I. Introduction

Driving under the influence remains one of the leading causes of injury and fatality on Arizona roads. In April 2025, a drunk driver collided with three vehicles at the intersection of Mill Avenue and 5th Street in downtown Tempe, sending multiple people to the hospital and reigniting debate over repeat DUI offenders in the state.

<br><br>

Those affected by alcohol-related crashes are encouraged to speak with a Tempe Car Accident Attorney to better understand how Arizona law can help victims recover damages and hold impaired drivers accountable.

II. Factual Background

  • Location & Time: Late evening, Mill Avenue near 5th Street — a popular entertainment district in Tempe.

  • Crash Details: A Ford Explorer driven by an intoxicated 28-year-old male ran a red light at high speed and struck two sedans and one SUV.

  • Injuries: Seven individuals were injured, two critically. One required airlift transport to a trauma center.

  • Arrest: The driver had a prior DUI conviction and was arrested at the scene. Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) was reportedly 0.18%.

III. Legal Issues Raised

  1. Gross Negligence and Punitive Damages

    Arizona law allows victims to pursue punitive damages against drivers whose extreme recklessness (e.g., high BAC, repeat DUI) shows conscious disregard for safety.

  2. Dram Shop Liability

    If a bar or restaurant overserved the driver, they may face third-party liability under Arizona's dram shop statutes.

  3. Criminal vs. Civil Proceedings

    A criminal DUI conviction does not preclude civil action. In fact, it may strengthen a victim's personal injury claim due to established fault.

  4. Insurance Coverage Limits

    DUI cases often exceed standard liability insurance limits, requiring claims against the driver's personal assets or underinsured motorist coverage.

IV. Applicable Law

  • ARS § 28-1381–1383 (Arizona DUI Statutes)

    Defines thresholds for DUI and aggravated DUI, including consequences for repeat offenders and accidents causing injury.

  • ARS § 12-820.03 (Punitive Damages)

    Allows for enhanced compensation in cases involving gross negligence or willful misconduct.

  • ARS § 4-311 (Dram Shop Law)

    Holds alcohol-serving establishments liable if they serve a “visibly intoxicated” individual who later causes harm.

  • Case Law: Schwerdtfeger v. Valley Bar & Grill, 2012 Ariz. App. LEXIS 198

    Found the establishment partially liable for failing to cut off a patron who later caused a high-speed DUI crash.

V. Legal Analysis

In this case, the impaired driver's BAC was more than twice the legal limit and he had a prior DUI on record. That level of recklessness supports a claim not just for compensatory damages (medical bills, lost wages, etc.), but also for punitive damages meant to deter future misconduct.

If surveillance or witness evidence confirms the driver was overserved at a local establishment, dram shop liability could extend fault to the bar that served him. This is critical in high-damage cases where the driver's insurance policy is insufficient.

Moreover, the dual-track nature of DUI cases—criminal prosecution and civil litigation—offers victims a powerful one-two punch: the state can impose penalties, while private attorneys can seek full financial recovery for the victims.

VI. Conclusion

DUI crashes are among the most preventable tragedies on the road. Arizona's legal framework provides robust tools for victims to hold drunk drivers—and potentially the establishments that enabled them—accountable. Legal action not only compensates the injured but also sends a message: reckless driving has consequences.