<p>Here’s another hard and fast rule I neglected to mention. Of course if you are the driver and are pulled over you should be able to pass a breathalyzer. In my son’s case in Jan the driver passed, however the 2/3 officers who showed up kept talking about " smart college boys" and then told the driver they would like to search the car. He of course, said I don.'t feel comfortable w that officer and the police said we will tow the car and get a search warrant, if you let us search the car wevwon’t do that. (you why they must call me immediately?) anyway he reluctantly gave permission they found 2 beers in a back pack in the trunk. Had they called me " I would ave said" you go get that search warrant officer and we’ll worry about able cause in court" there had been no speeding, no failure to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. Their probable cause after following them for 4 miles was " coming to close to a curb"</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s an old saying very familiar to those of us involved in the criminal justice system: “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”</p>
<p>I’m glad that you see a potential 30 day sentence for an individual who gets beyond the wheel with a .16 blood alcohol with a teenage passenger as a “deal breaker”. That’s the whole point behind the law. They want drivers who are afraid of going to jail to figure that it’s not worth the risk, before they get behind the wheel.</p>
<p>I’d prefer a system in which the kid could get jail time without a permanent criminal record.</p>
<p>Sigh, momofmusician. I had talks with my kids, and they would say the same thing with in the most sincere way as they still do. As do many other parents. And danged if I can pick out who is going to stick with that, with any accuracy. </p>
<p>When I heard that the young woman I knew as a baby, whose first birthday I attended, a day that holds a lot of sweet memories, died of a drug OD, I got a searing pain in my chest and nearly threw up. I still get very upset thinking about this. Mixing pills, pain killers, I don’t know much about them, and some alcohol to boot, went to sleep and didn’t wake up. I know another one whose picture are in my son’s birthday part book my oldest one’s, and he too popped some pills, did a line of something, hit his head, fell asleep on a sofa, didn’t wake up. </p>
<p>My friend who lost a son to drug OD has been trying to get those who gave him the drugs prosecuted. Authorities not interested in the least. Another junkie bit the dust. </p>
<p>So, when I think about these young lives lost to drugs,. i don’t know. We lost 10,000 lives by drunk drivers last year, close to 40K by suicide, maybe 30K with drug overdoses, is it? Can’t quite pick out the OD deaths as they are mixed in with poisoning. The attention that drinking and driving has been getting and the law enforcing those rules has led to a substancial decrease in those numbers in the past 30 years, reducing it by half. Now what the arrests have been , the convictions, the penalites, all of those stats, i don’t know. But more people killed themselves on purpose last year than got killed or died from a drunk driving accident. Those are the firm stats. </p>
<p>I think informing one’s kids very specifically about what happens when you get any auto troubles from speeding tickets to reckless driving, to texting/answering the phone while driving and, yes, absolutely drinking is important. You can tell them they could kill, maim hurt others and selves. That they will lose their driving privileges for a very long time, could get thrown out of school, go through months of court hearing It still doesn’t take the chances away. So you tell them how to react when in trouble for any number of things. And then you try to stay on top of them. </p>
<p>I have no idea what the numbers are of first time offenders for DUI and related charges getting filed each year. But it’s not an uncommon thing around here at all.</p>
<p>“I’m glad that you see a potential 30 day sentence for an individual who gets beyond the wheel with a .16 blood alcohol with a teenage passenger as a “deal breaker”. That’s the whole point behind the law.”</p>
<p>And a speeder to boot. This is precisely the kind of crime I want to protect my community against. What if it was a first-time offender who was 50? Sadly, in my view, the stiffer penalties have indeed worked. I’d love to see other options that work.</p>
<p>Now, No fan of jails here. Before I retired, Washington State likely had 12-14,000 youth under the age of 21 in need of treatment for heroin/prescription opiate addiction who weren’t getting it. One of the reasons they weren’t getting it is that the courts were lobbing kids who didn’t need treatment at all into the treatment centers, which are giant cash cows for the latter. Keeps the kids out of jail, yeah, right.</p>
<p>Guess where many of those who need treatment and don’t get it are going to end up?</p>
<p>“I’m glad that you see a potential 30 day sentence for an individual who gets beyond the wheel with a .16 blood alcohol with a teenage passenger as a “deal breaker””</p>
<p>Calmom, that is not my opinion. It’s a fact. Take a hundred parents whose kids are in that situation, and see where the deal breaks down. They might not even hire an attorney and let the kid “do the time” in the courtroom, not the jail and take the penalty. But throw in that prison sentence, and I’ll bet you that most parents will ante up the money and get the attorney to get those charges lessened. The other issue is the permanence the outcome. But for a case like this, getting it thrown out is not likely to happen and it becomes a given. There are things one can do later to deal with it. But the concern here and now is the jail sentence. That is when the parents will cross over and fight the charge. When too many do so and when you want them on your side, one might want to rethink the penalty. Ariesathena put it well. </p>
<p>Also, over time, one can see if a consequence is too harsh with these mandatory sentences. What happens is that judges send the whole dang file back to the DA who has to redo it or they dismiss the case. Or the DA loses the case each time and realizes that he can’t win with such cases, and the law becomes a sham. </p>
<p>I agree fully that what happened here was serious. But really, Calmom, the penalty is the harshest anywhere. If the kid did the same nearly ANYWHERE here in the US with all of the aggravating circumstances, age 17, first offense, he would not be stuck in a mandatory 30 days in jail, nor would he have in his own jurisdiction last year. I’m not saying a free pass here, but that the mandatory punishment is too harsh. I happen to agree because I sat and watched hundreds of such cases, and got some idea as to what people get here in NY when they do something like this. No 30 days for first timers I can tell you. You are an attorney. Look up what the consequence ranges are for this situation. The only ones who got 30 days jail time were kids without representation that waled in guilty on some standard stuff, and it was DWI. This is a harsh sentence for that specific transgression under those circumstances in this country in these times. Should not be mandatory, and if it were not, I’ll bet the judge would not so sentence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wouldn’t go so far as telling my kid to not bother calling, but I’m pretty sure my kids knew that neither I nor their dad would freak out over the idea of their being in jail. I’m sure they’ve heard their dad griping enough about clients who refuse to take plea bargain offers for a short time in jail and then end up being convicted after trial and facing much longer sentences. I’m sure they have also heard their dad on the phone counseling family members of someone who has been arrested, to hold off on posting bail money until after a court hearing to reduce the amount of bail or seek o.r. release. </p>
<p>I think that everyone in court for any offense above a traffic infraction should have a lawyer, even if it ends up to be only so that they are properly and fully informed of their rights before entering a plea of guilty. (The Supreme Court pretty much agrees with me on that one; that’s why any person charged with an offense that carries any possibility of jail time is entitled to a court-appointed lawyer if they cannot afford to pay for a lawyer on their own). If there is a valid defense to a charge, then of course that person is entitled to assert it.</p>
<p>But it makes sense for a parent to let their kid know that there are consequences that are outside the parents direct control. </p>
<p>Of course when you are a parent you feel differently about your own kid than others, but at least for me, the long-time exposure and understanding of the criminal justice system tends to mean that I take rational rather than emotional approach to such things. Part of this is simply knowledge-- when a person gives me an account of a set of circumstances, I can fill in missing pieces and from the start have a better big picture sense of what has happened.</p>
<p>“Part of “the talk” in my house was: If you or anyone with you is drunk, call me. I will drive you and everyone else home.”</p>
<p>But that has nothing to do with what happened here. The kid had a premeditated plan to drink, drive after drinking, drive with an 17-year-old in the car after drinking. (And maybe he wanted to get there fast!) How was he going to have drunken sex with her if he’d called mom?</p>
<p>It’s actually quite a bit worse than the 40-year-old mom who had three drinks at a luncheon with the girls, and then picked up her daughter after school.</p>
<p>My friend’s son who died of OD refused to go to treatment centers and after age 18, and he had been sent to a number of them went off on his own. She was trying to get him in jail as she saw the writing on the wall and actually the jails there have some mandatory treatment centers in them. Couldn’t get him in jail though he was a junkie who sold to minors. The couple of times he was arrested, they released him within a day. What the heck to do when you see your kid like that? He belonged in jail.</p>
<p>For those who think OP’s kid should do the 30 days and deserves it, well, your opinion and your right to it. Not the opinion of most courts that would have a case like that and not the opinion of parents whose kid is face with this either… I hope that NCDad’s kid does get some exception to the mandatory sentencing. I, for one, do not agree with it. But neither I, nor any of us are going to be making the decision. I’d also like to see how many first offenders NC gets that will fall into the mandatory sentencing group, and how many actually will serve it over the next few years, or if only the poor folks who can’t get a good enough attorney will end up sitting in that jail. </p>
<p>I think that the mandatory part of that sentence is what is the problem. Should a first offender 50 year old be given a pass over the 17 year old, or vice versa? Especially if that 50 year old should have had a toddler or several kids in the care with her, vs the 17 year old with an equally drunk peer who helped provide the booze? I wouldn’t want it being a one size fits all sentence. There could be other things in the picture that we don’t know, mitigating or aggravating that can tip the balance. I can think of a dozen things that can change the picture about the case, and even more when you start changing who the driver and the passengers could be and other circumstances.</p>
<p>“It’s actually quite a bit worse than the 40-year-old mom who had three drinks at a luncheon with the girls, and then picked up her daughter after school.”</p>
<p>I disagree with this too. If that 40 year old mom has her kid in the car who is minor and if that mom has a BAC of that level and is speeding, …I think she just might get the 30 days in jail from me. Shades of the Taconic Parkway Wrongway driver here.</p>
<p>The OP’s son has a peer in the car who was complicit in the drinking and probably the plans of sex too. We don’t know that one way or the other. But the way it often works with this after proms, sex is in the picture, and usually in mutual agreement. The date was well aware that the driver was drunk–had probably abetted him and was drinking herself. Heck, she could have been driving herself without changing the scenario much. My one son went to the prom with a date who picked him up in her car from our house to take him to the pre prom to do. It’s not always the guys who run the show with these things. I think the girls here were the ones providing the booze, not the OP’s son even. So yes, I would put a lot more weight and responsibility on a 40 year old mother than on a 17 year old child. I think in NY, the mom would have social services knocking on the door for that child, by the way. Not for a 17 year olds’ date, however.</p>
<p>
Perhaps the kids are just better at hiding it from you than you are at detecting it. I graduated high school last year, and everything they said lined up with my experiences. Even in the AP classes, some students would show up high, and it was relatively common for students to go to the trails during lunch and come back stoned. Also it’s extremely easy to mask the scent of weed. I don’t know a single, regular marijuana user who doesn’t put their drugs in some sort of scent proof container. </p>
<p>Tolerance varies by school. During my senior year, a well known stoner actually used a portable vaporizer (a device that gets someone high but doesn’t burn the marijuana) in class, and was caught. He was suspended for a week and after the week was up, happily returned to the same class with only a minor blemish on his record. </p>
<p>Finally, it was my experience (unless my friends were lying) that parents never provided marijuana to their students. Rather the students provided it to their parents. </p>
<p>However, I went to high school in California, a state where weed is quasi legal, and where getting arrested for simple possession is almost unheard of.</p>
<p>" I’d also like to see how many first offenders NC gets that will fall into the mandatory sentencing group, and how many actually will serve it over the next few years, or if only the poor folks who can’t get a good enough attorney will end up sitting in that jail."</p>
<p>By the way, regardless of what the sentence is, the main reason for mandatory sentencing is to prevent differential and preferential sentencing. It doesn’t work as well as it should, but it is a darn bit better than what usually goes on without it.</p>
<p>Not toddler in the car: 17 year old.</p>
<p>Just curious, Calmom, if you got such a call from one of yours, and then were faced with Laura’s law with the DA now under the gun not to allow reduced charges, and the judge stuck with a 30 day jail sentence, what would you do? It’s a fair sentence for what was done, so do you just let it go, or do you try to get a treatment center instead of jail time, do your dangest to get that DA to make exception and reduce the charges, and failing that try to get the judge to force the DA to reduce or dismiss? </p>
<p>I guess you think that this mandatory sentence and more stringent measures to reduce the DAs options to reduce charges is not too harsh, even though it’s about as harsh as I have seen on a mandatory basis for what happend. Do you support making this standard for all first offense minors with these aggravated circumstance and charge? Tha’ts pretty much what NC has done here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very true in my neck of the woods as well. It is very possible that a kid around here who was arrested with those circumstances would not have been released to the parent but taken to the juvenile lockup instead. The focus on “rehabilitation” in the juvenile system means that often kid arrested for minor offenses can be locked up for weeks or months for minor crimes where an adult would not do any time (or something that would not even be a crime for an adult). Juveniles don’t have the same rights as adults – to start with, there is no right to bail. The process for release pending disposition of the charges generally requires parents to meet with a juvenile probation officer first, so that the p.o. can gather info to present to the judge about the family circumstances. </p>
<p>My daughter got a traffic ticket (rolling stop) a few weeks before her 18th birthday. Nothing more annoying to me than a juvenile traffic ticket – you can’t just pay the fine and forget about it, there has to be an appearance in juvenile court, and those things take forever. And instead of a fine, the kids generally get sentenced to some number of hours of community service. I was very relieved when it turned out that because the court date was after she turned 18, she could go to adult court. (She wanted to fight the ticket --she did, and she won. But that’s another story.)</p>
<p>The juvenile system is a real blessing for kids charged with felonies that could result in state prison time – though many of those kids get charged as adults anyway, as the prosecutors in our state have considerable discretion – but on the misdemeanor end of things, its a lot tougher. No right to a jury trial and it’s fairly common that there are tough judges assigned to the juvenile court who think nothing of sending a kid to juvie for 6 months for an offense that might get an adult a suspended sentence (no jail).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, after a little bit of internet research, I think NC treats all criminal offenders over the age of 16 as adults, not just drivers. So its not tied to the privilege, it’s just the way the law is in that state.</p>
<p>Given what I have seen of the juvenile system and juvenile lockups, I have mixed feelings. Sometimes they can be a lot worse than the incarceration options for adults convicted of similar crimes. I don’t think 16 year olds should be sent off to state prison with adults, but when I practiced law my hands were often tied in juvenile court in cases I could have won in adult court. No jury trials in juvenile court either. I think that if I had the power to rewrite the laws, I’d probably create an interim “youth” category for individuals between age 16-24, give them full legal rights in adult court, but place limits on sentencing, with lower penalties and more of opportunities for education and rehabilitation, and more of an opportunity to expunge a record after an appropriate period of time. Kind of like the drug court approach, but for a much broader range of offenses.</p>
<p>
Jail is NOT prison. Two entirely different things. (you also referred to a jail sentence as doing “hard time” in a earlier post – that is also confusing jail for prison).</p>
<p>And no, MOST parents are not all that freaked out about a 30 day jail sentence. Not enough to pay a fortune to fight the case at least. (You can state “facts”. I think I had enough experience over the years about what people were willing to pay to have a sense as to where most people drew the line).</p>
<p>It has nothing to do with the initial decision to hire a lawyer – as I said, I think that a lawyer should be hired in any case. But there’s a difference between paying a lawyer $2500 and paying $25,000. </p>
<p>I don’t know what lawyers charge in OP’s neck of the woods, but if his lawyer is hoping to dispo the case at the first court appearance, then I figure he’s probably paying a flat fee or low end retainer. The lawyer is keeping an eye on the clock. And as I said, my guess is that the lawyer is expecting to plead the case down to a level 3 sentence range (with the 7 day minimum). (If not, I don’t see the benefit of entering a plea at the first court appearance).</p>
<p>Sorry for hard to understand last post- typed it in 45 seconds. Bottom line is all teenagers should call their parents immediately upon being pulled over by cops and other than being polite and offering up license, registration and consenting to a breathalyzer( if you will pass) ( if you will not - go back to step 1 and call your parents) they should remain silent.</p>
<p>I think part of the reason for the tough laws is cosmetic–legislators want to appear “tough on crime.” Another part though is that it’s simply unfair for people without resources to end up with longer sentences for the same action than those imposed on kids who come from caring families who can afford private attorneys. And that discrepancy is twice as bad when we are talking about kids. </p>
<p>Despite calmom’s views, I think my statutory rape analogy DOES work. I agree that the passenger is always the victim. I just don’t think if we changed the facts a little the outcome should be way different. Assume this couple were both 18. The aggravating factor of having a passenger under 18 wouldn’t exist. </p>
<p>Yes, sometimes it’s necessary to draw a bright line. I just don’t think this is one of those cases. I think it’s FAR worse when a 40 year old mother has a toddler in the car; the toddler doesn’t have a choice as to whether to get into the car with a drunk driver. A 17 year old DOES have a choice. It’s unlikely that a 3 year old is going to be drinking booze. If (s)he is, it certainly isn’t his/her own idea. The 17 year old passenger here is engaging in adult behaviors with someone her own age and I don’t think the law should give her extra protection as a minor in those circumstances. </p>
<p>While my heart goes out to NCDad and his family, I don’t think 30 days in jail is too stiff a sentence for what this kid did. I wouldn’t put him in Attica, but I doubt that spend 30 days in the county jail is going to make him suicidal. In most places, the only people in county jail are folks with a sentence less than one year, and sometimes, less than 6 months. He’s not going to be sharing a cell with a murderer. </p>
<p>If I ruled the world, I’d offer some kind of expungement option if he kept his nose clean until he was 25.</p>
<p>I also suspect that if he gets jail time, there will be a lot less drunk driving among the kids at his high school for at least 2-3 years. It will “send a message.”</p>
<p>Please understand that if it were my own kid, I’d be fighting tooth and nail against jail. I think NCDad is doing all the right things. But from a societal viewpoint, I don’t think giving jail time for this is too harsh.</p>
<p>
In New York State, the penalty for DUI on a first offense is “up to one year in jail.” A second offense is a felony (up to 4 years incarceration). </p>
<p>Your mistake is focusing on the minimum penalties rather than the maximum. Judges always have discretion to sentence up to the maximum, and are often much more likely to do so if the person is convicted after a trial, depending on the evidence that the judge heard. </p>
<p>The existence of minimum penalties probably tends to promote more plea deals, because the defendants have more realistic expectations as to outcomes, and prosecutors start to focus on those minimums rather than piling on a bunch of charges and urging the maximum. </p>
<p>The minimum jail time for a first offense DUI in NC is 24 hours (which may be met in many cases by credit for time served from the night of the arrest ). </p>
<p>OP’s son is not being charged with “first offense DUI”. He is being charged with First offense DUI PLUS having a BAC of more than .15 PLUS having a passenger under age 18 in the car at the time. He’s probably also being charged with a separate offense of minor in possession of alcohol and/or having an open container in the car. We don’t know how fast he was speeding - if it was more than 30 miles over the limit, that’s an additional add on.</p>
<p>
My kids are adults. If I got a call from one of them about an arrest, I’d advise them to hire a local lawyer in their state, and use my legal connections to get a good recommendation. If they needed to borrow money from me to pay for the lawyer, we’d work on that, depending on what they were facing. (I’m not rich) If they wanted my advice on whether or not to accept a plea offer, I’d be happy to offer an opinion. With the facts as laid out in OP’s case, I’d expect that the lawyer should be able to get a deal for a level 2 offense and aim for that. But ultimately I’d leave it to the lawyer. </p>
<p>(It’s not a good hypothetical because I can’t really envision either kid getting behind the wheel with that level of BAC. I’ve always known them to walk or make other transportation arrangements when out drinking. I know my son still does that because he has a habit of calling me when he’s walking home at night. My d. lives in Brooklyn, she doesn’t have a car, nor do any of her friends. )</p>
<p>a family friends son got in trouble. under age drinking, kicked a news stand, and told the cop he was stupid This town we were in is notorious for arresting people for “public distrubrance” to raise money thru fines</p>
<p>anyway, night in jail, he was visiting from out of state, and it wqas going to get pricey, as he didn’t want anything on his record (he was 19) as someday he wanted to be a fireman. he called some attorneys, and it was getting complicated and exptensive.</p>
<p>anyway, i had a duh moment, and suggested he contact the public defenders office. he did, next day, it was negotiated he could do public service in his home state, and so long as he didn’t get in trouble in california in the next year, it would be expunged. it would be treated like a speeding ticket, infraction and no need to report.</p>
<p>public defenders cqan be awesome for poor college students dealing with relatively minor situations. they know how the prosecturers offices work and its often and look at this file, lets get qa deal done. cost the kid 1200 in fines aqnd tickets, but phew</p>