Busted for Public Intoxication

[Sweet Delights]

Can any attorneys provide me with some advice?

I was just sitting in Big Lots in my car (Kingwood, Texas), in a parking space, at 3 in the afternoon and I just got off the phone and the police came and said, "What are you doing here?"

So, they proceed to get me out of the car and arrested me for Public Intoxication and possession of paraphernalia.

Did they need PC?, (Probable Cause) on this? I am desperately trying to get an attorney because I thought I got shafted. If anything, I would like to get this adjudicated and do community service and not have the conviction on my record.

I feel that the police had zero probable cause on this, but I am not versed in criminal law. Maybe it could be thrown out on the PC issue? I just can't seem to get an attorney to return my calls.

Any help/advice is appreciated!!

[instfixer]

IF you were drunk, I would say that you were awfully lucky not to get charged with DUI/DWI
as far as ""I just can't seem to get an attorney to return my calls.""

Little story:
A doctor at a party asks a lawyer what he does when people asks him questions at functions and parties. The lawyer replies that he answers their questions and then sends them a bill for 'legal services' The doctor thanks the lawyer for the advice... A few days later the doctor gets a bill for 'legal services'

For you, set an appointment for one hour with a lawyer and say, of course, that you will pay.

Would you do a free meet and greet?

[glade55]

big lots lol

[tattooed_asian_kim]

HOW LONG WERE YOU IN THE PARKING SPACE ? ? ? ? BRIEFLY OR MULTIPLE HOURS ? ? ? ALSO ,,, PUBLIC INTOXICATION IS A MISD. CHARGE (( EASIER TO SHAKE OFF )) ... BUT ,,, ISNT PARAPHENALIA A FELONY CHRAGE ? ? ? UNLESS THEY MEAN = BOOZE ACCOUTREMENTS ? ... THIS IS LIKE THE TIME I WORKED IN LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS + AND + LE WAS UP MY ASS FOR " PUB INTOX " THERE ... BECAUSE ALL ALCOHHOL AND DRUNK HUMANS ARE ILLEGAL IN PUBLIC !!! I WAS LIKE = " HELL NO I AM NOT GOING DOWN FOR THE 2 DRINKS I HAD THAT DAY !!! " I WAS NOT DISRUPTIVE LOUD ETC !!! BUT LITTLE ROCK LE MENACED ME ANYWAY

[chicagoboy]

Originally Posted by tattooed_asian_kim

I WAS NOT DISRUPTIVE LOUD ETC !!!

Please, no need to shout.

[Guest021716-5]

Kingwood is terrible and boring, the cops have nothing else to do there but be nosy. And yes as long as you were on a public street the police can arrest you. Just tell them someone "slipped" alcohol in your drink and that you weren't willfully intoxicated.

[Sweet Delights]

No, was definitely not drunk. I like Stellas, but I hardly drink and hadn't had anything to drink that day

[Gotyour6]

What did they catch you with?

[straightshooter30]

Were you under the influence of any substance? Did they test - field sobriety test, or breathalyzer? Yes, get an attorney, don't say anything (Hopefully you haven't...) and fight!

Originally Posted by Sweet Delights

No, was definitely not drunk. I like Stellas, but I hardly drink and hadn't had anything to drink that day

[ShysterJon]

Kandy wrote me privately a few days ago about this matter, and I replied. She's okay with me sharing my reply, which follows (and includes some additions):

For you (and an attorney) to properly evaluate the strength of the state's case, you would need to know what the officer would testify to at a trial. Normally when a suspect is arrested, the arresting officer will construct an offense report, which will detail the facts of the officer's encounter with a suspect. If you haven't already done so, you should contact the Kingwood Police Department to get a copy of the offense report. But since the offenses are ticketable only offenses, there may not be an offense report. If that's the case, then all the officer's observations should be noted on the face of the ticket. Note: The copy of the ticket you received may not include writing the officer made on another copy of the ticket, so ask KPD for a copy of the ticket and any other records regarding the case. Cite Article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, which is the law that states that a defendant is entitled to discovery of the State's evidence.

The law regarding police interactions with suspects is complicated, but the bottom line is an officer will normally need to have reasonable suspicion that an offense has occurred before initiating interaction with a suspect. For patrol officers, that normally means the officer observed the suspect committing a crime. Reasonable suspicion is a low standard of proof, basically that some evidence existed of a crime. If the facts are ONLY as you stated, the officer didn't have reasonable suspicion you'd committed a crime merely because you were sitting in your car in a parking lot. I suspect there's something you left out of your story, but, of course, I don't know.

For the officer to cite you for PI, he/she needed to have probable cause that you were intoxicated in public and presented a danger to yourself and/or others. Probable cause is a higher standard than reasonable suspicion. It basically means that there was evidence that it was more likely than not that a crime had been committed. Assuming the officer can articulate facts to prove probable cause on the PI, he/she was permitted to search your vehicle for intoxicants, such as alcohol or other things you could have ingested. If the paraphernalia was in plain view, the officer had the right to seize it and ticket you independently of any evidence regarding the PI.

If you don't have criminal history, chances are the prosecutor will offer a deferred probation. These offenses are Class C misdemeanors, so the records are subject to expunction (that is, destruction) whether or not you have a conviction.

Good luck!

As a side note to tattooed_asian_kim: We welcome your input here on two conditions: One, please use a readable font. This is not Backpage. Two, post intelligently. I look forward to your first post in this forum meeting these conditions.

[obiwansalami]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Kandy wrote me privately a few days ago g

For the officer to cite you for PI, he/she needed to have probable cause that you were intoxicated in public and presented a danger to yourself and/or others. Probable cause is a higher standard than reasonable suspicion. It basically means that there was evidence that it was more likely than not that a crime had been committed.

About a decade ago, Houston PD (and I think Dallas PD as well) decided to curb drunk driving by sending undercover police to bars. Their goal was to observe patrons that might be drunk, and issue them PI tickets on the spot. No breathalyser, no nothing. If you were a little too loud, or laughed too loud, you'd get a PI ticket if undercover officer was nearby. This was well reported in the media and widely criticized, so that practice has since stopped. Now in the light of what you wrote above, what could have been the "probable cause" to write a PI ticket in those cases? Being too loud in a bar?

On the other hand, when HPD raids after hours clubs in Houston under suspicion that they serve alcohol (as they all do), the officers line up all patrons and give them breathalysers. If you blow over the limit, you get arrested for PI, which then gives officers pretext to search you for concealed weapons and drugs. Again, this is another example of stretching the "probable cause" to issue you a PI - why would a mere presence in an after hours club that possible serves alcohol give the officers probable cause to administer a breathalyser test to all patrons?

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

Kandy wrote me privately a few days ago g

If the paraphernalia was in plain view, the officer had the right to seize it and ticket you independently of any evidence regarding the PI.

Is water pipe paraphernalia? How about glass pipe? if so, why are they being legally sold in this state? How can they be OK while on display in the shelf, and become illegal as soon as they're paid for?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by obiwansalami

About a decade ago, Houston PD (and I think Dallas PD as well) decided to curb drunk driving by sending undercover police to bars. Their goal was to observe patrons that might be drunk, and issue them PI tickets on the spot. No breathalyser, no nothing. If you were a little too loud, or laughed too loud, you'd get a PI ticket if undercover officer was nearby. This was well reported in the media and widely criticized, so that practice has since stopped. Now in the light of what you wrote above, what could have been the "probable cause" to write a PI ticket in those cases? Being too loud in a bar?

On the other hand, when HPD raids after hours clubs in Houston under suspicion that they serve alcohol (as they all do), the officers line up all patrons and give them breathalysers. If you blow over the limit, you get arrested for PI, which then gives officers pretext to search you for concealed weapons and drugs. Again, this is another example of stretching the "probable cause" to issue you a PI - why would a mere presence in an after hours club that possible serves alcohol give the officers probable cause to administer a breathalyser test to all patrons?

Is water pipe paraphernalia? How about glass pipe? if so, why are they being legally sold in this state? How can they be OK while on display in the shelf, and become illegal as soon as they're paid for?

I remember the PI ticket-writing in Dallas. I'm not going to speculate as to what the cops considered probable cause to write the tickets. Obviously, drinking in and of itself, or making a loud noise, or merely being in an establishment that sells alcohol, isn't sufficient evidence to prove PI.

A pipe can transform from being legal to illegal if there is a substance affixed to the pipe, such as resin, and the cop can smell the resin and conclude it's from the burning of an illegal substance. I assume head shops don't sell pipes pre-coated with resin. Haha. Or I guess a cop could ask the possessor of a pipe, "Do you smoke [insert illegal substance] in this pipe?," and if the suspect said, "Yes," that would also transform it from a legal to illegal pipe.

[chicagoboy]

Originally Posted by obiwansalami

About a decade ago, Houston PD (and I think Dallas PD as well) decided to curb drunk driving by sending undercover police to bars. Their goal was to observe patrons that might be drunk, and issue them PI tickets on the spot. No breathalyser, no nothing. If you were a little too loud, or laughed too loud, you'd get a PI ticket if undercover officer was nearby. This was well reported in the media and widely criticized, so that practice has since stopped.

Perhaps obiwansalami is thincking of TABC's Operation Last Call.

[obiwansalami]

Originally Posted by chicagoboy

Perhaps obiwansalami is thincking of TABC's Operation Last Call.

If he were to thinck, he would have thuncked exactly that. Well done, BoyofChicago.

[Sweet Delights]

Update. Went to court, judge was kind, paid small fine and I requested a deferral and nothing will be on record.

Everything worked out fine, wasn't a big deal ! :-)