22.10.2013 Views

Minors, You Are What You Drink!: Arkansas's New Spin on Minors in ...

Minors, You Are What You Drink!: Arkansas's New Spin on Minors in ...

Minors, You Are What You Drink!: Arkansas's New Spin on Minors in ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

994 ARKANSAS LAW REVIEW [Vol. 65:977<br />

<strong>in</strong> order to determ<strong>in</strong>e alcohol c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> the body. 106 The<br />

statute does, however, provide <strong>on</strong>e excepti<strong>on</strong> for students<br />

enrolled <strong>in</strong> college who must taste w<strong>in</strong>e or beer as a part of<br />

their curriculum. 107<br />

Arkansas’s m<strong>in</strong>or-<strong>in</strong>-possessi<strong>on</strong> statute is most similar<br />

to Missouri’s statute because both explicitly prohibit<br />

possessi<strong>on</strong> and do not <strong>in</strong>clude a c<strong>on</strong>sumpti<strong>on</strong> provisi<strong>on</strong>. 108<br />

However, unlike Arkansas’s provisi<strong>on</strong>, Missouri’s m<strong>in</strong>or-<strong>in</strong>possessi<strong>on</strong><br />

law provides guidance as to when an officer may<br />

lawfully test for the presence of alcohol <strong>in</strong> the m<strong>in</strong>or’s<br />

body. 109 When a m<strong>in</strong>or is visibly <strong>in</strong>toxicated, c<strong>on</strong>sent to<br />

alcohol test<strong>in</strong>g is implied. 110 In determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g whether a<br />

m<strong>in</strong>or is visibly <strong>in</strong>toxicated, the facts and circumstances<br />

observed by the officer must provide the officer with<br />

probable cause. 111<br />

For example, <strong>in</strong> J.D.L.C., the Missouri Court of<br />

Appeals determ<strong>in</strong>ed that an officer lacked probable cause<br />

to c<strong>on</strong>clude that a m<strong>in</strong>or was visibly <strong>in</strong>toxicated when the<br />

m<strong>in</strong>or was not belligerent and did not have blood-shot or<br />

glassy eyes. 112 Therefore, the court c<strong>on</strong>cluded that the<br />

officer did not have probable cause to issue a breathalyzer<br />

test to the m<strong>in</strong>or, and the results of that test were<br />

<strong>in</strong>admissible. 113 Apparently, Missouri did not <strong>in</strong>tend to give<br />

officers unfettered discreti<strong>on</strong> when test<strong>in</strong>g the alcohol<br />

c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> a m<strong>in</strong>or’s body. However, <strong>on</strong>ly time will tell as<br />

to how officers <strong>in</strong> Arkansas will proceed. Act 1152 simply<br />

does not provide any <strong>in</strong>formati<strong>on</strong> or guidance as to how an<br />

officer may obta<strong>in</strong> evidence of alcohol c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> the body<br />

of a m<strong>in</strong>or. In fact, there is noth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the statute that<br />

suggests whether test<strong>in</strong>g is required for proof of alcohol<br />

106. MO. ANN. STAT. § 311.325.<br />

107. MO. ANN. STAT. § 311.325. However, those students are not allowed to<br />

c<strong>on</strong>sume the alcohol, and the <strong>in</strong>structor must ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> possessi<strong>on</strong> and c<strong>on</strong>trol of the<br />

substance at all times. MO. ANN. STAT. § 311.325.<br />

108. Compare ARK. CODE ANN. § 3-3-203(a) (Supp. 2011), with MO. ANN.<br />

STAT. § 311.325.<br />

109. MO. ANN. STAT. § 311.325.<br />

110. MO. ANN. STAT. § 311.325.<br />

111. State v. J.D.L.C., 293 S.W.3d 85, 89 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).<br />

112. Id.<br />

113. Id.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!