To me that lawyer looks like a sleazy ass. He keeps going on about how Tiger “blew zero” on the breathalizer, as if that was the only form of impairment, and as if Tiger didn’t have a history of reckless driving. As if he wasn’t found with a couple of oxycontin in his pocket along with signs of obvious impairment.
None of what he did is excusable. One can feel bad for him if he’s in pain due to previous surgeries and taking narcotic pain medications, but then he sure as hell shouldn’t be driving while high as a kite, let along driving while staring at a cell phone! I don’t know Florida law but in most places distracted driving – just that alone, never mind impaired driving on top of that – is considered a serious offense that can cause serious accidents and death. I have no sympathy for this guy. He can afford an Uber or even a private chauffeur instead of putting the public at risk.
That’s standard practice. Filing a not guilty plea at the beginning of the case is typical, and doesn’t necessarily mean that the case is going to trial. The vast majority of cases resolve with a plea.
I found the lawyer amusingly sleazy. Purposefully or not leaning into the NY/NJ stereotype. That being said, I found his points about the roadside tests to be instructive.
TIger Woods has been granted permission to leave the country to get treatment, because, y’know, in the U.S. there are no five-start luxury rehab facilities capable of handling his problems, and here he would face “ongoing medical scrutiny” (whatever that means) and privacy issues.
Tiger Woods has Lifetime exemptions to the Masters and PGA. and a exemption to the British Open until he age 60.
He is no longer exempt for the US Open, but he will get special exemptions for at least 5 tournaments if he wants them.
As for the PGATour, he has a lifetime exemption (as does anyone who wins 20 or more times on the tour), assuming he does not sign with the LIV Tour. There is a performance caveat, he must keep a scoring average under the average scoring average plus 3 shots. In other words, if the avg scoring average is 72, he must have a scoring average of 75 or better.
IMO, if Tiger is no longer competitive, he will not be using those exemptions.
The language around driving laws that I’ve seen usually refers to a “highway”, which is a euphemism for “any public road”. It doesn’t apply to private property, and it’s doubtful whether a motorized golf cart is a “vehicle” in the eyes of the law. People have indeed been ticketed for driving golf carts on public roads, but only because they’re not roadworthy vehicles.
Anyway, the bottom line to this is that Woods has suffered no real consequences. The license suspension is as irrelevant to him as the $1500 fine. He probably already has a chauffeur. Or he can just continue to drive himself and smash into things and rely on his high-priced lawyer to get him off with another meaningless penalty.
In Florida, you can absolutely get a DUI on a golf cart. Near where I live, they are quite popular for people who want to cruise around the downtown shops/bar area. Your cart has to have a legitimate license tag, but you can drive it on the streets.
(Driving on private property is another issue, though. I agree that you won’t be ticketed if you are driving on a golf course)
As with many laws especially motor vehicle law it will be different in every state. For instance in my state anything with wheels that is propelled by a motor is considered a motor vehicle. Also there is a short list of motor vehicle statutes that can be enforced on private property but DUI is one of them. It most likely won’t come up unless there is an accident to investigate but you can be charged.
In general, this is true of private property that is “publicly accessible” by vehicle. So you can be charged with DUI for doing drunken donuts in a WalMart parking lot - but not in, say, a fenced-off lot that your friend owns.
Whether it pertains to driving a cart on a private golf course is unclear. The fact that no license is needed for that suggests maybe not.
You will have to see what the statute is in your state as I said. In mine you absolutely can be charged with DUI on a private golf course. The circumstances when that may happen will be extremely rare but it can happen. The difference with quasi-public property like a Walmart parking lot vs private property like a golf course is more about access than what statutes are enforceable. Police may routinely drive through the Walmart parking lot to enforce laws such as handicap parking or fire lane violations without being invited. That same cop isn’t patrolling the golf course looking for DUIs. But that cop may be called when there is a serious accident involving a golf cart and then he could cite the driver for DUI.
But to emphasize again, that’s in my state. Laws will be slightly or greatly different in other states. And just as importantly, each state will have its own caselaw for DUIs.
ETA I missed your example and stayed with the golf cart. But yes you can be charged with DUI in my state while doing donuts on your friend’s property. If the cop has a legal reason for entering the property and the investigation reveals the driver to be intoxicated they can be charged. In my state. Maybe not yours.
