If you only remember one point about DUI penalties in Wisconsin, remember this: BAC limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21. A first offense: First-offense OWI is typically a forfeiture (civil) with fines, license revocation, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock conditions; subsequent OWIs are criminal misdemeanors/felonies. Felony threshold: A fourth OWI can be a felony; OWI causing injury/death can also be a felony. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Wis. Stat. § 346.63. Lookback: Prior OWI convictions within lifetime enhance; lookbacks for felony counts use defined windows in chapter 346.. Ignition interlock: Ignition interlock is commonly required after OWI as a condition of reinstatement.
First-offense penalties
First-offense OWI is typically a forfeiture (civil) with fines, license revocation, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock conditions; subsequent OWIs are criminal misdemeanors/felonies.
Walking through Wisconsin facts
Use this walkthrough to see which Wisconsin authority does the work at each step.
A driver in Wisconsin is charged with a first impaired-driving offense and wants to know what the statute actually sets.
- Start with the alcohol limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
- Read the first-offense range: First-offense OWI is typically a forfeiture (civil) with fines, license revocation, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock conditions; subsequent OWIs are criminal misdemeanors/felonies.
- Ask when the charge becomes a felony: A fourth OWI can be a felony; OWI causing injury/death can also be a felony. Lookback: Prior OWI convictions within lifetime enhance; lookbacks for felony counts use defined windows in chapter 346.
- Interlock: Ignition interlock is commonly required after OWI as a condition of reinstatement.
Wisconsin OWI under § 346.63 proceeds in circuit court with parallel DOT administrative actions. First offenses are often civil forfeitures; repeats escalate quickly.
When a Wisconsin DUI becomes a felony
A fourth OWI can be a felony; OWI causing injury/death can also be a felony.
Ignition interlock and license consequences
Ignition interlock is commonly required after OWI as a condition of reinstatement.
How a typical Wisconsin DUI case unfolds
Wisconsin OWI under § 346.63 proceeds in circuit court with parallel DOT administrative actions. First offenses are often civil forfeitures; repeats escalate quickly.
Related Wisconsin guides
- How to file for divorce in Wisconsin
- Child custody and parenting time in Wisconsin
- Security deposit return in Wisconsin
Case law: DUI penalties in Wisconsin
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Duane C. Burkman, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner
…results of a chemical test in order to convict a person of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, but it does not preclude the introduction of corroborating physical evidence. The defendant’s interpretation of sec. 346.63(4), Stats., leads to absurd results. A statute should be construed to avoid an unreasonable or absurd result. Wis. Environmental Decade v. Public Serv…
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Duane C. Burkman, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner is worth reading on Wisconsin DUI penalties because the court put the point in its own words: "The defendant’s interpretation of sec. 346.63(4), Stats., leads to absurd results. A statute should be construed to avoid an unreasonable or absurd result. Wis. Environmental Decade v." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Barbara J. Babbitt, Defendant-Appellant
…ts. The officers ultimately placed Babbitt under arrest for driving under the influence of an intoxicant *356 in violation of § 346.63(l)(a), STATS. The officers then took Babbitt to the police station where she was asked to submit to an Intoxilyzer test to determine her blood-alcohol level. Babbitt refused. At the refusal hearing, the court found that the officers had probable…
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Barbara J. Babbitt, Defendant-Appellant is worth reading on Wisconsin DUI penalties because the court put the point in its own words: "The officers ultimately placed Babbitt under arrest for driving under the influence of an intoxicant *356 in violation of § 346.63(l)(a), STATS." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David A. WAALEN, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner
…nt's ability to drive is not required to convict someone of driving under the influence. Id. at 275. The court held that the definition of "under the influence" contained in the Criminal Code should not be applied to Motor Vehicle Code violations. While the court believed that this approach resulted in two different definitions of "under the influence," one in the Criminal Code…
On DUI penalties, STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David A. WAALEN, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner speaks to the Wisconsin dispute in this passage: "Id. at 275. The court held that the definition of 'under the influence' contained in the Criminal Code should not be applied to Motor Vehicle Code violations." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
State, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Draize, Defendant-Appellant
State, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Draize, Defendant-Appellant, 88 Wis. 2d 445 (1979)
…t order affirming a county court judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of an intoxicant, contrary to sec. 346.63(1) (a), Stats. At issue is whether the trial court committed prejudicial error by (1) receiving in evidence a state trooper’s testimony that the defendant told him he had taken a breathalyzer test before; and (2) allowing the prosecutor, in rebuttal…
Practitioners open State, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Draize, Defendant-Appellant when Wisconsin DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "t order affirming a county court judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of an intoxicant, contrary to sec. 346.63(1) (a), Stats. At issue is whether the trial court committed prejudicial error by (1) receiving in evidence a state trooper’s testimony that the defen" Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Joseph L. Smet, Defendant-Appellant
…ment has not been a prerequisite for prosecution under the "driving under the influence" statute since 1981. See State v. Muehlenberg, 118 Wis. 2d 502, 505, 347 N.W.2d 914 (Ct. App. 1984). "The statute represents *535 a legislative determination that public safety is per se endangered when a person drives a motor vehicle while having a specified concentration of.. . alcohol in…
Practitioners open State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Joseph L. Smet, Defendant-Appellant when Wisconsin DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "See State v. Muehlenberg, 118 Wis. 2d 502, 505, 347 N.W.2d 914 (Ct. App. 1984). 'The statute represents *535 a legislative determination that public safety is per se endangered when a person drives a motor vehicle while having a specified concentration of.. ." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cassius A. Foster, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner — Abrahamson, J
…nonconsensual blood draws performed on persons suspected of driving under the influence of an intoxicant in light of Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013). ¶ 84. The majority opinion is part of a trilogy of cases addressing McNeely. In addition to the instant case, the court addresses McNeely in State v. Kennedy, 2014 WI 132, 359 Wis. 2d 454, 856 N.W.2d 834, and State v.…
Practitioners open State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Cassius A. Foster, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner — Abrahamson, J when Wisconsin DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013). ¶ 84. The majority opinion is part of a trilogy of cases addressing McNeely. In addition to the instant case, the court addresses McNeely in State v. Kennedy, 2014 WI 132, 359 Wis. 2d 454, 856 N.W.2d 834, and State v." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
City of West Allis v. Rainey
City of West Allis v. Rainey, 36 Wis. 2d 489 (1967)
…ng to establish the fact prima facie that the defendant was driving under the influence of an intoxicant and the corroborating evidence of the officers was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction. By the Court. — Judgment affirmed. The functioning of the machine is explained in Watts, Some Observations on Police-Administered, Tests for Intoxication, 46 N. C. L. Rev. (1966)…
Practitioners open City of West Allis v. Rainey when Wisconsin DUI penalties turns on the distinction in this sentence: "By the Court. — Judgment affirmed. The functioning of the machine is explained in Watts, Some Observations on Police-Administered, Tests for Intoxication, 46 N. C. L. Rev." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Key takeaways
- BAC limits: 0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
- Lookback period: Prior OWI convictions within lifetime enhance; lookbacks for felony counts use defined windows in chapter 346.
- First-offense range: First-offense OWI is typically a forfeiture (civil) with fines, license revocation, alcohol assessment, and ignition-interlock conditions; subsequent OWIs are criminal misdemeanors/felonies.
- Felony threshold: A fourth OWI can be a felony; OWI causing injury/death can also be a felony.
- Ignition interlock: Ignition interlock is commonly required after OWI as a condition of reinstatement.
- Primary authority: Wis. Stat. § 346.63.
Blood alcohol limits in Wisconsin
0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
Lookback window for prior offenses
Prior OWI convictions within lifetime enhance; lookbacks for felony counts use defined windows in chapter 346.
Frequently asked questions
What is the legal BAC limit in Wisconsin?
0.08% for adults; 0.04% for commercial drivers; zero-tolerance for drivers under 21
Is a first DUI a felony in Wisconsin?
A fourth OWI can be a felony; OWI causing injury/death can also be a felony.
Will I need an ignition interlock device?
Ignition interlock is commonly required after OWI as a condition of reinstatement.
This guide covers Wisconsin impaired-driving law as of 2026. Sentencing grids, administrative DMV rules, and local diversion programs change — verify the live statute and speak with counsel about your charging document.