Idling In Car DWI Charge Thrown Out
A critical element in every DWI case is proof of operation of the vehicle by the defendant. To lay people, accused of DWI, one would think that operation meant "actually being seen driving the car." Unfortunately, this isn't the case.There have been many reported cases where courts have found operation where the keys and sometimes the defendant weren't even in the car at the time the Police started their investigation into the DWI.
A recent Appellate Division case, helpful to the accused, has swung the pendulum back somewhat in favor of defendants--in the right factual scenario. The Appellate Division has held that idling in your car while intoxicated does not constitute drunk driving. Specificailly, in the case of State v. Putz, the Court held, that the being drunk while seated behind the wheel of a car, even with the motor running and the parking brake off, can't carry a DWI conviction without proof of intention to drive. The Appellate Division held that the trial court ignored credible evidence that Putz, who was discovered sleeping in his idling vehicle after midnight, had no intent to move the vehicle. This is good news for the accused.
However, the driving while intoxicated cases are always a tough battle. As an aside for legal scholars, this is yet another helpful case to defendants. Yet, it will be an unpublished case; thus allowing Judges to consider it, but not be bound by its holding. Lately, it seems that every unfavorable DWI case is published, while the favorable ones go unreported. However, the Judges in this case should be commended for taking a position against a long line of cases which have found the critical element of operation even where a person did not have the keys in the ignition.
For more on DWI see, www.jerseycriminallawyer.com
