SB377,94,157
350.101
(1) (d)
Related charges. A person may be charged with and a prosecutor
8may proceed upon a complaint based upon a violation of any combination of par. (a),
9(b),
(bg), or (bm) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence. If the person
10is charged with violating any combination of par. (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm), the offenses
11shall be joined. If the person is found guilty of any combination of par. (a), (b),
(bg), 12or (bm) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence, there shall be a single
13conviction for purposes of sentencing and for purposes of counting convictions under
14s. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. and 3. Paragraphs (a), (b),
(bg), and (bm) each require proof of a
15fact for conviction which the others do not require.
SB377,176
16Section 176
. 350.101 (1) (e) of the statutes is renumbered 350.101 (1) (e) 1. and
17amended to read:
SB377,94,2418
350.101
(1) (e) 1. In an action under par. (bm) that is based on the defendant
19allegedly having a detectable amount of methamphetamine
, or 20gamma-hydroxybutyric acid
, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood,
21the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence
22that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for
23methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors
,
or gamma-hydroxybutyric
24acid
, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
SB377,177
25Section 177
. 350.101 (1) (e) 2. of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,95,5
1350.101
(1) (e) 2. In an action under par. (bg) or (cg) that is based on the
2defendant allegedly having a prohibited tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, the
3defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that
4at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for
5tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6).
SB377,178
6Section 178
. 350.101 (2) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,95,97
350.101
(2) (bg)
Causing injury with tetrahydrocannabinols concentrations at
8or above specified levels. No person who has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration
9of 5.0 or more may cause injury to another person by the operation of a snowmobile.
SB377,179
10Section 179
. 350.101 (2) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,95,2011
350.101
(2) (c)
Related charges. A person may be charged with and a prosecutor
12may proceed upon a complaint based upon a violation of any combination of par. (a),
13(b),
(bg), or (bm) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence. If the person
14is charged with violating any combination of par. (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm) in the
15complaint, the crimes shall be joined under s. 971.12. If the person is found guilty
16of any combination of par. (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm) for acts arising out of the same incident
17or occurrence, there shall be a single conviction for purposes of sentencing and for
18purposes of counting convictions under s. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. and 3. Paragraphs (a), (b),
19(bg), and (bm) each require proof of a fact for conviction which the others do not
20require.
SB377,180
21Section 180
. 350.101 (2) (d) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,96,222
350.101
(2) (d) 1. In an action under this subsection, the defendant has a
23defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the injury would
24have occurred even if he or she had been exercising due care and he or she had not
25been under the influence of an intoxicant or did not have an alcohol concentration
1of 0.08 or more
, a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more, or a detectable
2amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.
SB377,181
3Section 181
. 350.101 (2) (d) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,96,104
350.101
(2) (d) 2. In an action under par. (bm) that is based on the defendant
5allegedly having a detectable amount of methamphetamine
, or 6gamma-hydroxybutyric acid
, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood,
7the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence
8that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for
9methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors
,
or gamma-hydroxybutyric
10acid
, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
SB377,182
11Section 182
. 350.101 (2) (d) 3. of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,96,1612
350.101
(2) (d) 3. In an action under par. (bg) that is based on the defendant
13allegedly having a prohibited tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, the defendant
14has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time
15of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for
16tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6).
SB377,183
17Section 183
. 350.104 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,97,218
350.104
(4) Admissibility; effect of test results; other evidence. The results
19of a chemical test required or administered under sub. (1), (2) or (3) are admissible
20in any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of the acts committed by a
21person alleged to have violated the intoxicated snowmobiling law on the issue of
22whether the person was under the influence of an intoxicant or the issue of whether
23the person had alcohol
or tetrahydrocannabinols concentrations at or above specified
24levels or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.
25Results of these chemical tests shall be given the effect required under s. 885.235.
1This section does not limit the right of a law enforcement officer to obtain evidence
2by any other lawful means.
SB377,184
3Section 184
. 350.11 (3) (a) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,97,64
350.11
(3) (a) 1. Except as provided under subds. 2. and 3., a person who violates
5s. 350.101 (1) (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm) or s. 350.104 (5) shall forfeit not less than $400 nor
6more than $550.
SB377,185
7Section 185
. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,97,128
350.11
(3) (a) 2. Except as provided under subd. 3., a person who violates s.
9350.101 (1) (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm) or 350.104 (5) and who, within 5 years prior to the
10arrest for the current violation, was convicted previously under the intoxicated
11snowmobiling law or the refusal law shall be fined not less than $300 nor more than
12$1,000 and shall be imprisoned not less than 5 days nor more than 6 months.
SB377,186
13Section 186
. 350.11 (3) (a) 3. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,97,1814
350.11
(3) (a) 3. A person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (a), (b),
(bg), or (bm) or
15350.104 (5) and who, within 5 years prior to the arrest for the current violation, was
16convicted 2 or more times previously under the intoxicated snowmobiling law or
17refusal law shall be fined not less than $600 nor more than $2,000 and shall be
18imprisoned not less than 30 days nor more than one year in the county jail.
SB377,187
19Section 187
. 350.11 (3) (a) 4. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,97,2120
350.11
(3) (a) 4. A person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (c)
or (cg) or 350.104 (5)
21and who has not attained the age of 19 shall forfeit not more than $50.
SB377,188
22Section 188
. 350.11 (3) (d) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,98,723
350.11
(3) (d)
Alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs,
24or tetrahydrocannabinols; assessment. In addition to any other penalty or order, a
25person who violates s. 350.101 (1) or (2) or 350.104 (5) or who violates s. 940.09 or
1940.25 if the violation involves the operation of a snowmobile, shall be ordered by the
2court to submit to and comply with an assessment by an approved public treatment
3facility for an examination of the person's use of alcohol, controlled substances or
4controlled substance analogs
, or tetrahydrocannabinols. The assessment order shall
5comply with s. 343.30 (1q) (c) 1. a. to c. Intentional failure to comply with an
6assessment ordered under this paragraph constitutes contempt of court, punishable
7under ch. 785.
SB377,189
8Section 189
. 609.83 of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,98,11
9609.83 Coverage of drugs and devices. Limited service health
10organizations, preferred provider plans, and defined network plans are subject to ss.
11632.853 and 632.895
(16p) and (16t).
SB377,190
12Section 190
. 632.895 (16p) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,98,1413
632.895
(16p) Medical use of marijuana. (a) In this subsection, “medical use
14of tetrahydrocannabinols” has the meaning given in s. 50.80 (4).
SB377,98,1915
(b) Every disability insurance policy and every self-insured health plan of the
16state or of a county, city, town, village, or school district that provides coverage of
17prescription drugs and devices shall provide coverage for the medical use of
18tetrahydrocannabinols in accordance with subch. VI of ch. 50 and any equipment or
19supplies necessary for the medical use of tetrahydrocannabinols.
SB377,98,2220
(c) Coverage under par. (b) may be subject only to the exclusions, limitations,
21and cost-sharing provisions that apply generally to the coverage of prescription
22drugs or devices that is provided under the policy or self-insured health plan.
SB377,191
23Section 191
. 767.41 (5) (am) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,99,424
767.41
(5) (am) (intro.) Subject to pars. (bm)
and, (c),
and (d), in determining
25legal custody and periods of physical placement, the court shall consider all facts
1relevant to the best interest of the child. The court may not prefer one parent or
2potential custodian over the other on the basis of the sex or race of the parent or
3potential custodian. Subject to pars. (bm)
and
, (c),
and (d), the court shall consider
4the following factors in making its determination:
SB377,192
5Section 192
. 767.41 (5) (d) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,99,126
767.41
(5) (d) The court may not consider as a factor in determining the legal
7custody of a child whether a parent or potential custodian holds or has applied for
8a registry identification card, as defined in s. 146.44 (1) (h), is or has been the subject
9of a written certification, as defined in s. 50.80 (10), or is or has been a qualifying
10patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6), or a primary caregiver, as defined in s. 50.80 (5),
11unless the parent or potential custodian's behavior creates an unreasonable danger
12to the child that can be clearly articulated and substantiated.
SB377,193
13Section 193
. 767.451 (5m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,99,1714
767.451
(5m) (a) Subject to pars. (b)
and, (c),
and (d) in all actions to modify
15legal custody or physical placement orders, the court shall consider the factors under
16s. 767.41 (5) (am), subject to s. 767.41 (5) (bm), and shall make its determination in
17a manner consistent with s. 767.41.
SB377,194
18Section 194
. 767.451 (5m) (d) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,99,2419
767.451
(5m) (d) In an action to modify a legal custody order, the court may not
20consider as a factor in making a determination whether a parent or potential
21custodian holds or has applied for a registry identification card, as defined in s.
22146.44 (1) (h), is or has been the subject of a written certification, as defined in s.
2350.80 (10), or is or has been a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6), or a
24primary caregiver, as defined in s. 50.80 (5), unless the parent or potential
1custodian's behavior creates an unreasonable danger to the child that can be clearly
2articulated and substantiated.
SB377,195
3Section 195
. 885.235 (1) (d) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,100,54
885.235
(1) (d) 1. A controlled substance included in schedule I under ch. 961
5other than a tetrahydrocannabinol.
SB377,196
6Section 196
. 885.235 (1) (d) 5. of the statutes is repealed.
SB377,197
7Section 197
. 885.235 (1) (e) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,100,98
885.235
(1) (e) “Tetrahydrocannabinols concentration" has the meaning given
9in s. 23.33 (1) (k).
SB377,198
10Section 198
. 885.235 (1g) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,100,2411
885.235
(1g) (intro.) In any action or proceeding in which it is material to prove
12that a person was under the influence of an intoxicant or had a prohibited alcohol
or
13tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or a specified alcohol concentration while
14operating or driving a motor vehicle or, if the vehicle is a commercial motor vehicle,
15on duty time, while operating a motorboat, except a sailboat operating under sail
16alone, while operating a snowmobile, while operating an all-terrain vehicle or utility
17terrain vehicle or while handling a firearm, evidence of the amount of alcohol
or
18tetrahydrocannabinols in the person's blood at the time in question, as shown by
19chemical analysis of a sample of the person's blood or urine or evidence of the amount
20of alcohol in the person's breath, is admissible on the issue of whether he or she was
21under the influence of an intoxicant or had a prohibited alcohol
or
22tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or a specified alcohol concentration if the
23sample was taken within 3 hours after the event to be proved. The chemical analysis
24shall be given effect as follows without requiring any expert testimony as to its effect:
SB377,199
25Section 199
. 885.235 (1g) (ag) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,101,6
1885.235
(1g) (ag) The fact that the analysis shows that the person had a
2tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of more than 0.0 but less than 5.0 is relevant
3evidence on the issue of being under the combined influence of
4tetrahydrocannabinols and alcohol, a controlled substance, a controlled substance
5analog, or any other drug, but, except as provided in sub. (1L), is not to be given any
6prima facie effect.
SB377,200
7Section 200
. 885.235 (1g) (cg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,101,108
885.235
(1g) (cg) The fact that the analysis shows that the person had a
9tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more is prima facie evidence that he
10or she had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.
SB377,201
11Section 201
. 885.235 (1L) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,101,2212
885.235
(1L) In any action under s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63
13(2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg), evidence of the amount of tetrahydrocannabinols in the
14person's blood at the time in question, as shown by chemical analysis of a sample of
15the person's blood or urine, is admissible on the issue of whether he or she had a
16tetrahydrocannabinols concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g.,
1730.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg) if the sample was taken within 3
18hours after the event to be proved. The fact that the analysis shows that the person
19had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of more than 0.0 but not more than 5.0
20is prima facie evidence that the person had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration
21in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101
22(1) (cg).
SB377,202
23Section 202
. 885.235 (1m) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,102,1024
885.235
(1m) In any action under s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681
25(1) (bn), 346.63 (2m) or (7), or 350.101 (1) (c), evidence of the amount of alcohol in the
1person's blood at the time in question, as shown by chemical analysis of a sample of
2the person's blood or urine or evidence of the amount of alcohol in the person's breath,
3is admissible on the issue of whether he or she had an alcohol concentration in the
4range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn)
1., 346.63 (2m),
5or 350.101 (1) (c) or an alcohol concentration above 0.0 under s. 346.63 (7) if the
6sample was taken within 3 hours after the event to be proved. The fact that the
7analysis shows that the person had an alcohol concentration of more than 0.0 but not
8more than 0.08 is prima facie evidence that the person had an alcohol concentration
9in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn)
1., 346.63
10(2m), or 350.101 (1) (c) or an alcohol concentration above 0.0 under s. 346.63 (7).
SB377,203
11Section 203
. 885.235 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,102,2212
885.235
(4) The provisions of this section relating to the admissibility of
13chemical tests for alcohol
or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or intoxication or
14for determining whether a person had a detectable amount of a restricted controlled
15substance in his or her blood shall not be construed as limiting the introduction of
16any other competent evidence bearing on the question of whether or not a person was
17under the influence of an intoxicant, had a detectable amount of a restricted
18controlled substance in his or her blood, had a specified alcohol
or
19tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, or had an alcohol concentration in the range
20specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn)
1., 346.63 (2m), or
21350.101 (1) (c)
, or had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration in the range specified
22in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg).
SB377,204
23Section 204
. 895.047 (3) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,103,524
895.047
(3) (a) If the defendant proves by clear and convincing evidence that
25at the time of the injury the claimant was under the influence of any controlled
1substance or controlled substance analog to the extent prohibited under s. 346.63 (1)
2(a), or had an alcohol concentration, as defined in s. 340.01 (1v), of 0.08 or more
or
3a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, as defined in s. 23.33 (1) (k), of 5.0 or more,
4there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the claimant's intoxication or drug use
5was the cause of his or her injury.
SB377,205
6Section 205
. 905.04 (4) (f) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,103,107
905.04
(4) (f)
Tests for intoxication. There is no privilege concerning the results
8of or circumstances surrounding any chemical tests for intoxication or
for alcohol
9concentration, as defined in s. 340.01 (1v)
, or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration,
10as defined in s. 23.33 (1) (k).
SB377,206
11Section 206
. 939.22 (33) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,103,1312
939.22
(33) (a) A controlled substance included in schedule I under ch. 961
13other than a tetrahydrocannabinol.
SB377,207
14Section 207
. 939.22 (33) (e) of the statutes is repealed.
SB377,208
15Section 208
. 939.22 (39g) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,103,1716
939.22
(39g) “Tetrahydrocannabinols concentration" has the meaning given in
17s. 23.33 (1) (k).
SB377,209
18Section 209
. 940.09 (1) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,103,2019
940.09
(1) (bg) Causes the death of another by the operation or handling of a
20vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.
SB377,210
21Section 210
. 940.09 (1) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,103,2422
940.09
(1) (dg) Causes the death of an unborn child by the operation or
23handling of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of
245.0 or more.
SB377,211
25Section 211
. 940.09 (1g) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,104,3
1940.09
(1g) (bg) Causes the death of another by the operation or handling of
2a firearm or airgun while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of
35.0 or more.
SB377,212
4Section 212
. 940.09 (1g) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,104,75
940.09
(1g) (dg) Causes the death of an unborn child by the operation or
6handling of a firearm or airgun while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols
7concentration of 5.0 or more.
SB377,213
8Section 213
. 940.09 (1m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,104,149
940.09
(1m) (a) A person may be charged with and a prosecutor may proceed
10upon an information based upon a violation of any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am),
11or (b)
, or (bg); any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am),
(bg), or (bm); any combination of
12sub. (1) (c), (cm),
or (d)
, or (dg); any combination of sub. (1) (c), (cm),
(dg), or (e); any
13combination of sub. (1g) (a), (am),
or (b)
, or (bg); or any combination of sub. (1g) (c),
14(cm),
or (d)
, or (dg) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.
SB377,214
15Section 214
. 940.09 (1m) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,104,2516
940.09
(1m) (b) If a person is charged in an information with any of the
17combinations of crimes referred to in par. (a), the crimes shall be joined under s.
18971.12. If the person is found guilty of more than one of the crimes so charged for
19acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence, there shall be a single conviction
20for purposes of sentencing and for purposes of counting convictions under s. 23.33
21(13) (b) 2. and 3., under s. 23.335 (23) (c) 2. and 3., under s. 30.80 (6) (a) 2. and 3., under
22s. 343.307 (1) or under s. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. and 3. Subsection (1) (a), (am), (b),
(bg), (bm),
23(c), (cm), (d),
(dg), and (e) each require proof of a fact for conviction which the others
24do not require, and sub. (1g) (a), (am), (b),
(bg), (c), (cm),
and (d)
, and (dg) each require
25proof of a fact for conviction which the others do not require.
SB377,215
1Section
215. 940.09 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,105,82
940.09
(2) (a) In any action under this section, the defendant has a defense if
3he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the death would have
4occurred even if he or she had been exercising due care and he or she had not been
5under the influence of an intoxicant, did not have a detectable amount of a restricted
6controlled substance in his or her blood,
did not have a tetrahydrocannabinols
7concentration of 5.0 or greater, or did not have an alcohol concentration described
8under sub. (1) (b), (bm), (d) or (e) or (1g) (b) or (d).
SB377,216
9Section 216
. 940.09 (2) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:
SB377,105,1710
940.09
(2) (b) In any action under sub. (1) (am) or (cm) or (1g) (am) or (cm) that
11is based on the defendant allegedly having a detectable amount of
12methamphetamine or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid
or
13delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood, the defendant has a defense if he
14or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or
15occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its
16metabolic precursors or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid
or 17delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.
SB377,217
18Section 217
. 940.09 (2) (c) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,105,2419
940.09
(2) (c) In an action under sub. (1) (bg) or (dg) or (1g) (bg) or (dg) that is
20based on the defendant allegedly having a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration that
21is 5.0 or greater, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance
22of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid
23prescription for tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as
24defined in s. 50.80 (6).
SB377,218
25Section 218
. 940.25 (1) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,106,3
1940.25
(1) (bg) Causes great bodily harm to another human being by the
2operation of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration
3of 5.0 or more.
SB377,219
4Section 219
. 940.25 (1) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:
SB377,106,75
940.25
(1) (dg) Causes great bodily harm to an unborn child by the operation
6of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or
7more.