Fla. Stat. » 322
Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 322.2715 (2025)

Ignition interlock device.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
322.2715 Ignition interlock device.—
(1) Before issuing a permanent or restricted driver license under this chapter, the department shall require the placement of a department-approved ignition interlock device for any person convicted of committing an offense of driving under the influence as specified in subsection (3), except that consideration may be given to those individuals having a documented medical condition that would prohibit the device from functioning normally. If a medical waiver has been granted for a convicted person seeking a restricted license, the convicted person shall not be entitled to a restricted license until the required ignition interlock device installation period under subsection (3) expires, in addition to the time requirements under s. 322.271. If a medical waiver has been approved for a convicted person seeking permanent reinstatement of the driver license, the convicted person must be restricted to an employment-purposes-only license and be supervised by a licensed DUI program until the required ignition interlock device installation period under subsection (3) expires. An interlock device shall be placed on all vehicles that are individually or jointly leased or owned and routinely operated by the convicted person.
(2) For purposes of this section, any conviction for a violation of s. 316.193, a previous conviction for a violation of former s. 316.1931, or a conviction outside this state for driving under the influence, driving while intoxicated, driving with an unlawful blood-alcohol level, or any other similar alcohol-related or drug-related traffic offense is a conviction of driving under the influence.
(3) If the person is convicted of:
(a) A first offense of driving under the influence under s. 316.193 and has an unlawful blood-alcohol level or breath-alcohol level as specified in s. 316.193(1), the ignition interlock device may be installed for at least 6 continuous months.
(b) A first offense of driving under the influence under s. 316.193 and has an unlawful blood-alcohol level or breath-alcohol level as specified in s. 316.193(4), or if a person is convicted of a violation of s. 316.193 and was at the time of the offense accompanied in the vehicle by a person younger than 18 years of age, the person shall have the ignition interlock device installed for at least 6 continuous months for the first offense and for at least 2 continuous years for a second offense.
(c) A second offense of driving under the influence, the ignition interlock device shall be installed for a period of at least 1 continuous year.
(d) A third offense of driving under the influence which occurs within 10 years after a prior conviction for a violation of s. 316.193, the ignition interlock device shall be installed for a period of at least 2 continuous years.
(e) A third offense of driving under the influence which occurs more than 10 years after the date of a prior conviction, the ignition interlock device shall be installed for a period of at least 2 continuous years.
(f) A fourth or subsequent offense of driving under the influence, the ignition interlock device shall be installed for a period of at least 5 years.
(4) If the court fails to order the mandatory placement of the ignition interlock device or fails to order for the applicable period the mandatory placement of an ignition interlock device under s. 316.193 or s. 316.1937 at the time of imposing sentence or within 30 days thereafter, the department shall immediately require that the ignition interlock device be installed as provided in this section, except that consideration may be given to those individuals having a documented medical condition that would prohibit the device from functioning normally. This subsection applies to the reinstatement of the driving privilege following a revocation, suspension, or cancellation that is based upon a conviction for the offense of driving under the influence which occurs on or after July 1, 2005.
(5) In addition to any fees authorized by rule for the installation and maintenance of the ignition interlock device, the authorized installer of the device shall collect and remit $12 for each installation to the department, which shall be deposited into the Highway Safety Operating Trust Fund to be used for the operation of the Ignition Interlock Device Program.
History.—s. 2, ch. 2005-138; s. 36, ch. 2008-176; s. 37, ch. 2009-71; s. 38, ch. 2010-223; s. 60, ch. 2013-160; s. 35, ch. 2014-216.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2005–2009 · leading case: Bradsheer v. Florida Dep't of High. Saf. & Motor Vehs., 20 So. 3d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bradsheer v. Florida Dep't of High. Saf. & Motor Vehs., 20 So. 3d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). · cites it 20× “However, the provision did not have retroactive effect; its application was limited to DUI convictions which occur[ed] on or after July 1, 2005.”
Karz v. Dickenson, 932 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). · cites it 2× “[2] Section 322.2715(4), Florida Statutes (2005), which became effective July 1, 2005, would appear to have allowed the administrative action in this case if it had been enacted at the time of Karz's offense.”
Embrey v. Dickenson, 906 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). “NOTES [1] We note that the legislature recently enacted section 322.2715(4), to take effect July 1, 2005, which provides that [i]f the court fails to order the mandatory placement of the ignition interlock device or fails to order for the applicable period the mandatory…”
State, Dep't of High. Saf. & Motor Vehs. v. Butler, 959 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). “Butler asserted that his employer had been granted a waiver; that the device was not imposed as a condition of his sentence for the May 2001 offense; that his convictions precluded application of section 322.2715; that the officer awarding reinstatement did not require…”
— 322.2715(4) — 3 cases
Bradsheer v. Florida Dep't of High. Saf. & Motor Vehs., 20 So. 3d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). “However, the provision did not have retroactive effect; its application was limited to DUI convictions which occur[ed] on or after July 1, 2005.”
Karz v. Dickenson, 932 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). “[2] Section 322.2715(4), Florida Statutes (2005), which became effective July 1, 2005, would appear to have allowed the administrative action in this case if it had been enacted at the time of Karz's offense.”
Embrey v. Dickenson, 906 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). “NOTES [1] We note that the legislature recently enacted section 322.2715(4), to take effect July 1, 2005, which provides that [i]f the court fails to order the mandatory placement of the ignition interlock device or fails to order for the applicable period the mandatory…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.

This Florida statute resource is curated by the attorney maintaining this site, a Jacksonville, Florida criminal defense attorney (Florida Bar No. 39104). Attorney Syfert regularly handles Chapter 322 matters in the context of driving-while-license-suspended and criminal traffic defense and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.