DUI Scenario (CRJ 125) 11/11/20

Problem 1

In a state that requires the driving of a vehicle as part of the offense, an officer observed a vehicle, with its motor running, on the side of a deserted road approximately 10 miles from the nearest residence. The defendant had passed out in the backseat.

ISSUE: Do these facts establish driving?

The courts in these situations will look to determine if there was sufficient evidence to establish that the defendant was in control of the vehicle and had driven it to that location. The fact that the incident occurred on a deserted road and the defendant was in the car normally will carry weight. The defendant must then rebut this evidence and put forth facts that raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the judge or jury. Normally, defendants in these situations contend that someone else was the driver and they were merely intoxicated passengers; however, the location of the defendant in the car will be considered vital in establishing this element. What if the defendant had passed out in the passenger’s side of the front seat? What if he was slumped over the wheel? [State v. Blaine, 148 Vt. 272, 531 A.2d 933 (1987)]

Problem 2

In a state that prohibits operation of a vehicle while under the influence, an officer observed a vehicle moving on a public road in an erratic manner. After stopping the car and approaching the driver’s side, the officer observed a 10-year-old behind the wheel and the defendant in the passenger seat. The defendant was obviously intoxicated and stated that the minor was her son.

ISSUE: Was the defendant operating the vehicle within the meaning of the statute?

In this situation, the courts will hold the defendant was not “operating” the vehicle. She may have legal custody or control of the vehicle by virtue of the relationship with the driver and may be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, but she will probably not be convicted of DUI. [State Dept. of Public Safety v. Juncewski, 308 N.W.2d 316 (1981)]

Problem 3

Under the same statute as in problem 2, the officer discovered the defendant in the vehicle with its engine running, but the gear shift was in the park position and the emergency brake was on.

ISSUE: Was the defendant operating the vehicle within the meaning of the statute?

Courts may find this element of the offense has been satisfied in these types of factual situations. The vehicle does not have to be in motion for the defendant to be operating it within the meaning of these statutes if the accused set in motion the operative machinery of the vehicle for purposes of putting it in motion. [Compare State v. Hedding, 122 Vt. 379, 172 A.2d 599 (1961) and Commonwealth v. Plowman, 28 Mass. App. Ct. 230, 548 N.E.2d 1278 (1990), upholding convictions, with Ferguson v. City of Doraville, 186 Ga. App. 430, 367 S.E.2d 551 (1988), which stated merely occupying a parked car is not sufficient for this element.]

1. 2 What actions can be taken to combat the gang problem or to reduce the level of violence associated with gang activities?

2. 3 Should the drug problem be treated as a “medical” problem?

3. 4 Should law enforcement officers be subject to random and unannounced drug tests? Justify your position.

References

1. Abadinsky, H. (1993). Drug abuse, Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

2. Coate, D., & Grossman, M. (1987). Change in alcoholic beverage prices and legal drinking ages: Effects on youth alcohol use and motor vehicle mortality. Alcohol Health Res. World 22.

3. DuPont, R. L. (1983). Teenage drug use: Opportunities for the pediatrician. J. Pediatr. 102(6), 1003–1007.

4. Etter, G. W. (2012). Gang investigation. In M. L. Birzer & C. Roberson (Eds.), Introduction to criminal investigation (313-334). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

5. Institute of Law and Justice (ILJ). (1994). Gang prosecution in the United States. Final Report Submitted to the National Institute of Justice, Washington, DC.

6. Jellick, E. M. (1960). The disease concept of alcoholism. New Brunswick, NJ: College and University Press.

7. Johnson, S. C. (2005, April 20). Testimony before the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, U.S. House of Representatives. Retrieved September 25, 2006, from heritage.org.

8. Klein, M. (1997). The problem of street gangs and problem-oriented policing. In Problem-oriented policing: Crime-specific problems critical issues and making POP work, T. O. Shelley & A. C. Grant (Eds.). Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum, 57–88.

9. Lee, H. (1963). How dry were we: Prohibition revisited. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

10. Moore, M. H., & Kleiman, M. A. R. (1989, September). The police and drugs. Perspectives on Policing, U.S. Department of Justice.

11. Moskowitz, J. M. (1989). The primary prevention of alcohol problems: A critical review of the research literature. J. Stud. Alcohol 50, 54–88.

12. National Gang Threat Assessment Report. (2005). Grant Number 2003-DD-BX-031, Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice.

13. Office of the Surgeon General. (1988, December 14–16). Surgeon General’s Workshop on Drunk Driving Proceedings, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 8–11.

14. Office on Smoking and Health. (1989). Smoking control policies. In Reducing the health consequences of smoking: 25 years of progress. A report of the Surgeon General’s Centers for Disease Control. Rockville, MD: DHHS Publication No. [CDC] 89-8411, pp. 461–536.

15. Painter, J. (1989). Bolivia’s new president faces an old problem: How to control coca growing. Latinamerica Press.

16. Reed, W. L. & Decker, S. H. (Eds.). (2002). Responding to gangs: Evaluation and research. NCJ 190351 Research Publication. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.

17.

18. Tully, E. J., & Bennett, M. (1989, August). A law enforcement response to legalizing illicit drugs. Police Chief, 57–64.

19. Where poppies once stood. (1984). Far Eastern Econ. Rev. 10.

20. Whitehead, J. (1986). U.S. international narcotics control programs and policies. Dept. of State Bull.