Publc intox

**IMGreat101** · 03-14-10, 10:20 PM

"There is no set BAC that makes for public intox. But even if there was, the media still isn't specifying that. They just say how many times the "legal limit" the person is, as though, even if in the privacy of their own home, they would be breaking the law."

there is no set bac?

I say there is, and not just judge on behaviour.

...or spelingggg

**Jks9199** · 03-14-10, 10:48 PM

Depends on the state law. In Virginia, the relevant code section is:

§ 18.2-388. Profane swearing and intoxication in public; penalty; transportation of public inebriates to detoxification center.
If any person profanely curses or swears or is intoxicated in public, whether such intoxication results from alcohol, narcotic drug or other intoxicant or drug of whatever nature, he shall be deemed guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor. In any area in which there is located a court-approved detoxification center a law-enforcement officer may authorize the transportation, by police or otherwise, of public inebriates to such detoxification center in lieu of arrest; however, no person shall be involuntarily detained in such center.

(emphasis mine)

You'll note that for this offense, all that it requires is that the suspect be "intoxicated." There's no BAC or anything like that. Generally, for drunk in public, the magistrates want an "odor of alcoholic beverages" coupled with speech, behavior, or physical ability/coordination indicators, like a lack of balance and slurred speech. Different state laws may vary; I don't think there is an equivalent code, for example, in NY.

Often, when the press talks about being at or above the legal limit, they're generally comparing to the per se limit for DUI, which is typically a Blood Alcohol Content of .08% or .08 grams/210 liters breath. (It's works out to be the same thing...)

**berserk** · 03-14-10, 11:23 PM

I've never heard of a PI law that includes an actual BAC. In CO, we don't have a PI statute at all. The closest thing we have is a law which allows us to take someone into protective custody if they are a danger to them self or someone else because of their level of intoxication. No mention is made in the statute of whether or not someone is in public. Dangerous levels will vary by individual, and it's more important to describe how they were endangering someone than it is to measure the alcohol in their system.

**Bob Loblaw** · 03-14-10, 11:34 PM

I will arrest someone for PI when that person is so drunk that they A) can't take care of themselves (for instance, passing out on a sidewalk outside a gas station) or B) can't stop causing problems and starting fights because they can't think like a reasonable person.

**MacLean** · 03-14-10, 11:38 PM

It would be community caretaking to detox someone who could not care for themselves, here.

**HudsonHawk** · 03-14-10, 11:46 PM

There's no public intox law here, although if you're drunk and stupid enough you'll probably break some other law.

**Cidp24** · 03-15-10, 12:48 AM

The smell of an alcoholic beverage and the appearance of intoxication is enough here. In reality, for most officers I know, you can be knee walking commode hugging drunk, as long as someone is taking care of you and you aren't acting a fool.

Incidentally, that law oddly includes public profanity.

**pgg** · 03-15-10, 01:40 AM

There is no BAC requirement for public intox here. Just like there is no "legal limit" for DUI here. That is a big myth also.

**lewisipso** · 03-15-10, 02:44 AM

Originally Posted by Jks9199

an "odor of alcoholic beverages" coupled with speech, behavior, or physical ability/coordination indicators, like a lack of balance and slurred speech.

Our state law simply says "appearing in an intoxicated condition" so the above would do.

**kjlaw** · 03-15-10, 06:45 AM

Here is the relevent information for your area.

iowa public intoxication

Iowa Code section 123.46 prohibits an individual from being intoxicated, or simulating intoxication in a public place. There are two elements of Public Intoxication that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial:
1. The defendant was intoxicated; OR
2. The defendant simulated that he/she was intoxicated; and
3. In a public place.
intoxication

In Iowa an individual is "intoxicated" when by drinking liquor and/or beer, one or more of the following is true:

1. His reason or mental ability has been affected;
2. His judgment is impaired;
3. His emotions are visibly excited;
4. He has, to any extent, lost control of bodily actions or motions.
public place

A "public place" is defined as "any place, building, or conveyance to which the public has or is permitted access." Included as "public places" are:
1. Public streets, alleyways, and parking lots
2. Steps and common hallways of apartment buildings
3. Dormitories
4. Bars and restaurants
5. Stadiums, event centers etc.
• Generally speaking any place open to the general public constitutes a "public place."
Not included as "public places" are:
1. Private vehicles (not public transportation)
2. Decks or porches to residence
3. Inside a person's apartment
4. On private land

**Xiphos** · 03-15-10, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Jks9199

Depends on the state law. In Virginia, the relevant code section is:
(emphasis mine)

You'll note that for this offense, all that it requires is that the suspect be "intoxicated." There's no BAC or anything like that. Generally, for drunk in public, the magistrates want an "odor of alcoholic beverages" coupled with speech, behavior, or physical ability/coordination indicators, like a lack of balance and slurred speech. Different state laws may vary; I don't think there is an equivalent code, for example, in NY.

Often, when the press talks about being at or above the legal limit, they're generally comparing to the per se limit for DUI, which is typically a Blood Alcohol Content of .08% or .08 grams/210 liters breath. (It's works out to be the same thing...)

I've actually DIP'd people who were high on drugs since it's the "appearance" of intoxication and it's not limited to alcohol. They were successfully prosecuted cases too. I'm talking really spaced out though.

**Jks9199** · 03-15-10, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Xiphos

I've actually DIP'd people who were high on drugs since it's the "appearance" of intoxication and it's not limited to alcohol. They were successfully prosecuted cases too. I'm talking really spaced out though.

Yep -- and I've even DIPped someone in a residence! The definition of public is "where others can see you" and the gal was refusing to leave, but her girlfriend wasn't cooperating with a trespass charge... They were both deaf, and a friend of theirs was translating. I was there, the translator was there... so the living room became "public." It flew!

DIP in VA is often a problem solver charge. You got a guy wandering around at 2 AM, in t-shirt and jeans when the temps in the low teens, and he's going to "stay with a friend"... DIP. Someone who won't play nice with others and is gonna get his ass beat and isn't taking a hint? DIP. I've never charged anyone under the "curse profanely" provision...

**berserk** · 03-15-10, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by pgg

There is no BAC requirement for public intox here. Just like there is no "legal limit" for DUI here. That is a big myth also.

No per se limit?

**Jks9199** · 03-15-10, 11:26 PM

I'm not sure what he's talking about -- but strictly speaking, in Virginia, the per se limit is only one way to get a DUI. It's sort of the easiest, and they've added per se levels for several drugs now. But, strictly, we can get them for Driving Under the Influence of alcohol, or of drugs, based on either the per se limits or by being able to testify to the impairment based on our observations. That's how we can win if they refuse the breath test... I think most states are similar.

**MacLean** · 03-15-10, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by lewisipso

Our state law simply says "appearing in an intoxicated condition" so the above would do.

Remind me not to visit any bars when I am down there!

**ChesCopPodz** · 03-16-10, 12:26 AM

I went from this:

Depends on the state law. In Virginia, the relevant code section is:

Quote:
§ 18.2-388. Profane swearing and intoxication in public; penalty; transportation of public inebriates to detoxification center.
If any person profanely curses or swears or is intoxicated in public, whether such intoxication results from alcohol, narcotic drug or other intoxicant or drug of whatever nature, he shall be deemed guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor. In any area in which there is located a court-approved detoxification center a law-enforcement officer may authorize the transportation, by police or otherwise, of public inebriates to such detoxification center in lieu of arrest; however, no person shall be involuntarily detained in such center.

To this:

In CO, we don't have a PI statute at all. The closest thing we have is a law which allows us to take someone into protective custody if they are a danger to them self or someone else because of their level of intoxication

and my level of difficulty in handling calls went up considerably

**lewisipso** · 03-16-10, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by maclean

Remind me not to visit any bars when I am down there!

I'll let one of my more popular shift guys take you to one. I'm not exactly a popular person in them if you know what I mean. I'll gladly be the ride home.

**pgg** · 03-16-10, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by berserk

No per se limit?

We have two sections, 23152(a) and (b). (b) states that at 0.08 BAC you are presumed to be intoxicated. The (a) section just states "under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs". If someone blows a 0.10 and I feel they are under the influence based on my observations I actually charge them with two counts, both the (a) and (b). If someone blows a 0.04 and I feel they are under the influence based on what I've seen I charge them with just the (a) section.

**Twan007** · 03-16-10, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by maclean

Remind me not to visit any bars when I am down there!

yeah... not only what Lew said (get someone who knows the area) but that's used (at least in my area) as a proactive statute - protective (someone who's about to get whooped) or someone who's needs to get out of the area (or face more serious charges) so a quick transport to the nearest station helps that happen

don't think you'd fit into either of those categories Mac...

**berserk** · 03-16-10, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by pgg

We have two sections, 23152(a) and (b). (b) states that at 0.08 BAC you are presumed to be intoxicated. The (a) section just states "under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs". If someone blows a 0.10 and I feel they are under the influence based on my observations I actually charge them with two counts, both the (a) and (b). If someone blows a 0.04 and I feel they are under the influence based on what I've seen I charge them with just the (a) section.

Okay, so the same as basically every other state. There's DUI impairment and DUI per se. How is that different than having a legal limit?