SB377: Bill Text

SB377,180 Section 180 . 350.101 (2) (d) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,96,2 350.101 (2) (d) 1. In an action under this subsection, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the injury would have occurred even if he or she had been exercising due care and he or she had not been under the influence of an intoxicant or did not have an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more, a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more, or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.

SB377,181 Section 181 . 350.101 (2) (d) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,96,10 350.101 (2) (d) 2. In an action under par. (bm) that is based on the defendant allegedly having a detectable amount of methamphetamine, or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

SB377,182 Section 182 . 350.101 (2) (d) 3. of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,96,16 350.101 (2) (d) 3. In an action under par. (bg) that is based on the defendant allegedly having a prohibited tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6).

SB377,183 Section 183 . 350.104 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,97,2 350.104 (4) Admissibility; effect of test results; other evidence. The results of a chemical test required or administered under sub. (1), (2) or (3) are admissible in any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of the acts committed by a person alleged to have violated the intoxicated snowmobiling law on the issue of whether the person was under the influence of an intoxicant or the issue of whether the person had alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols concentrations at or above specified levels or a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood. Results of these chemical tests shall be given the effect required under s. 885.235. This section does not limit the right of a law enforcement officer to obtain evidence by any other lawful means.

SB377,184 Section 184 . 350.11 (3) (a) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,97,6 350.11 (3) (a) 1. Except as provided under subds. 2. and 3., a person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (a), (b), (bg), or (bm) or s. 350.104 (5) shall forfeit not less than $400 nor more than $550.

SB377,185 Section 185 . 350.11 (3) (a) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,97,12 350.11 (3) (a) 2. Except as provided under subd. 3., a person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (a), (b), (bg), or (bm) or 350.104 (5) and who, within 5 years prior to the arrest for the current violation, was convicted previously under the intoxicated snowmobiling law or the refusal law shall be fined not less than $300 nor more than $1,000 and shall be imprisoned not less than 5 days nor more than 6 months.

SB377,186 Section 186 . 350.11 (3) (a) 3. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,97,18 350.11 (3) (a) 3. A person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (a), (b), (bg), or (bm) or 350.104 (5) and who, within 5 years prior to the arrest for the current violation, was convicted 2 or more times previously under the intoxicated snowmobiling law or refusal law shall be fined not less than $600 nor more than $2,000 and shall be imprisoned not less than 30 days nor more than one year in the county jail.

SB377,187 Section 187 . 350.11 (3) (a) 4. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,97,21 350.11 (3) (a) 4. A person who violates s. 350.101 (1) (c) or (cg) or 350.104 (5) and who has not attained the age of 19 shall forfeit not more than $50.

SB377,188 Section 188 . 350.11 (3) (d) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,98,7 350.11 (3) (d) Alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs, or tetrahydrocannabinols; assessment. In addition to any other penalty or order, a person who violates s. 350.101 (1) or (2) or 350.104 (5) or who violates s. 940.09 or 940.25 if the violation involves the operation of a snowmobile, shall be ordered by the court to submit to and comply with an assessment by an approved public treatment facility for an examination of the person's use of alcohol, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs, or tetrahydrocannabinols. The assessment order shall comply with s. 343.30 (1q) (c) 1. a. to c. Intentional failure to comply with an assessment ordered under this paragraph constitutes contempt of court, punishable under ch. 785.

SB377,189 Section 189 . 609.83 of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,98,11 609.83 Coverage of drugs and devices. Limited service health organizations, preferred provider plans, and defined network plans are subject to ss. 632.853 and 632.895 (16p) and (16t).

SB377,190 Section 190 . 632.895 (16p) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,98,14 632.895 (16p) Medical use of marijuana. (a) In this subsection, “medical use of tetrahydrocannabinols” has the meaning given in s. 50.80 (4).

SB377,98,19 (b) Every disability insurance policy and every self-insured health plan of the state or of a county, city, town, village, or school district that provides coverage of prescription drugs and devices shall provide coverage for the medical use of tetrahydrocannabinols in accordance with subch. VI of ch. 50 and any equipment or supplies necessary for the medical use of tetrahydrocannabinols.

SB377,98,22 (c) Coverage under par. (b) may be subject only to the exclusions, limitations, and cost-sharing provisions that apply generally to the coverage of prescription drugs or devices that is provided under the policy or self-insured health plan.

SB377,191 Section 191 . 767.41 (5) (am) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,99,4 767.41 (5) (am) (intro.) Subject to pars. (bm) and, (c), and (d), in determining legal custody and periods of physical placement, the court shall consider all facts relevant to the best interest of the child. The court may not prefer one parent or potential custodian over the other on the basis of the sex or race of the parent or potential custodian. Subject to pars. (bm) and , (c), and (d), the court shall consider the following factors in making its determination:

SB377,192 Section 192 . 767.41 (5) (d) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,99,12 767.41 (5) (d) The court may not consider as a factor in determining the legal custody of a child whether a parent or potential custodian holds or has applied for a registry identification card, as defined in s. 146.44 (1) (h), is or has been the subject of a written certification, as defined in s. 50.80 (10), or is or has been a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6), or a primary caregiver, as defined in s. 50.80 (5), unless the parent or potential custodian's behavior creates an unreasonable danger to the child that can be clearly articulated and substantiated.

SB377,193 Section 193 . 767.451 (5m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,99,17 767.451 (5m) (a) Subject to pars. (b) and, (c), and (d) in all actions to modify legal custody or physical placement orders, the court shall consider the factors under s. 767.41 (5) (am), subject to s. 767.41 (5) (bm), and shall make its determination in a manner consistent with s. 767.41.

SB377,194 Section 194 . 767.451 (5m) (d) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,99,24 767.451 (5m) (d) In an action to modify a legal custody order, the court may not consider as a factor in making a determination whether a parent or potential custodian holds or has applied for a registry identification card, as defined in s. 146.44 (1) (h), is or has been the subject of a written certification, as defined in s. 50.80 (10), or is or has been a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6), or a primary caregiver, as defined in s. 50.80 (5), unless the parent or potential custodian's behavior creates an unreasonable danger to the child that can be clearly articulated and substantiated.

SB377,195 Section 195 . 885.235 (1) (d) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,100,5 885.235 (1) (d) 1. A controlled substance included in schedule I under ch. 961 other than a tetrahydrocannabinol.

SB377,196 Section 196 . 885.235 (1) (d) 5. of the statutes is repealed.

SB377,197 Section 197 . 885.235 (1) (e) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,100,9 885.235 (1) (e) “Tetrahydrocannabinols concentration" has the meaning given in s. 23.33 (1) (k).

SB377,198 Section 198 . 885.235 (1g) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,100,24 885.235 (1g) (intro.) In any action or proceeding in which it is material to prove that a person was under the influence of an intoxicant or had a prohibited alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or a specified alcohol concentration while operating or driving a motor vehicle or, if the vehicle is a commercial motor vehicle, on duty time, while operating a motorboat, except a sailboat operating under sail alone, while operating a snowmobile, while operating an all-terrain vehicle or utility terrain vehicle or while handling a firearm, evidence of the amount of alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols in the person's blood at the time in question, as shown by chemical analysis of a sample of the person's blood or urine or evidence of the amount of alcohol in the person's breath, is admissible on the issue of whether he or she was under the influence of an intoxicant or had a prohibited alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or a specified alcohol concentration if the sample was taken within 3 hours after the event to be proved. The chemical analysis shall be given effect as follows without requiring any expert testimony as to its effect:

SB377,199 Section 199 . 885.235 (1g) (ag) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,101,6 885.235 (1g) (ag) The fact that the analysis shows that the person had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of more than 0.0 but less than 5.0 is relevant evidence on the issue of being under the combined influence of tetrahydrocannabinols and alcohol, a controlled substance, a controlled substance analog, or any other drug, but, except as provided in sub. (1L), is not to be given any prima facie effect.

SB377,200 Section 200 . 885.235 (1g) (cg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,101,10 885.235 (1g) (cg) The fact that the analysis shows that the person had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more is prima facie evidence that he or she had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,201 Section 201 . 885.235 (1L) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,101,22 885.235 (1L) In any action under s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg), evidence of the amount of tetrahydrocannabinols in the person's blood at the time in question, as shown by chemical analysis of a sample of the person's blood or urine, is admissible on the issue of whether he or she had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg) if the sample was taken within 3 hours after the event to be proved. The fact that the analysis shows that the person had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of more than 0.0 but not more than 5.0 is prima facie evidence that the person had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg).

SB377,202 Section 202 . 885.235 (1m) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,102,10 885.235 (1m) In any action under s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn), 346.63 (2m) or (7), or 350.101 (1) (c), evidence of the amount of alcohol in the person's blood at the time in question, as shown by chemical analysis of a sample of the person's blood or urine or evidence of the amount of alcohol in the person's breath, is admissible on the issue of whether he or she had an alcohol concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn) 1., 346.63 (2m), or 350.101 (1) (c) or an alcohol concentration above 0.0 under s. 346.63 (7) if the sample was taken within 3 hours after the event to be proved. The fact that the analysis shows that the person had an alcohol concentration of more than 0.0 but not more than 0.08 is prima facie evidence that the person had an alcohol concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn) 1., 346.63 (2m), or 350.101 (1) (c) or an alcohol concentration above 0.0 under s. 346.63 (7).

SB377,203 Section 203 . 885.235 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,102,22 885.235 (4) The provisions of this section relating to the admissibility of chemical tests for alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration or intoxication or for determining whether a person had a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood shall not be construed as limiting the introduction of any other competent evidence bearing on the question of whether or not a person was under the influence of an intoxicant, had a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, had a specified alcohol or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, or had an alcohol concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3., 23.335 (12) (a) 3., 30.681 (1) (bn) 1., 346.63 (2m), or 350.101 (1) (c), or had a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration in the range specified in s. 23.33 (4c) (a) 3g., 30.681 (1) (bn) 2., 346.63 (2p), or 350.101 (1) (cg).

SB377,204 Section 204 . 895.047 (3) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,103,5 895.047 (3) (a) If the defendant proves by clear and convincing evidence that at the time of the injury the claimant was under the influence of any controlled substance or controlled substance analog to the extent prohibited under s. 346.63 (1) (a), or had an alcohol concentration, as defined in s. 340.01 (1v), of 0.08 or more or a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, as defined in s. 23.33 (1) (k), of 5.0 or more, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the claimant's intoxication or drug use was the cause of his or her injury.

SB377,205 Section 205 . 905.04 (4) (f) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,103,10 905.04 (4) (f) Tests for intoxication. There is no privilege concerning the results of or circumstances surrounding any chemical tests for intoxication or for alcohol concentration, as defined in s. 340.01 (1v), or tetrahydrocannabinols concentration, as defined in s. 23.33 (1) (k).

SB377,206 Section 206 . 939.22 (33) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,103,13 939.22 (33) (a) A controlled substance included in schedule I under ch. 961 other than a tetrahydrocannabinol.

SB377,207 Section 207 . 939.22 (33) (e) of the statutes is repealed.

SB377,208 Section 208 . 939.22 (39g) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,103,17 939.22 (39g) “Tetrahydrocannabinols concentration" has the meaning given in s. 23.33 (1) (k).

SB377,209 Section 209 . 940.09 (1) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,103,20 940.09 (1) (bg) Causes the death of another by the operation or handling of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,210 Section 210 . 940.09 (1) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,103,24 940.09 (1) (dg) Causes the death of an unborn child by the operation or handling of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,211 Section 211 . 940.09 (1g) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,104,3 940.09 (1g) (bg) Causes the death of another by the operation or handling of a firearm or airgun while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,212 Section 212 . 940.09 (1g) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,104,7 940.09 (1g) (dg) Causes the death of an unborn child by the operation or handling of a firearm or airgun while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,213 Section 213 . 940.09 (1m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,104,14 940.09 (1m) (a) A person may be charged with and a prosecutor may proceed upon an information based upon a violation of any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am), or (b), or (bg); any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am), (bg), or (bm); any combination of sub. (1) (c), (cm), or (d), or (dg); any combination of sub. (1) (c), (cm), (dg), or (e); any combination of sub. (1g) (a), (am), or (b), or (bg); or any combination of sub. (1g) (c), (cm), or (d), or (dg) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.

SB377,214 Section 214 . 940.09 (1m) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,104,25 940.09 (1m) (b) If a person is charged in an information with any of the combinations of crimes referred to in par. (a), the crimes shall be joined under s. 971.12. If the person is found guilty of more than one of the crimes so charged for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence, there shall be a single conviction for purposes of sentencing and for purposes of counting convictions under s. 23.33 (13) (b) 2. and 3., under s. 23.335 (23) (c) 2. and 3., under s. 30.80 (6) (a) 2. and 3., under s. 343.307 (1) or under s. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. and 3. Subsection (1) (a), (am), (b), (bg), (bm), (c), (cm), (d), (dg), and (e) each require proof of a fact for conviction which the others do not require, and sub. (1g) (a), (am), (b), (bg), (c), (cm), and (d), and (dg) each require proof of a fact for conviction which the others do not require.

SB377,215 Section 215. 940.09 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,105,8 940.09 (2) (a) In any action under this section, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the death would have occurred even if he or she had been exercising due care and he or she had not been under the influence of an intoxicant, did not have a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, did not have a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or greater, or did not have an alcohol concentration described under sub. (1) (b), (bm), (d) or (e) or (1g) (b) or (d).

SB377,216 Section 216 . 940.09 (2) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,105,17 940.09 (2) (b) In any action under sub. (1) (am) or (cm) or (1g) (am) or (cm) that is based on the defendant allegedly having a detectable amount of methamphetamine or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

SB377,217 Section 217 . 940.09 (2) (c) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,105,24 940.09 (2) (c) In an action under sub. (1) (bg) or (dg) or (1g) (bg) or (dg) that is based on the defendant allegedly having a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration that is 5.0 or greater, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6).

SB377,218 Section 218 . 940.25 (1) (bg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,106,3 940.25 (1) (bg) Causes great bodily harm to another human being by the operation of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,219 Section 219 . 940.25 (1) (dg) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,106,7 940.25 (1) (dg) Causes great bodily harm to an unborn child by the operation of a vehicle while the person has a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or more.

SB377,220 Section 220 . 940.25 (1m) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,106,13 940.25 (1m) (a) A person may be charged with and a prosecutor may proceed upon an information based upon a violation of any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am), or (b), or (bg); any combination of sub. (1) (a), (am), (bg), or (bm); any combination of sub. (1) (c), (cm), or (d), or (dg); or any combination of sub. (1) (c), (cm), (dg), or (e) for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence.

SB377,106,22 (b) If a person is charged in an information with any of the combinations of crimes referred to in par. (a), the crimes shall be joined under s. 971.12. If the person is found guilty of more than one of the crimes so charged for acts arising out of the same incident or occurrence, there shall be a single conviction for purposes of sentencing and for purposes of counting convictions under s. 23.33 (13) (b) 2. and 3., under s. 23.335 (23) (c) 2. and 3., under s. 30.80 (6) (a) 2. or 3., under ss. 343.30 (1q) and 343.305 or under s. 350.11 (3) (a) 2. and 3. Subsection (1) (a), (am), (b), (bg), (bm), (c), (cm), (d), (dg), and (e) each require proof of a fact for conviction which the others do not require.

SB377,221 Section 221 . 940.25 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,107,5 940.25 (2) (a) The defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the great bodily harm would have occurred even if he or she had been exercising due care and he or she had not been under the influence of an intoxicant, did not have a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, did not have a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration of 5.0 or greater, or did not have an alcohol concentration described under sub. (1) (b), (bm), (d) or (e).

SB377,222 Section 222 . 940.25 (2) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB377,107,13 940.25 (2) (b) In any action under this section that is based on the defendant allegedly having a detectable amount of methamphetamine, or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for methamphetamine or one of its metabolic precursors, or gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

SB377,223 Section 223 . 940.25 (2) (c) of the statutes is created to read:

SB377,107,19 940.25 (2) (c) In any action under this section that is based on the defendant allegedly having a tetrahydrocannabinols concentration that is 5.0 or greater, the defendant has a defense if he or she proves by a preponderance of the evidence that at the time of the incident or occurrence he or she had a valid prescription for tetrahydrocannabinol or he or she was a qualifying patient, as defined in s. 50.80 (6).