United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: West Virginia Supreme Court Expands DUI To Private Property
Source:
Truth Voice
URL Source: http://truthvoice.com/2016/11/west- ... pands-dui-to-private-property/
Published: Nov 23, 2016
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2017-08-18 08:53:31 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1042
Comments: 2
West Virginians can be charged with drunk driving on their own private land, even if they represent no danger to others. The state Supreme Court of Appeals laid down this new precedent last month, overturning previous interpretations of the state’s driving under the influence (DUI) law. “We hold that an individual may lose his/her driver’s license if they are found driving a vehicle anywhere within the physical boundaries of West Virginia while under the influence of alcohol (and/or drugs), even if the vehicle is driven only upon private property not open to the general public,” Chief Justice Menis E. Ketchum II wrote for the court. The ruling does not just apply to automobiles driven on one’s own land. The high court reviewed the situation of Joshua D. Beckett, who was arrested on February 4, 2012 for riding an all-terrain vehicle on his family’s farm in Monroe County. Having had a bit too much to drink, Beckett crashed his ATV and a friend called 911 for help. The medical personnel who responded to the scene called the sheriff after noticing Beckett was tipsy and had a blood alcohol level of .17. A magistrate threw out the aggravated DUI charge against Beckett, but the state Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) suspended his license anyway. Beckett sued to block the suspension on the grounds that he never once drove on a public road while drunk and the DMV has no jurisdiction over private property. A circuit court judge agreed, citing the 1980 state Supreme Court ruling West Virginia v. Ball. The high court justices, however, decided that the Ball ruling was incorrect and substituted a new interpretation of the DUI statute as criminalizing the act drunk driving “in this state” — without qualification. “The legislature chose to structure our DUI statutes to regulate the condition of the driver, not the locale in which the driving is taking place,” Justice Ketchum wrote. “Thus, the legislature expressed its plain intent to prohibit an intoxicated person from driving a vehicle anywhere in West Virginia, whether on public roads or across private land.” A copy of the ruling is available in a 70k PDF file at the source link below. Source:
Reed v. Beckett (West Virginia Supreme Court, 10/26/2016)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
They must be running low on money to pay the welfare checks. Maybe they should consider legalizing oxy and then taxing it? If they did,they would be kneedeep in cash,most of it that had welfare money as it's original source. They could consider it to be recycling,and then brag about how effective their recycling system is. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
But, if someone does drive drunk on his own private property, can he be charged with DUI, or only lose his license, assuming he has one? If not, then suspending the license doesn't prohibit him from doing the exact same thing again, in which case, the "plain intent" of the legislature, does not apply as the judge ruled. ATV's are also not registered vehicles.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
“Thus, the legislature expressed its plain intent to prohibit an intoxicated person from driving a vehicle anywhere in West Virginia, whether on public roads or across private land.”
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]