English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I know if you refuse to be tested its an automatic charge , but if you didnt refuse and they fail to test you ,can you still be charged with it?

2006-07-06 15:32:13 · 8 answers · asked by ladiewolve 2 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

let me explain better , how can you get jail time without the proof..I have a friend in jail right now for 45 days , plus 45 days at an inpatient rehab court ordered. He wasnt drunk..he actually took to many pills, didnt know where he was , wandered into someone's home and they called the police.
Now , if he had said something like..I was sleep walking and unaware of my actions( this is a hypothetic question) Would they not need some proof he was "on something" to actually send him to jail and rehab ?

2006-07-06 15:52:36 · update #1

8 answers

I doubt very seriously your friend is in jail for 45 days for drunk in public. He's doing time for some type of burglary/breaking and entering kind of charge related to "wandering" into someones house. Drunk in public is what's usually called a 'quality of life' charge. We're not talking about your buddy's quality of life but the everyone else's. Society wants to be secure in the knowledge that drunks and stoners aren't stumbling about with impunity. We give cops wide latitude in judging who may be too intoxicated to be wandering at large and as the charge in most places has all the kick of a parking ticket we don't require any type of testing to determine the actual level or type of intoxication.

2006-07-06 17:28:04 · answer #1 · answered by not climbing 1 · 0 0

Depending on the country you are with, you can't be charge unless you are caught in the act holding a piece of beer and then throwing in out on the street, or making noises in the middle of the night, or you disturb the traffic by making troubles in the area.

Here in our country, Philippines, we dont have any law on public intoxication rather public disturbance. After the arrest, a case must be filed within 48 hours(?) and it failed, that person must be release immediately since there was no complainant after all.

But in your friend's case, he was arrest to avoid public damages but being arrested doesn't mean he'll be charge to such minor crime until he get tested, or until a complainant will file a case/charge against him. He is not jailed, just a custody TO AVOID PUBLIC DISTURBANCE but since there was no case has been filed against him, he should be released. after 48 hours of custody or else, the arresting officer will be charge into "Illegal Custody".

The term "jailed" applied only to those who have a sentence, meaning the case in court has already been decided by the prosecutors/judge, while a custody is the reverse of jail. A person in custody has no case yet.

.......Drink moderately!

2006-07-06 15:57:56 · answer #2 · answered by dirtyking04 1 · 0 0

I speak for Texas law here........Intoxication here is the introduction of alcohol or drugs into the body system causing the loss of normal body functions.
You do not have to have tests done on you. As long as the actions of the actor can be placed on paper and described, then that is how you prove the case. For public intoxication tests are usually never done.

2006-07-07 18:03:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

public intox is not totally restricted to alcohol. Drugs can also be a reason for public intox. tests are not needed for evidence in a public intox case. All that is needed is that the subject shows that he cant take care of himself (example: not knowing where you are, where your going, the date etc.) that is all a police officer needs for a public intox arrest. If a person cant tell me where they are or where they are going, or dont know where they live, then they go to jail for public intox. I dont need to have them do a breathlizer or field tests. They just go to jail.

2006-07-06 17:51:43 · answer #4 · answered by viperroadster 2 · 0 0

This is just what I know. I am not a lawyer. Yes, you may be charged. But there is no proof since they did not do a test. They may say "I saw the person intoxicated" But they need written proof. Like a paper trail.

2006-07-06 15:41:42 · answer #5 · answered by wol_latin 1 · 0 0

If you are acting in an intoxicated manner, you can be charged and convicted of public intoxication. You can be charged whether you are under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

2006-07-07 08:48:09 · answer #6 · answered by Mama Pastafarian 7 · 0 0

Yes. The intoxilyser is used for vehicle related conditions to establish a blood-alcohol level. 0.08 is one such illegal level. If you are under the influence of alcohol, police officers look at how you are walking, talking, and how you smell. So if you can't walk straight and reek of the fire water, your more than likely drunk enough for the charge.

2006-07-06 15:42:49 · answer #7 · answered by thin-blue-line 2 · 0 0

Yes, there's such a thing as circumstantial evidence.

2006-07-06 15:37:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers