The Wisconsin Supreme Court voted to accept four new cases Tuesday, including a case that would determine if someone’s drunken driving offenses in another state could be used against them here.

Among the cases chosen is State v. Gerard Carter. Carter was charged with operating with a prohibited blood alcohol concentration and operating while under the influence of an intoxicant, according to a statement from the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The statement said the state then discovered Carter had a prior OWI charge in Illinois, along with two “Zero Tolerance” suspensions of his driver’s license. Illinois’ “Zero Tolerance” law prohibits any amount of alcohol in the system of a driver less than 21 years of age.

Wisconsin decided to count all the previous violations and proceed with sentencing as if both charges were his fourth offense.

Although Carter submitted a plea of guilty, he also filed a motion to consider whether the Illinois offenses should be used for his sentencing, according to the statement.

Carter’s lawyers are arguing the prior “Zero Tolerance” suspensions should not count as previous offenses for sentencing purposes in the state of Wisconsin, as they did not occur here.

A Wisconsin circuit court denied Carter’s motion, deciding to count the suspensions, because, despite the difference between the laws of Wisconsin and Illinois, they both prohibited driving while under the influence of alcohol.

However, an appeals court unanimously reversed the decision, ruling the “Zero Tolerance” suspensions cannot be counted as convictions.

Wisconsin Association on Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Interim Executive Director Angela McAlister said she supported including driving-related alcohol offenses from other states for sentencing purposes.

“Drunk driving is drunk driving, no matter where it is,” McAlister said.

In McAlister’s opinion, including such offenses may lead to harsher punishments and could also lead to a decrease in drunken driving and faster intervention for those with an alcohol problem.

“People need treatment. When we put people in jail so quickly, the problem isn’t solved,” McAlister said.

Echoing this sentiment was University of Wisconsin Nutritional Sciences professor Susan Smith.

“Changes that enable affected individuals to obtain intervention sooner could be to their benefit, and to the benefit of others that are affected by their behavior,” Smith wrote in an e-mail to The Badger Herald.

According to Smith, Wisconsin has the highest rate in the nation of individuals admitting to binge drinking within the last month, at 23.4 percent. Considering the prevalence of drinking in the state, Smith said including offenses in other states could have an effect.

“It does seem likely that such changes could increase the number of repeat offenders. Whether it leads to increased sentencing is up to the courts and prosecutors,” Smith said in the e-mail.

UW law professor Frank Tuerkheimer also said he supports alcohol-related driving offenses from other states affecting sentencing here. He said it would be “nuts” not to include them.

In Tuerkheimer’s opinion, those who repeatedly drive under the influence should have their record travel with them, no matter where in the country they commit their offense.

“To me, this is a no-brainer,” Tuerkheimer said.