An alcohol policy evaluation of drinking and driving in Hillsborough County, Florida

Criminal Justice Policy Review

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 434-450

  Grohosky, Amanda R ^a   Moore, Kathleen A ^b   Ochshorn, Ezra ^b  

^a RIDER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Alcohol policy; Drinking and driving

Indexed keywords

EID: 35748956872     PISSN: 08874034     EISSN: 15523586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0887403407303736     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Dejong, W., & Hingson, R. (1998). Strategies to reduce driving under the influence of alcohol. Annual Reviews of Public Health, 19, 359-378.
2. DeYoung, D.J. (1997). An evaluation of the effectiveness of alcohol treatment, driver license actions and jail terms in reducing drunk driving recidivism in California. Addiction, 98(2), 989-997.
3. DeYoung, D.J. (2002). An evaluation of the implementation of ignition interlock in California. Journal of Safety Research, 33(4), 473-482.
4. Dill, P.L., & Wells-Parker, E. (2006). Court mandated treatment for convicted drinking drivers. Alcohol Research and Health, 29(1), 41-48.
5. Fradella, H.F. (2000). Mandatory minimum sentences: Arizona's ineffective tool for the social control of driving under the influence. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11(2), 113-135.
6. Freeman-Wilson, K., & Huddleston, C.W. (1999). DWI/Drug Courts: Defining a national strategy. Alexandria, VA: National Drug Court Institute.
7. Fulkerson, A. (2003). Blow and go: The breath-analyzed ignition interlock device as a technical response to DWI. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 29(1), 219-235.
8. Hedlund, J.H., & McCartt, A.T. (2002). Drunk driving: Seeking additional solutions. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.
9. Huddleston, C.W., & Wosje, R. (2005). DWI courts: A promising sentencing innovation (DOT HS 809 850). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
10. Jones, R.K., & Lacey, J.H. (2000). State of knowledge of alcohol-impaired driving: Research on repeat DWI o fenders (DTNH 22-98-C-05109). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
11. Kunitz, S.J., Woodall, W.G., Zhao, H., Wheeler, D.R., Lillis, R., & Rogers, E. (2002). Rearrest rates after incarceration for DWI: A comparative study in Southwestern US County. American Journal of Public Health, 92(11), 1826-1831.
12. Martinez, P. (1998). Treatment of persons charged with driving under the influence: A multimodal program design. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 59 (4-B), 1860.
13. McCarty, D., & Argeriou, M. (1988). Rearrest following residential treatment for repeat offender drunken drivers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49(1), 1-6.
14. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (2002). It's time to get MADD all over again: Resuscitating the nation's e forts to prevent impaired driving. Irvine, TX: Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
15. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2003a). Initiatives to address impaired driving. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
16. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2003 b). You drink & drive. You lose. National crackdown: Small scale sobriety checkpoints. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
17. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2005). Tra fic safety facts (DOT HS 810 630). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
18. Snelling, E. (2006, July 31). Personal communication.
19. Vallejo, J. (2005). Obvious choice: Alcohol and drug-impaired driving awareness. Tampa, FL: DUI Awareness Initiative.
20. Wells-Parker, E., & Williams, M. (2002). Enhancing the effectiveness of traditional interventions with drinking drivers by adding brief individual intervention components. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63(6), 655-664.