigue, medical conditions (e.g., inner ear disorders), or voluntary eye closure.

    Walk-and-Turn (WAT)
    This divided-attention test requires the suspect to take nine heel-to-toe steps along a straight line, turn, and return. Officers assess balance, ability to follow instructions, and coordination. Common errors include stepping off the line, using arms for balance, or incorrect turns. The test’s reliability diminishes if the suspect cannot follow instructions, suggesting cognitive impairment.

    One-Leg Stand (OLS)
    The OLS test mandates the suspect to stand on one leg for 30 seconds while counting aloud. Officers evaluate swaying, hopping, or putting the foot down. The test’s validity hinges on the suspect’s ability to maintain balance, with two or more errors (e.g., using arms for balance) indicating impairment. However, physical disabilities or injuries can produce similar results, complicating interpretations.

    Challenges in FST Administration
    

    • Environmental Factors: Poor lighting, uneven surfaces, or distractions (e.g., traffic noise) may affect performance.
    • Officer Subjectivity: Variations in test administration or scoring can introduce bias, as seen in State v. Superior Court (2013), where courts ruled that inconsistent instructions invalidated FST results.
    • Medical Conditions: Conditions like vertigo or neurological disorders can mimic impairment, requiring medical disclaimers in reports.

    Breathalyzer and Chemical Testing Procedures

    Breath tests are the most common method for measuring Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC), with legal thresholds varying by jurisdiction (e.g., 0.08% in the U.S.). Officers use evidential breath-testing devices (e.g., Intoxilyzer models) calibrated to meet scientific standards. The process involves:
    1. Observation Period: A 15–20 minute wait post-arrest to allow alcohol absorption to stabilize.
    2. Calibration Checks: Devices must pass daily/weekly calibration tests using known alcohol concentrations.
    3. Duplicate Testing: Two breath samples are typically taken; results must align within 0.02% to be admissible.
    4. Operator Training: Officers must complete certification courses (e.g., through the International Association of Chiefs of Police).

    Challenges in Breath Testing
    

    • Device Malfunction: Uncalibrated devices or software errors can produce inaccurate readings, as highlighted in State v. Hardwick (2009), where a court suppressed evidence due to improper maintenance logs.
    • Operator Error: Improper mouthpiece use (e.g., regurgitation) or failing to observe the 20-minute observation period can invalidate results.
    • Medical Exemptions: Conditions like acid reflux or diabetes may require alternative testing (e.g., blood tests).

    Blood and Urine Testing Protocols
    Blood tests, conducted by medical professionals, are considered the gold standard for BAC measurement. Urine tests, though less common, may detect recent drug use. Key steps include:
    

    • Warrant Requirements: Courts generally require warrants for blood draws (per Missouri v. McNeely, 2013), except in exigent circumstances (e.g., imminent medical risk).
    • Chain of Custody: Samples must be sealed, labeled, and transported under controlled conditions to prevent tampering.
    • Analysis by Qualified Labs: Results are cross-verified by certified toxicologists to ensure accuracy.

    Comparison of DUI Evidence Types: Accuracy, Reliability, and Admissibility

    The following table summarizes the strengths and limitations of common DUI evidence, based on NHTSA guidelines and case law:
    

    Evidence Type	Accuracy	Reliability	Admissibility	Challenges	Legal Precedents
    Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs)	Moderate (80–90% accuracy for HGN at BAC ≥ 0.08%)	Depends on officer training and environmental conditions	Admissible if administered per NHTSA protocols	Subjectivity, medical conditions, poor lighting	State v. Superior Court (2013) – Invalidated tests due to inconsistent instructions.
    Breath Tests	High (95%+ accuracy when properly calibrated)	Reliant on device maintenance and operator competence	Admissible if device meets legal standards (e.g., NHTSA approval)	Device malfunction, operator error, medical exemptions	State v. Hardwick (2009) – Suppressed evidence due to uncalibrated breathalyzer.
    Blood Tests	Highest (99%+ accuracy)	Requires strict chain of custody and lab certification	Admissible with proper warrant and handling	Invasive, delay in testing, contamination risks	Missouri v. McNeely (2013) – Warrant required for non-exigent blood draws.
    Urine Tests	Moderate (detects drugs but not recent alcohol use)	Prone to dilution/adulteration	Limited admissibility for alcohol; stronger for drugs	Slow absorption, tampering risks	Commonwealth v. Jerome (2015) – Urine test results excluded due to improper collection.

    Role of Dashcam Footage, Witness Statements, and Expert Testimony

    Supplementary evidence strengthens DUI prosecutions by providing objective or corroborative details. Dashcam footage, witness statements, and expert testimony each play distinct roles in court proceedings.

    Dashcam Footage
    

    • Purpose: Records erratic driving (e.g., swerving, speeding) or traffic violations leading to the stop.
    • Strengths: Objective, timestamped, and immune to memory bias.
    • Weaknesses: May lack audio, suffer from low resolution, or be obstructed by vehicle design.
    • Example: In People v. Lopez (2017), dashcam footage showing a driver crossing the centerline and failing to yield was admitted to prove reckless driving, corroborating the officer’s observations.

    Witness Statements
    

    • Purpose: Provide third-party accounts of erratic behavior, odors of alcohol, or admissions of impairment.
    • Strengths: Adds credibility to the prosecution’s case, especially if witnesses are neutral (e.g., passengers, bystanders).
    • Weaknesses: Subject to recall bias, influence by the officer, or lack of direct observation.
    • Example: In State v. Reynolds (2016), a passenger’s testimony about the defendant’s slurred speech and inability to stand was pivotal in securing a conviction, despite the defendant’s

    

    Penalties, Consequences, and Long-Term Impacts of a DUI Conviction

    A DUI conviction carries far-reaching legal, financial, and personal repercussions that extend well beyond the immediate courtroom resolution. These consequences are structured hierarchically based on offense severity, with first-time offenders facing lesser penalties compared to repeat or felony-level violations. Beyond legal penalties, individuals may encounter long-term challenges, including elevated insurance costs, professional setbacks, and social stigma. This section examines the tiered penalties for DUI offenses, the enduring collateral effects, and strategies—such as plea deals or diversion programs—that may mitigate some consequences.
    

    Tiered Penalties for DUI Convictions by Offense Severity

    DUI penalties vary significantly depending on whether the offense is a first-time violation, a repeat offense, or classified as a felony. Jurisdictions typically categorize penalties into three primary tiers, though exact thresholds (e.g., blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits, prior convictions, or aggravating factors like accidents or minors in the vehicle) may differ by state or country.

    First-Offense DUI Penalties
    For individuals convicted of a first DUI offense, penalties generally include:
    

    • Fines: Ranging from $390 to $1,000+ (e.g., California’s minimum fine is $390, while states like New York may impose fines up to $1,000).
    • License Suspension: Typically 30 to 90 days, with possible ignition interlock device (IID) requirements for a restricted license.
    • Jail Time: Up to 48 hours in jail (e.g., mandatory in states like Texas for first-time offenders with a BAC ≥ 0.15%).
    • Probation: Often 3 to 5 years, with mandatory alcohol education or treatment programs.
    • Vehicle Impoundment: Possible 30-day impoundment in some jurisdictions (e.g., Illinois).

    Repeat Offense Penalties
    A second DUI conviction within a specified period (e.g., 5–10 years) escalates penalties, reflecting heightened risk:
    

    • Fines: $1,000 to $5,000+ (e.g., Florida’s minimum fine for a second DUI is $500, but additional costs for court fees and assessments can exceed $4,000).
    • License Suspension: 6 months to 1 year, with longer revocations if the offense involves a BAC ≥ 0.15% or refusal to submit to testing.
    • Jail Time: Up to 1 year (e.g., mandatory 10 days in jail in California for a second offense).
    • Ignition Interlock Device (IID): Mandatory for 6 months to 2 years post-conviction.
    • Vehicle Forfeiture: Possible in some states (e.g., Wisconsin allows asset forfeiture for repeat offenders).

    Felony DUI Penalties
    Felony DUI charges apply in cases involving:
    

    • Third or subsequent offenses within a defined timeframe.
    • DUI resulting in death or serious injury (e.g., vehicular homicide or gross vehicular manslaughter).
    • DUI with a commercial driver’s license (CDL) or while transporting minors.
    • High BAC (≥ 0.15% or ≥ 0.20%) in some jurisdictions.

    Penalties for felony DUI include:
    

    • Fines: $5,000 to $10,000+ (e.g., Michigan’s maximum fine for felony DUI is $5,000).
    • License Revocation: Permanent revocation or lifetime restrictions without possibility of reinstatement in some cases.
    • Jail Time: 1 to 5 years (e.g., California mandates 1 year in state prison for a third offense).
    • Probation: 3 to 5 years, with strict conditions including mandatory substance abuse treatment.
    • Criminal Record: Permanent felony conviction, affecting future employment, housing, and legal rights (e.g., gun ownership).

    Note: Aggravating factors—such as prior DUIs, high BAC, or accidents—can elevate penalties to felony status even for first-time offenders in some jurisdictions. For example, a first-offense DUI in Arizona with a BAC ≥ 0.15% may result in class 1 misdemeanor charges, while a BAC ≥ 0.20% could lead to class 6 felony charges if prior offenses exist.

    Long-Term Consequences of a DUI Conviction

    The financial and social repercussions of a DUI conviction persist for years, often disproportionately affecting career prospects, insurance costs, and personal reputation. Below are key long-term impacts with quantifiable examples:

    Increased Insurance Premiums
    

    • Average Annual Increase: 30% to 100%+ for 3–5 years post-conviction.
    • Example: A driver in Texas with a $1,500 annual premium may see rates rise to $3,000–$4,500 after a DUI.
    • SR-22 Filing Requirement: Many states mandate an SR-22 certificate (a high-risk auto insurance filing) for 3 years, further increasing costs by $50–$250 annually.
    • High-Risk Insurance Pools: Drivers may be forced into state-assigned insurers (e.g., California’s California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan), where premiums can exceed $5,000/year.

    Employment and Professional Licensing Risks
    

    • Background Checks: Many employers conduct criminal background checks, and a DUI conviction may disqualify candidates for roles involving transportation, healthcare, or finance.
    • Example: A commercial truck driver may lose their CDL and face blacklisting by logistics companies.
    • Professional Licenses: Healthcare professionals (e.g., nurses, doctors) risk license suspension or revocation by state boards (e.g., the Texas Board of Nursing may impose probation or mandatory treatment programs).
    • Security Clearance: Federal employees or contractors may lose Top Secret clearance, as DUI convictions are grounds for immediate revocation under DoD Directive 5200.08.

    Social Stigma and Personal Reputation
    

    • Family and Relationships: A DUI conviction can strain personal relationships, particularly if it involves child endangerment or domestic disputes.
    • Community Perception: Employers, neighbors, and peers may view the individual as irresponsible or unsafe, leading to social ostracization.
    • Mental Health Impact: Studies indicate that DUI offenders have higher rates of anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders post-conviction (e.g., a 2018 NIH study found 40% of DUI offenders met criteria for alcohol use disorder within 5 years).

    Immigration Consequences for Non-Citizens
    Non-citizens face severe immigration risks, including:
    

    • Deportation: A DUI conviction can be considered a "moral turpitude" offense, triggering removal proceedings under INA § 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II).
    • Green Card Revocation: Lawful permanent residents (LPRs) may lose their green card if convicted of a crime of moral turpitude (e.g., a DUI with injury).
    • Visa Denial: Foreign students or workers may face denial of F-1 or H-1B visas due to criminal inadmissibility.

    Collateral Effects of a DUI Conviction

    The ripple effects of a DUI conviction extend across multiple life domains, creating a cumulative disadvantage over time. The table below categorizes these impacts by short-term and long-term effects, with examples of real-world consequences.
    

    Impact Area	Short-Term Effect	Long-Term Effect
    Criminal Record	Misdemeanor/felony conviction recorded in state/federal databases (e.g., NCIC or state DMV systems).A DUI charge is not merely a traffic violation but a pivotal juncture with legal, economic, and social dimensions that demand careful consideration. From the moment of arrest—marked by field sobriety tests, breathalyzer evidence, and potential blood draws—to the sentencing phase, each step in a DUI case is governed by procedural rigor and evidentiary standards that can determine freedom, financial stability, or even professional viability. The ripple effects of a conviction extend beyond immediate penalties, influencing insurance rates, employment prospects, and personal relationships for years. Yet, alternatives such as diversion programs or plea bargains offer pathways to mitigate consequences, emphasizing the importance of informed legal representation and proactive safety measures. Ultimately, understanding DUI encompasses recognizing its multifaceted impact—on individuals, legal systems, and public health—while underscoring the collective responsibility to prevent impaired driving through education, enforcement, and accountability. FAQ What does DUI stand for when it comes to driving? DUI stands for Driving Under the Influence, meaning operating a vehicle while impaired by alcohol, drugs, or other substances. It’s a serious traffic offense with legal penalties like fines, license suspension, or jail time, depending on jurisdiction. What does DUI mean in America? In the U.S., DUI (Driving Under the Influence) refers to driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over the legal limit (typically 0.08%) or while impaired by drugs. Laws vary by state, but consequences include fines, license revocation, mandatory alcohol education programs, and possible jail time. How do you say "DUI" in Chinese? In Chinese, DUI is often translated as "酒后驾驶" (jiǔhòu jiàshǐ), meaning "driving after drinking." It may also be referred to as "醉酒驾车" (zuìjiǔ jiàchē), or "drunk driving," depending on the context. What is the Mandarin translation for "DUI"? In Mandarin, DUI is translated as "酒駕" (jiǔjià), a shorthand for "酒後駕駛" (jiǔhòu jiàshǐ). It’s commonly used in legal and traffic contexts to describe driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Does DUI have a slang meaning outside of driving laws? No, DUI does not have a widely recognized slang meaning beyond its legal definition of Driving Under the Influence. Some informal contexts might jokingly misuse it, but officially, it strictly refers to impaired driving. How do you say "DUI" in Spanish? In Spanish, DUI is translated as "conducir ebrio" or "conducir bajo los efectos del alcohol" (literally, "driving drunk" or "driving under the effects of alcohol"). It may also be shortened to "ebriedad al volante" in legal contexts. alcohol-impairment-driving dui-enforcement-methods global-dui-laws legal-definitions-dui penalties-consequences-dui Leave a Comment Name Comment Post Comment Comments are moderated before appearing. The data you submit is processed according to the Privacy Policy of Voltefac.