Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 44. LAW ENFORCEMENT · CHAPTER 4. MISCELLANEOUS FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE · Part 12. Montana 24/7 Sobriety and Drug Monitoring Program Act
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 44-4-1203 (2026)

Sobriety And Drug Monitoring Program Created

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 44
  3. CHAPTER 4
  4. Part 12
  5. 44-4-1203 Sobriety and drug monitoring program created

TITLE 44. LAW ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4. MISCELLANEOUS FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Part 12. Montana 24/7 Sobriety and Drug Monitoring Program Act

Sobriety And Drug Monitoring Program Created

44-4-1203. Sobriety and drug monitoring program created. (1) There is a statewide 24/7 sobriety and drug monitoring program within the department to be administered by the attorney general.

(2) (a) The core components of the sobriety program must include use of a primary testing methodology for the presence of alcohol or dangerous drugs that:

(i) best facilitates the ability to apply immediate sanctions for noncompliance; and

(ii) is available at an affordable cost.

(b) Primary testing methods for alcohol include twice-a-day, in-person breath testing at a central location and other methodologies approved by the department. Primary testing methodologies must utilize devices that are capable of determining alcohol concentrations below an equivalent breath alcohol concentration of 0.010 grams per 210 liters of breath. If the primary testing methodology is a breath alcohol analysis, the device utilized must be listed on the most recent conforming products list for evidential breath alcohol measurement devices as published by the national highway traffic safety administration.

(c) In cases of hardship or when a sobriety program participant is subject to less-stringent testing requirements, testing methodologies with timely sanctions for noncompliance may be utilized. Hardship testing methodologies include the use of transdermal alcohol monitoring devices, remote breath test devices, and other methods approved by the department. A hardship testing methodology may be used if the court or agency determines that hardship factors, including but not limited to distance from or lack of access to a primary testing method site, prevent the reasonable use of a primary testing method.

(3) The sobriety program must be supported by evidence of effectiveness and satisfy at least two of the following categories:

(a) the program is included in the federal registry of evidence-based programs and practices;

(b) the program has been reported in a peer-reviewed journal as having positive effects on the primary targeted outcome; or

(c) the program has been documented as effective by informed experts and other sources.

(4) If a law enforcement agency chooses to participate in the sobriety program, the department shall assist in the creation and administration of the program in the manner provided in this part. The department shall also assist entities participating in the program in determining alternatives to incarceration.

(5) (a) If a law enforcement agency participates in the program, the law enforcement agency may designate an entity to provide the testing services or to take any other action required or authorized to be provided by the law enforcement agency pursuant to this part, except that the law enforcement agency's designee may not determine whether to participate in the sobriety program.

(b) The law enforcement agency shall establish the testing locations and times for the county but must have at least one testing location and two daily testing times approximately 12 hours apart.

(6) All alcohol or drug testing ordered by a court must utilize the data management technology plan provided for in 44-4-1204(4). All alcohol or drug testing ordered by a court must utilize the data management technology system in accordance with the data management technology plan provided for in 44-4-1204(4). The data is owned by the state and maintained by the department. Approved testing methodologies, whether designated as primary or hardship, must be capable of electronically transferring data directly into the data management technology system through a department-approved interface.

(7) In order to provide a more complete record of drug and alcohol testing results, any alcohol or drug testing required by other state or local agencies may utilize the data management technology system.

History: En. Sec. 3, Ch. 318, L. 2011; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 309, L. 2013; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 312, L. 2015; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 374, L. 2019.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2015–2023 · leading case: State v. Spady, 2015 MT 218, 354 P.3d 590.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Spady, 2015 MT 218, 354 P.3d 590. · cites it 5× “309; § 44-4-1203(2), MCA (2013). ¶39 Here, the record does not support a conclusion that the Justice Court required the 24/7 Sobriety Program as a condition of bail for Spady after conducting an individualized assessment.”
State v. N. Akhmedli, 2023 MT 120, 531 P.3d 562. “3d 590 , this Court reversed the District Court’s determination that §§ 44-4-1203(2)-1213(4), MCA, were unconstitutional as “an improper delegation of legislative authority to the Attorney General for failure to provide objective criteria.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 44-4-1203(2): 2 cases
State v. Spady, 2015 MT 218, 354 P.3d 590. “309; § 44-4-1203(2), MCA (2013). ¶39 Here, the record does not support a conclusion that the Justice Court required the 24/7 Sobriety Program as a condition of bail for Spady after conducting an individualized assessment.”
State v. N. Akhmedli, 2023 MT 120, 531 P.3d 562. “3d 590 , this Court reversed the District Court’s determination that §§ 44-4-1203(2)-1213(4), MCA, were unconstitutional as “an improper delegation of legislative authority to the Attorney General for failure to provide objective criteria.”
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.