How many drinks are too many?
If you asked my mother that question, or any of her teetotalling relatives, the response would be: That’s simple, stupid. Any number of drinks is too many.
In this context, however, my real question is actually different. How many alcoholic drinks can you have without exceeding the legal limit for safe driving in the District of Columbia? This is in fact something people often ask me, as a criminal defense lawyer who has handled tons of DUI and DWI cases, and I have to admit I didn’t really know the answer the first time I was asked that.
Now for the lawyerly response. Well, that depends. It depends on your gender, your weight, the type of alcohol, the timeframe over which the alcohol had been consumed, your metabolism, whether you had recently had something to eat, what you had eaten, and so on.
I also have an important caveat. In order to be convicted of driving under the influence – as opposed to driving while intoxicated for which 0.08 grams per 100 milliliters of blood is the per se standard – you can in fact be convicted of DUI with any amount of alcohol in your system if the prosecution can also prove that your driving was impaired as a result of the alcohol consumption. In this sense, my mother is absolutely right. Any number of drinks CAN be too many.
Caveats aside, let me attempt an answer and, for this, I will refer you to a handy-dandy calculator put out by Dui.DrivingLaws.Com at http://dui.drivinglaws.org/calc.php. While I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the calculator, it does produce some interesting results. I found, for example, that a 160 pound male who consumes four 12-ounce beers within 1 hour will come in at just below the legal limit for DWI in DC at 0.0767. A 160 pound female drinking the exact amount over the same period would come in well over the limit at 0.0958.
Try it yourself. It’s fun. It certainly beats testing the limits in person.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
A person’s blood alcohol content is not the only thing that can determine a persons sobriety. A driver having a blood alcohol content (BAC) reading somewhat lower than 0.08%, but also showed signs of impairment can be charged with a DUI. The “legal limit” is simply the number above which a driver is automatically guilty of driving under the influence (or some related statute) without any other evidence. However, many states also allow for DUI charges and conviction when a driver has a slightly lower BAC reading but also fails field sobriety tests, drives erratically, or otherwise shows signs of being impaired.
Thank you for the comment. While I absolutely agree with the overall thrust of your point, I might quibble with some of the details.
First of all, unless the substance being measured is some type of drug, blood alcohol content is in fact the only thing that is used to determine a person’s sobriety. After all, you can’t be drunk without having alcohol in your blood. The question is how you measure this blood alcohol content.
A blood test measures alcohol concentration directly. A breathalyzer serves as a surrogate measure for blood alcohol content. A still more indirect measure, as you suggest, would be to look at failed field sobriety tests, erratic driving, and other signs of impairment. At the same time, the purpose of all these measures — both direct and indirect — is to determine whether or not the person is intoxicated. The intoxication can only occur if there is alcohol in the person’s blood. Therefore, the purpose of all these measures is to try to determine blood alcohol content of the person being investigated.
I also agree that many jurisdictions allow for DUI conviction for driving with blood alcohol concentrations below the statutory limit. That’s why, as my mother says, any number of drinks CAN be too many.
The jurisdictions in which this is possible would include Washington, D.C. As I have spelled out elsewhere on this site, D.C. differentiates between driving while intoxicated (DWI), on the one hand, and driving under the influence (DUI) and operating while impaired (OWI), on the other. DWI is a per offense in which, in order to secure a conviction, the prosecution need only prove that the defendant was in operating or in physical control of the vehicle while his/her blood alcohol content was above the statutory limit. This is in contrast to DUI and OWI. With respect to those two offenses, the prosecution must prove impaired driving through intoxication in addition to operation/physical control. And it can try to do this, as you suggest, through evidence of failed field sobriety tests and erratic driving.