A flaw in law?

[AK]

I notice there are several posts on this forum in which inquiries are made about DUI in which the "driver" was not driving, but sitting in a vehicle, and left completely unanswered. Is this some flaw in law that attempts to rob of us yet another liberty in the name of some kind of perceived greater good?

I again ask how a person who was not driving can possibly be charged with driving under the influence. The logic eludes me. And the battle awaits.

Autumn in Kentucky

 

[HomeGuru]

From my recollection, most of the posts with respect to this subject were answered. Do a search.

There is no flaw in the law. If a licensed driver is legally intoxicated, then that driver should not get behind the wheel of the vehicle for any reason. In your case, your husband was drunk, got into the vehicle on the drivers side behind the steering wheel, started the car....
The police had probable cause and drunk husband was in fact in control of the vehicle. If the vehicle was in gear and the parking brake was off, the vehicle would have been moving. Even if it was parked with the motor running, that action is considered driving under the legal definition.
Other options he could have done: catching a cab home, calling you or a friend to pick him up and take him home......

 

[AK]

Thank you for the reply. I was wondering how a nonmoving vehicle with a person lying down in the seat could be construed as driving. While I have contempt for those who drive on our roadways drunk, I also have contempt for liberal laws that have a lot of "coulds" and "possibilities" in them. Were I myself on a jury, I could not convict a person beyond a reasonable doubt of drunk driving because they were sleeping in a truck seat. He has an appointment with an attorney on Wed. I wonder if we'd be just wasting our money now.

Can a person request a jury for a DUI charge?

 

[HomeGuru]

If you were on the jury, you are instructed by the judge to rule pursuant to the law and not your own personal belief. Thus if the law states that the legal definition of control of a motor vehicle includes when an individual is in that vehicle, even when the individal is not sitting in the drivers seat, then that is the law.

A DUI is a serious charge, so you would not be wasting your money by hiring an attorney. Yes, the accused can request a jury trial and in your case, I would think a jury trial would be the most beneficial based on the facts.

 

[Not Guilty]

The law in Arizona ia that a driver must be in actual physical control of the vehicle to be found guilty of DWI/DUI. I would expect the law is the same or similar in Kentucky. The preliminary issue in all DWI/DUI cases is was the accused driving. It is not illegal to be impaired by alcohol, it is just illegal to be impaired while in actual physical control of a vehicle. Some factors that prove if someone was driving, are was the vehicle parked? was the motor running? were the keys in the ignition? was the driver awake and or capable of driving? The actual physical control issue is one of law typically decided by the judge in a pretrial hearing, the actual physical control issue can also be decided by the jury. If the accused was not in actual physical control (driving) he or she wins. THIS IS JUST INFORMATION NOT ADVICE, RELY ON THE ADVICE OF A LOCAL LAWYER EXPERIENCED IN CRIMINAL LAW.

[Edited by Not Guilty on 01-10-2001 at 05:17 PM]