Former Alaska Department of Fish & Game commissioner Denby Lloyd, 56, arrested for drunken driving in August 2010, pleaded guilty in Juneau Superior Court on Wednesday to driving under the influence as part of an agreement reached by his attorney Louis Menendez and the City and Borough of Juneau.
A second charge of reckless endangerment was dismissed as part of the deal. That charge stemmed from his wife being a passenger in the vehicle.
Judge Larry Card accepted the agreement and sentenced Lloyd to the mandatory minimum of 33 days, with 30 suspended and three to serve at Lemon Creek Correctional Center.
“Mr. Lloyd will report to jail this evening by 8 o’clock,” Menendez said in court. “As is his request.”
Lloyd was also fined $3,000 with $1,500 suspended. The remainder is due by June 2012.
Conditions of the sentence were for Lloyd to attend and comply with the Juneau Alcohol Safety Action Program, which he already has done.
A 90-day license suspension was also imposed, which is to be followed by six months of required use of an interlock device for his vehicle. Lloyd will also have 18 months of unsupervised probation and must pay additional court and incarceration costs of $234, and a surcharge of $75. Lloyd is already eligible to retain his license. His costs in purchasing the interlock device will be credited toward the payment of his fine.
“Mr. Lloyd has no prior convictions,” City Attorney Robyn Carlisle said. “This is a self-correcting sentence, we will never see Mr. Lloyd in error in court again.”
Lloyd had no statement for the court.
“We are all humans,” Card said to Lloyd. “I appreciate the fact that you are here and I am satisfied you will never see a court again.”
An evidentiary hearing was held before Juneau Superior Court Judge Patricia Collins, now retired, on April 19 to determine if probable cause existed for Juneau Police Department Officer Thomas Penrose to pull Lloyd’s vehicle over on Aug. 8, 2010 for a traffic violation and whether that stop and ensuing field sobriety tests were enough justification to arrest Lloyd for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Court documents state that on Aug. 8, 2010 at 12:40 a.m., Penrose observed Lloyd’s vehicle signaling for what would have been an illegal left turn. That turn was not attempted, but Penrose followed the vehicle and noted expired tags but no other improper driving. The vehicle stopped in front of the Baranof Hotel and Penrose activated police lights and approached the vehicle.
Collins ruled on May 2 that while Penrose made multiple errors in his report and the administration of the field sobriety tests, the final question for the court is whether, objectively viewed, there was probable cause to arrest Lloyd given the totality of circumstances at the conclusion of those tests. She ruled that probable cause did exist,
Collins noted that Lloyd’s breath alcohol test result was 0.143 percent. A person is presumed intoxicated at a blood alcohol level of 0.08 percent.
• Contact reporter Klas Stolpe at 523-2263 or at klas.stolpe@juneauempire.com.
Comments (23)
Add comment"Never see a court again"
Lets get real--- I think most people arrested for DUI have done it before and will do it again!
nice slap on the wrist
ALL drunk drivers convicted of drunk driving should spend a mandatory 30 days in jail and lose their license for at least a year. They do not deserve the freedom to drive on our roads. They are a threat to society.
Repeat offenders should lose their license forever and spend at least one year in jail to ensure they are sober.
Denby's wrists must be a little red this morning.
Justice done
I dont condone DUI under any circumstances. Offenders should pay for their crimes. That said, it is time we, as concerned citizens, contact our legislators and ask that they support a "three strikes" and you're out policy regarding alcohol related driving offenses. The recidivism rate is very high. Most dont get caught. The ones that do should have accountability beyond a slap on the wrist every time. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Three alcohol related driving offenses should forever prohibit one from having a driver's license. Period !! Mr. Denby "... is already eligible to retain his license". What???? Why?? He endangered his wife and the public at large. He was found guilty of alcohol related driving offenses and he is serving but 3 days in jail? I'll bet he drove himself to LCCC !!!
I hope he never sees court again, but my firm hope is that this lesson will hit home with this man who obviously has an alcohol problem and bad judgement. The fact that he could afford Louis Menendez and used his excellent litigation skills to mediate such a deal tells all. He is not a man who believes in the true seriousness of his crime.
"The fact that he could
"The fact that he could afford Louis Menendez and used his excellent litigation skills to mediate such a deal tells all."
Tells all what? He got basically the same sentence that every other first time offender gets. It's his constitutional right to have his case heard in court. I suppose if you are ever arrested for something you'll just show up at court and tell the judge to have his/her way with you?
Slap on the wrist
Who is going to "learn their lesson" on their first offense...with 3 days in jail? I think a first offense should land you in jail for a min of 30 days (none suspended) and lose your license for one year.
I know of several people in this town that Menendez has "gotten off" for drunk driving...and they are still doing it. One in particular has received 6 DUIs, lost his license for life....but I still seeing him driving.
3 days in jail is a bunch of crap!
Ever spend 3 days in Jail? I
Ever spend 3 days in Jail? I haven't either, but I can guarantee you for sure it would have an effect on the vast majority of the people put in there.
3days
How about a week. 3days is something you endure and keep your mouth shut. A week seems a little more reasonable considering the offense.
Prisons
The purpose of prisons, is to remove people from society who are a danger to society.
Drunk drivers are a danger to society, and they have a high recidivism rate.
If I were queen of the world:
First offense: 30 days mandatory jail. $5000 fine. Lose license one year. Mandatory treatment for alcoholism.
Second offense: 1 year mandatory jail with none suspended. Forfeit your car. $10,000 fine. Revoke license for life. Mandatory treatment.
Third offense: 10 years in jail.
Let he who is without sin....
....you know the rest.
@Jo MacNamara: one of the
@Jo MacNamara: one of the purposes of prisons is to lock people up who are a danger to society, but it's far from the main reason. The main reason is to make people outside of the prison system feel better.
If we were REALLY concerned about recidivism, rehabilitation would be a focal point of our penal system, and it sadly is not, because a certain un-empathetic demographic believes, contrary to all actual evidence, that stiffer penalties result in fewer criminals.
As for drunk drivers--take away their licenses and they cease to be a problem. No jail time is required (although I think 3 days is good for first offense).
And of course no one takes into account how just being convicted of a DUI affects your life in other ways. Prospective employers are less likely to hire you, your insurance premiums go through the roof, and you even stand a chance of LOSING your current job. And of course your friends and family probably aren't 100% supportive.
"As for drunk drivers--take
"As for drunk drivers--take away their licenses and they cease to be a problem."
Yeah, because you have to insert a valid DL in the ignition to start the car. I wish I could find a report that shows how many people with DUI's are also cited for driving without a valid OL, but I know this is often the case with repeat offenders.
A joint study in 1997 by the
A joint study in 1997 by the National Sheriffs' Association and National Highway Transportation Safety Administration said state motor vehicle officials estimated that as many as 80 percent of those who aren't licensed to drive legally do so anyway.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07204/803726-85.stm#ixzz1PThYUi8R
About one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted each year of driving under the influence are repeat DUI offenders, NHTSA said. And many second- and third-time DUI offenders who had licenses suspended accumulated traffic offenses or were involved in crashes during the suspension periods.
In one study, 32 percent of suspended second-time DUI offenders and 61 percent of third-time offenders received violations or crash citations on their driving records during their suspensions.
You can't legally assume
You can't legally assume someone who commits one crime will commit another. If someone gets a DUI and doesn't have a valid license, they have committed two crimes, and are subject to different punishment than someone who just gets a DUI.
Just showing proof that
Just showing proof that suspending licenses doesn't solve the problem as you suggested.
Fair enough. The article
Fair enough.
The article does go on to discuss vehicle seizure, however, which I think would be a good idea. Much better than jail.
I like the idea of forfeiting
I like the idea of forfeiting vehicles on the 2nd or 3rd offense. Auctioning off these vehicles could help raise funds for something, though often times the vehicles these chronic offenders are driving are junk.
He pleaded guilty and took
He pleaded guilty and took responsibility. I met him before when I was commercial fishing in Bristol Bay and he was a nice guy. Not saying he shouldnt be held accountable; just that hes a good person who made a mistake. I believe he will not be back in court, and he will make a different decision in the future.
6 monthes of an interlock, thats it?
Most first time offenders have to have that equipment in for a year! Come on Judge!
@gstring
The legislature recently amended the law so it's only 6 months. It was a year, but was then reduced in the next session (or maybe two sessions later).
Denby Lloyd
To those who have never made a mistake I applaud you. To those who pass judgement with no knowledge of the man concerned, you are shamed.
The pains and sorrows of the last 10 months are beyond your understanding perhaps because you have never felt those emotions, either because you do no wrong or probably more aptly, are simply condescending and scornful people.
My gut reaction is anger that one can accuse more than the verdict concludes. To slander a man you know not with such contempuousness is frightening and very sad.
This man has given most of his waking hours for the past 28 years to his duties for the State of Alaska because of his love and passion for the wilderness and the good people who reside here.
But for the Grace of God go I.
Laurie Lloyd
I agree with you. I met him in King Salmon a few years back when I was commercial fishing as a deckhand. He encouraged me to try and get my own permit and boat and had a conversation with me for about 20 minutes in regards to our fisheries and state politics. He was very genuine and patiently discussed opportunities with me. I could tell he was passionate about his work, and was demonstrating leadership. It was obvious he was a man of quality and I always appreciated that experience with him and followed him in the newspapers to hear what he had to say on issues.
As you say, we all make our mistakes and I have made more than my share. I dont judge him and I respect your coming forward to support him in his time of need. Its the most we could ever hope for-to see our loved ones com forward and stand up for us- he is blessed.
Jo MacNamara, you're not the
Jo MacNamara, you're not the queen of the world. 'Nuff said!