What is the sentence for an Aggravated DUI conviction in Arizona?

Arizona Aggravated DUI sentencing depends on the specific charge and any prior convictions. Prison sentences are mandatory — not probation. In State v. Driggs, the defendant received a ten-year prison sentence. Sentences can range from one year to well over ten years depending on the defendant's criminal history, the facts of the case, and whether the case went to trial or was resolved by plea agreement (plea sentences are often shorter).

Can an out-of-state DUI conviction count as a prior DUI in Arizona?

Yes. Arizona courts can and do use out-of-state DUI convictions as prior offenses to elevate a current DUI to an Aggravated DUI. In State v. Driggs, two prior Colorado DUI convictions from October 2015 were used to support the Aggravated DUI charges. The prosecution proved the prior convictions through testimony from a Colorado law enforcement officer.

Is a breath test result admissible if the deprivation period wasn't perfectly observed?

Arizona requires a 15-minute 'deprivation period' before administering a breath test to ensure the result reflects deep lung air and is not contaminated by mouth alcohol from burping, vomiting, or recent drinking. If the officer properly monitored the defendant during this period — verifying no food, alcohol, vomiting, or mouth contamination — the results are admissible. In State v. Driggs, the court upheld the breath test results because there was no evidence of an actual problem during the deprivation period, even though the defendant had been handcuffed in the back seat during transport.

If I have a suspended or revoked out-of-state license, can I be charged with Aggravated DUI in Arizona?

Yes. Arizona's Aggravated DUI statute applies when a person drives while their license is suspended, revoked, or restricted — regardless of which state issued that license. In State v. Driggs, the defendant's Colorado driver's license was revoked, and that revocation supported one of the Aggravated DUI charges in Arizona.

State v. Driggs: What an Arizona Aggravated DUI Conviction Looks Like — And What You Can Learn From It

Q: What makes a DUI an Aggravated (Felony) DUI in Arizona?

In Arizona, a DUI becomes an Aggravated DUI — a felony — under several circumstances defined by A.R.S. § 28-1383. The most common triggers are: (1) driving while impaired or over .08% BAC while your license is suspended, revoked, or restricted; (2) committing a DUI while having two or more prior DUI convictions within the past 84 months (seven years); (3) driving the wrong way on a highway; or (4) having a person under 15 years old in the vehicle. An aggravated DUI conviction can result in mandatory prison time, not just jail.

Q: What is a Rule 20 Motion in an Arizona DUI case?

A Rule 20 Motion for Judgment of Acquittal is a legal motion that a defendant's attorney can file at trial arguing that the prosecution has not presented enough evidence for a reasonable jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 20(a)(1), the judge must grant the motion if there is no 'substantial evidence' to support a conviction. In practice, these motions are rarely granted, and in State v. Driggs the court denied the motion and upheld the conviction on appeal.

Case: State v. Driggs, No. 2 CA-CR 2024-0057 — Arizona Court of Appeals, Filed January 7, 2026

This post analyzes a recent Arizona Court of Appeals decision involving an Aggravated DUI (felony DUI) conviction. While this is a memorandum decision — meaning it is not binding legal precedent for future cases — it is an instructive real-world example of how Arizona courts evaluate aggravated DUI evidence, what prosecutors must prove, and what sentences defendants can face.

If you or someone you know is facing an Aggravated DUI charge anywhere in Arizona — including Maricopa County, Pima County, Pinal County, or elsewhere in the state — understanding how these cases unfold at trial is critical.

What Were the Charges?

The defendant was charged with two separate counts of Aggravated DUI under A.R.S. § 28-1383:

Driving while impaired and with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over .08% while his license was revoked; and
Driving while impaired and with a BAC over .08% while having two prior DUI convictions within the past 84 months (seven years).

Either charge on its own is enough to turn a standard DUI into a Class 4 felony in Arizona. In this case, the State pursued both simultaneously.

The Facts: What the Jury Heard

The Traffic Stop

A police officer pulled the defendant over for excessive speed. At the stop, the officer discovered that the defendant held a revoked Colorado driver’s license — not an Arizona license, but still relevant under Arizona’s Aggravated DUI statute.

The officer observed multiple classic indicators of alcohol impairment: slurred speech, and “droopy,” watery, and bloodshot eyes. The defendant agreed to participate in field sobriety tests.

Field Sobriety Testing

During the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) eye test, the officer found that both of the defendant’s eyes showed a lack of smooth pursuit — a recognized sign of impairment. Empty alcohol bottles were also found in the vehicle; the defendant admitted he had consumed their contents.

The defendant initially agreed to take a Preliminary Breath Test (PBT) at the scene, but he failed to provide enough air to produce a valid reading and ultimately refused. He was then placed under arrest.

The Breath Test at the Station

The arresting officer began a mandatory 15-minute deprivation period during transport to ensure no food, alcohol, or mouth contamination could skew the breath test results. At the station, an Intoxilyzer breath test was administered by a second officer while the arresting officer continued to observe the defendant.

The results:

First sample (3:13 a.m.): .111 BAC
Second sample (3:20 a.m.): .112 BAC

Both readings were well above Arizona’s legal limit of .08%.

A forensic scientist testified about a potential defense argument — that a silent burp during the deprivation period could affect test results. The scientist explained, however, that a burp alone does not invalidate the test; only actual regurgitation of stomach contents into the mouth would be a problem. There was no evidence that occurred here.

The Post-Arrest Statement

After receiving his Miranda rights, the defendant told officers he began drinking at 11:00 a.m., took four shots of whiskey at his residence, then went to a bar where he consumed two more shots, a beer, and a glass of wine before driving.

The Prior Convictions

A Colorado law enforcement officer testified that the defendant had been convicted of two separate DUI offenses in Colorado in October 2015, and that he was on felony parole at the time of this arrest. This testimony established the “two priors within 84 months” element required for one of the Aggravated DUI counts.

What Happened at Trial

After the State presented its case, the defense filed a Rule 20 Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, arguing the prosecution had not presented sufficient evidence to support a conviction. Under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 20(a)(1), a judge must grant a judgment of acquittal if there is no “substantial evidence” — meaning proof that reasonable persons could accept as adequate to support a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.

The trial court denied the motion. The jury found the defendant guilty on all counts.

At sentencing, the court imposed a ten-year prison sentence, with credit for 482 days already served.

What the Court of Appeals Decided

NOTICE: This case is a memorandum decision which means it is not for official publication under Arizona Supreme Court Rule111(c). The decision is not precedential and may be cited only as authorized by rule. Although not official precedent it does give an indication of what the court of appeals thinks about these issues.

The defendant appealed on two grounds:

The Rule 20 motion should have been granted. The Court of Appeals disagreed, holding that the combined evidence — the officer’s observations, the HGN test results, empty alcohol bottles, the defendant’s admission of extensive drinking, and the Intoxilyzer readings — was more than sufficient for a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The breath test results should have been excluded. The defendant argued the deprivation period may not have been properly observed. The Court of Appeals again disagreed, finding that the arresting officer monitored the defendant throughout and there was no actual evidence of any contamination event. The results were properly admitted.

The conviction and the ten-year sentence were upheld in full.

📌 What This Means If You’re Facing an Aggravated DUI in Arizona

State v. Driggs illustrates several truths about how Arizona prosecutes and sentences felony DUI cases:

Out-of-state license revocations count. The defendant’s revoked Colorado license was enough to trigger the Arizona Aggravated DUI statute — your license does not have to be an Arizona license.
Out-of-state prior DUI convictions count too. Prosecutors can use prior DUI convictions from other states — here, Colorado — to elevate your current charge to a felony.
A high BAC and physical signs of impairment together create a strong prosecution case. When a jury sees HGN test failure, slurred speech, empty bottles, a post-Miranda admission, and a .111/.112 Intoxilyzer reading, it is very difficult for the defense to overcome that evidence.
Sentences after trial can be severe. Ten years in prison is a real outcome. Plea agreements often result in shorter sentences, but those decisions require careful legal strategy.
Procedural challenges — like attacking the deprivation period — must be grounded in actual evidence. Theoretical possibilities are not enough to suppress a breath test result.

If you are anywhere in Arizona and have been arrested for an Aggravated DUI, the decisions you make in the days immediately following your arrest can significantly affect the outcome of your case.

Frequently Asked Questions About Aggravated DUI in Arizona

What makes a DUI an Aggravated (Felony) DUI in Arizona?

A DUI becomes an Aggravated DUI — a felony — under A.R.S. § 28-1383 under several circumstances. The most common are: driving impaired (or over .08% BAC) while your license is suspended, revoked, or restricted; committing a DUI while having two or more prior DUI convictions within the past 84 months; driving the wrong way on a highway; or having a passenger under 15 years old in the vehicle. Learn more about Arizona DUI charges and penalties.

What is the sentence for an Aggravated DUI in Arizona?

Arizona law mandates prison — not probation — for Aggravated DUI convictions. The exact sentence depends on the charge, criminal history, and case facts. In State v. Driggs, the defendant received ten years. Sentences resolved through plea agreements are often shorter than those imposed after a jury trial, which is one reason early legal representation matters so much.

Can an out-of-state DUI conviction be used against me in Arizona?

Yes. Arizona courts can use prior DUI convictions from other states to elevate a current charge to an Aggravated DUI. In State v. Driggs, two October 2015 Colorado DUI convictions were used to establish the “two priors within 84 months” element. Prosecutors typically prove these through records and law enforcement testimony from the other state.

Can an out-of-state suspended or revoked license trigger an Aggravated DUI in Arizona?

Yes. If your license from any state is suspended or revoked and you are caught driving impaired in Arizona, that satisfies the license-suspension element of Arizona’s Aggravated DUI statute. Your license does not need to be an Arizona license.

Is a breath test result admissible if the deprivation period was conducted during transport?

Yes, as long as the officer properly observed the defendant during the required 15-minute period — verifying no eating, drinking, vomiting, or contamination occurred. In State v. Driggs, the court found that conducting the deprivation period in the patrol car during transport was acceptable because the defendant was handcuffed and under continuous observation. See more about how Arizona’s Intoxilyzer test works.

What is a Rule 20 Motion in an Arizona DUI case?

A Rule 20 Motion for Judgment of Acquittal is a motion that defense counsel can file at trial arguing the prosecution has not presented “substantial evidence” sufficient for a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In practice, these motions are rarely granted when the State has multiple forms of evidence — and as State v. Driggs shows, they are also difficult to win on appeal.

Related Arizona DUI Resources

About the Author: Gordon Thompson is an Arizona DUI and criminal defense attorney. He regularly writes about Arizona DUI case law, field sobriety testing, and criminal procedure to help Arizona residents understand their legal rights. For questions about a specific situation, contact Gordon Thompson directly.

Website: https://www.GordonThompsonAttorney.net
Blog: https://www.GordonThompsonAttorney.net/blog/

What is a Felony DUI in Arizona Number 12, State v. Driggs