Minor In Possesion. What Are My Rights?

I know the title sounds GQ, but I’m sure we will get varied answers so that is why I put it in IMHO. Move it if you see fit…

Well…it is the day before school starts. Therefore, last night was the biggest party night of the entire year, on one of the biggest party campuses in the US. So there I sat, sober, in my fraternity house watching the fine looking ladies walking by and a cop comes around the corner and busts two of them for Minor In Possession (MIP). They take the field sobriety test by the cop who frankly was being an ass about things, evidently fail, and get the ticket.

So…What are my rights if this situation would have occurred to ME?

I’ve gotten various advice, most of which centering on, don’t take the field test, don’t talk, don’t carry ID, and ask for a lawyer, but advice from the Teeming Millions carries significantly more weight than advice from a friend of a friend of a friend etc.

:rolleyes::::Cyberhwk waits to see how many posts there will be before someone suggests not to drink::::rolleyes:

P.S. I live in Washington State. Yes…we have that ignorant zero tolerance policy.

Don’t drink.:smiley: Just kidding.

Seriously, my advice,

Don’t get caught.:smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :wink:

In posession of WHAT? Just alcohol?

I have trouble reconciling a “zero tolerance policy” with just a “ticket”. If it’s like a traffic ticket without a criminal penalty or record, just pay the ticket and move on. Or show up in court to contest the ticket, and hope the cop doesn’t show up to defend issuing it.

Your as ignorant as your statement. I lost 2 close friends to an ignorant WSU sophmore because he was to ignorant to follow the laws of the state. My friends were both 21, the ignorant one was 19. Did I mention that your statement was ignorant? And I hope your truly offended too.

I know the answers to your questions, but I won’t answer them.

Pray tell, how did you lose your friends as a direct result of someone else drinking?

Or were those “laws of the state” drunk driving laws? I don’t think anyone is supporting drunk drivers.

Well, while we’re discussing other people’s ignorance, you’re as ignorant as your grammar.

Careful about not carrying ID - in some jurisdicitions, not carrying ID can get you taken into custody.

MY advice would be to figure out if the consequences of violating the law are worth the risks to you, personally. Attempting to circumvent discovery of the violation can be more problematic for you than otherwise.

I’m also fairly certain that if you looked up the relevant law, you’d discover the legislature would have been way ahead of you re: what if I refuse the test etc. In my state (MI) refusal of a breathalyzer revokes your driving priveleges.

Plus, if the cop has ‘reasonable suspicion’, and you refuse, they may get a judges order. That’s not generally a ‘happy place’.

I’m refering to MIP, not DUI smart ass. (Hence the title of this thread).

…and most likey wasted to the point where he would have been WELL over the ADULT legal limit ANYWAY. I’m not saying there shouldn’t BE a legal limit, as you seem to be infering (amid the stupid remarks anyway) , I’m just saying lets spread things equally. A 20 year old with a .07 BAC is no more and no less dangerous than a 21 year old with a .07 BAC. The ignorant part is the 19 year old gets a ticket for not hurting a god damn thing. Obviously, there is no excuse for drunk driving period.

Eat me.

I couldn’t find Washington’s laws concerning breath tests, but I suspect that you have the right to refuse to take one, in which case the police have the right to detain you (on reasonable suspicson) until a magistrate can be found that will issue a warrant compelling you take the test. Advice? Take the test and save yourself the extra hassle.

If you’re found guilty you face a year’s revocation of your driver’s permit, up to a $500 fine, and up to 2 months in jail.

The 19 year old may not have been “hurting a god damn thing” but he was breaking the law and deserved the ticket. Laws exist not only to punish but to deter future harm (the 19 year old is more likely to not drink next time knowing what the consequences are).

I may be mistaken but Washington State’s implied consent law surrounding a breath test applies to driving a motor vehicle. The OP stated he watched a cop bust two females who were walking.

A MIP charge in Washington State does not require the minor to be driving a motor vehicle at the time. However, part of the punishment for MIP is suspension and/or revocation of driving privileges.

Source: http://search.leg.wa.gov/wslrcw/RCW%20%2013%20%20TITLE/RCW%20%2013%20.%2040%20%20CHAPTER/RCW%20%2013%20.%2040%20.265.htm
You may not like it that one day you are a minor and the next day an adult with respect to the issue, but tough cookies. Everyone goes through it. Well, everyone who lives through it goes through it.

As for carrying/not carrying ID, you do not state the context. If operating a motor vehicle, you must follow the law here. If it requires you to be in possession of an ID (probably your driver’s license), and you don’t have it when stopped, again tough cookies. Don’t forget the driving is a privilege and not a right. You agreed to such stipulations when you applied for the license, passed the test(s) and were granted the license.

OTOH, are you required to carry ID while just walking down the street and you are stopped by a cop? (I’m not adding any apparent or overt illegalities here such as MIP.) Not so sure. A tough call. There was a famous case years ago specifically on this issue (and debated in the SDMB) and the Court threw out the conviction.

A field sobriety test may not hold up in court, especially if that’s the basis for the ticket, especially when the two were walking. Seems to me that the cop was hedging his bets that the two would not contest the ticket in court - a time-honored tradition where cops try to bluff their power over unsuspecting people.

Finally, welcome to the real world. Now your words and actions are your own. No chance hiding behind momma’s apron strings. Life ain’t always fair. Deal with it.

FWIW, Washington State’s zero tolerance policy is aimed more at protecting me from your immaturity than anything else. Being drunk may be a rite of passage for many your age. From us sober folks watching what’s going on, you have no sympathy from me. Better you get caught and stopped by the cops than we meet on the street with two vehicles - if I don’t get killed or maimed by your self-indulgence, I will come after you one way or the other later.

I always find it amusing that minors or those caught by cops for DUI (or whatever) say the cop was “an ass.”

I’d say the cop was just doing his job. He’d probably much rather give a couple of underage kids a ticket than have to call their parents and tell them their kids were killed because they were driving drunk or that they drank so much they died.
:rolleyes:

Cyberhwk wasn’t the one caught, he was an observer. Also, sometimes cops are asses while they’re doing their jobs. The OP doesn’t specify if it was the ticketing that qualified the cop as “an ass”, or some other action/attitude during the incident.

If he wants to prevent drunk driving, he should go bust drunk drivers. Not someone walking home with friends from a party, YYMV evidently.

I walking home from parties drunk a perfectly safe thing to do? Is it a legal thing to do?
Look if you are underage, you are underage. That is it.
Public drunk, Minor in Possession are against the law. Are they the greatest crimes in the world? No, but an officer has a duty to arrest/ticket people who break the law.

This is IMHO, not the BBQ Pit. I expect this to be the last post of this nature in In My Humble Opinion.

Geez, Zebra, Bibliocat, et.al. Can’t you answer the guy’s question?

All he asked was…

(bolding mine)

I’m sure he is well aware that he is underage. He was asking about his rights in a given situation, not begging for a lecture on the evils of alcohol. I thought this board was about fighting ignorance?

Er, I don’t know anything about Washington, but Massachusetts also has a zero-tolerance law. And in Massachusetts, you have the right to either take the breathalyzer test, or automatically have your license suspended for a period of time, the exact length of which I don’t remember. 30-90 days, though. It may also be possible for them to detain you. Frankly, however, being a minor greatly restricts your options. You are not allowed to posess alcohol, and doing so is going to get you in trouble. Think what you will of that, it’s reality.

My question has more to with this:

How wonderful that the legislature care so much! So what do they do to deter people from using alcohol and controlled substances? Take away driving privileges. Maybe it’s just me, but I think that that’s going to deter a kid from driving, not using alcohol or drugs. Maybe I should take this over to GD, though.

Anyway, in short, to the OP: Your options are don’t drink, don’t get caught, don’t take the test and get in trouble for it, take the test and get in trouble for it. When it comes down to it, when you’ve broken a law, you’re already on the wrong end of the stick. It’s hard to improve the situation.

All IMHO, of course. Including the bit about options.

My advice?

Go to Canada. From anywhere in Washington, it is only a few hours drive away (or less depending on how far you are up north). In British Columbia, the drinking age is 19.

What kills me is that these laws are always aimed at Juveniles… in fact, it would appear that is the exact wording.

However, legally an 18-20 yo is not a juvenile. Sounds to me like a grey area. Personally, I would fight it, but then again I’m a down to my shoes “fight the power, in a sneaky sort of way” kind of guy.

<nitpick>

Drunk drivers are, by definition, already driving drunk. Busting them prevents nothing.

Busting drunk people who are not (yet) in a car arguably does.

</nitpick>