DWI's and "casing" bars

Factual Questions
21

The real outrage:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A24635-2003Jan7&notFound=true

Art

22

That link doesn’t work for me, Art.

23

Works for me, and yes, it is an outrage.

24

Hmm, it does work if I copy and paste.

PIs have long been a tool of the police that can be hard to defend against.

25

That’s my understanding, at least here in Texas: DWI if the keys are in the ignition when they find you, whether the car is running or not. PI if the keys are anywhere other than the ignition (of course, if they actually witness you driving drunk and pull you over you can’t then take the keys out of the ignition to avoid a DWI. The point is that if the keys are in the ignition when you’re busted they have probable cause to assume you’ve been driving even if they didn’t witness you doing so).

26

I don’t have a cite but I think they tried it with male cops and it just wasn’t very effective.

27

This reminds me of an old joke, and a question I’m curious about:

A cop is staking out a bar to pick up drunks at closing time. Some guy staggers out of the bar, obviously inebriated, so the cop watches him. He wanders around the parking lot, finally finds his car, fumbles the keys several times getting the door open, falls into the car, and starts a similar tortous process getting the keys into the ignition. Meanwhile, other patrons are streaming out of the bar, getting into their cars and driving away. Finally, the drunk the cop is watching manages to get his key in the ignition, and the cop walks up and asks him to step out of the car. The driver, without a trace of a slur says “Certainly, officer”, steps out of the car without a problem, takes a breathalyzer, and proves to be stone cold sober. The cop asks him what’s going on, and he says “I’m the designated decoy.”.

For the sake of argument, if someone actually pulled such a stunt, could they get arrested for anything, and would it stand up in court?

28

Damn. Sorry. I didn’t notice somebody had posted the gag already.

29

Well, first of all this joke was already illustrated earlier, but as per your question: I’m not a lawyer but I would think if the cops wanted to be hardasses they could bust him for obstruction of justice or something similar.

30

As a lawyer in Austin, Texas, I just wanted to make a couple of comments.

  1. Law enforcement officials can arrest anyone, anywhere, for anything. They just have to later be able to show evidence they made a good arrest. If they made a bad arrest the case goes away. If the officer goes way overboard his/her job might be at stake and potentially criminal charges might be filed (this doesn’t happen much because officers tend to be good people and/or know they will be forced by defense attorneys to prove their claims.) The real issue at hand is not whether a person can be arrested but instead whether a conviction can be had based on the evidence.

  2. Being passed out in a car with the keys in the ignition doesn’t guarantee a conviction. The keys-in-the-ignition scenario provides evidence for the prosecution that the person was driving, certainly, but the defense can put on its own evidence to the contrary. A more probative question is whether the engine is running.

  3. People are flabbergasted by this but it is true: a person in the state of Texas (I suspect in other states as well) can be successfully convicted of a DWI with a BAC level that is LESS than .08%. Yes, that is the legal limit, but there is another, more subjective test: “not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties…”

(I don’t know how to do links yet but here’s the cite [in the definition of “Intoxicated”])

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/pe/pe0004900.html#pe004.49.04

  1. The answer to the OP’s question is that officers park and/or circulate around bars and bar districts looking for people stumbling out of bars, or more frequently, committing traffic offenses in the vicinity. One of the more common reasons for stops is for lack of headlights at night. As someone said before, they tend to go where the drunks are.

  2. One of the above posters asked about leaving a bar completely loaded in front of an officer and driving home without getting pulled over. The scary truth is that an experienced officer can always find something wrong with a person’s driving. The good news is that most officers don’t do this and instead look for more obvious violations.

31

I forgot to answer the question about the “designated decoy.”

Firstly, I doubt an officer would actually be IN the parking lot. They tend to park across the street or nearby.

If such a scenario were to occur I suspect the officer would get a kick out of it and tell stories about it to his/her buddies.

I haven’t given this much thought, but about the only offense I could think of that might fit would be a rather weak case of “Interference with Public Duties.”

§ 38.15. Interference With Public Duties
(a) A person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with:
(1) a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law;

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/pe/pe0003800.html#pe019.38.15

Oh, and I forgot to mention that SAustinTX was right on the mark: given a situation where the police (at least in Austin) aren’t sure about making a DWI stick they are very quick to arrest a person for Public Intoxication.

32

Not to be snippy, but that was a heck of a long post to defend breaking the law.

An easy solution to your problem, of course, is simply to drink less.

33

Thank you counselor for answering one of my long-standing questions.

I have no tolerance for alcohol, none at all. I am the cheapest of cheap dates.

So yes, I could be charged with DUI after one drink if it impairs my motor(ing) skills.

BTW, anyone have a link to the newspaper article I have not yet seen claiming the number of Americans killed in drunk-driving accidents is less than is sometimes claimed?

34

Paul in Saudi wrote: “So yes, I could be charged with DUI after one drink if it impairs my motor(ing) skills.”

Aye, that’s true. In fact, you could be charged with DUI (or DWI, as we call it in Texas) after having ingested no intoxicating substance at all. That is a pretty rare scenario but given a certain set of circumstances it could happen. You could spend time in jail before the trial and pay thousands of dollars defending yourself. As I mentioned, the odds are slim of this happening.

More responsively, if your motor skills were affected enough after one drink to make you intoxicated in the eyes of a judge or a jury then, yes, you could be convicted of a DWI. Punishable by up to six months in jail and/or a $2,000 fine (assuming this was your first conviction for DWI). Plus an extraordinarily stiff new fee (over $1,000) to retain your privilege to drive post-conviction.

35

It always strikes me as ironic to see what a person’s friends hear and take as gospel about what someone did to get arrested – as contrasted to what I saw with my own eyes. I suppose it’s human nature to take the side of a friend who is telling you a tale of woe about their arrest by those awful/immoral/mean cops and their subsequent conviction by that corrupt/impersonal/punish-the-helpless criminal justice system. But, people who have been drinking a lot often don’t understand or really remember what they were doing at the time they were arrested. And, people edit after the fact to make themselves feel better. OK, some lie also :wink:

And to back up what Gnomadic99 said,

*  (" If the officer goes way overboard his/her job might be at stake and potentially criminal charges might be filed (this doesn't happen much because officers tend to be good people and/or know they will be forced by defense attorneys to prove their claims.") 
*

… as a law enforcement officer, I can lose my job and career if I lie about what you did or fabricate evidence. I have never met any person whose arrest was worth losing the job I feed my kids with. :dubious:

thanks to GGnomadic99 and Bricker for their great explanations.

Rob

36

Here in Canada, if a person has the keys in the ignition, but is not driving the car, they are considered to be “intoxicated while in control of a vehicle”.

As well, to go with the OP, a police officer can pull over anyone who they suspect to be committing a criime. That includes a person they see walk out of a bar, and enter a vehicle. They can be pulled over under the suspicion of driving intoxicated.

37

The first and third stories are quite possible. As I suggested above, the second, fourth, and fifth are highly unlikely. I suspect you are confusing DWI with “Drunk in public,” or some similar charge.

Why is this an outrage? From the article:

…and…

  • Rick
  • Rick
38

What the hell…?
You are not allowed to be drunk in a bar?
Do they allow minors to enter junior high schools?
:smack:

39

T. Mehr, where did you get the idea that you are “allowed to be drunk in a bar?”

Your sarcastic comment leads to the inference that you believe bars are designed for people to get drunk, in much the same way that junior high schools are designed for minors. Where did you get this idea?

  • Rick
40

Well, maybe it’s a question of definition, Bricker.
I have rarely left a bar in a condition that I could or would want to drive a car (which I don’t do after more than one beer regardless of the law).
So how do you define drunk?
does it mean you can’t drive or is it more as stated in the article:
“They drew attention to themselves by their actions.” ?

Where did I get the idea, that bars are designed for people to get drunk?
Well, they sell alcoholic beverages which tend to get the consumer drunk.
I go to a bar to get drunk and I am usually welcome, I see people around me being drunk and the waitres smiles when she brings me another beer. And while noone is forced to drink or get drunk, the whole purpose of a bar is to drink and get drunk.