Underage Possession/Consumption

[BOR]

But, we do not know the facts here as the OP has not returned to clarify them. Heck, for all we know, the OP bought it, walked outside, and took a swig while under the watchful eye of the officer. All are included in the same charge and go to support the offense. The officer would not be required to cite the OP three times for the same incident for each occurrence. When they go to court, the officer will articulate what he observed, the judge will decide whether said observations violate the cited section, and the court will evaluate the case to render his or her decision.

- Carl

Well, technically he could cite for a violation of E1, possession.

2nd citation; E1, consumption.

One citation is sufficient though, and can list both. The court, even if cited seperately, will consolidate the charges.

[cdwjava]

Well, technically he could cite for a violation of E1, possession.

2nd citation; E1, consumption.

One citation is sufficient though, and can list both. The court, even if cited seperately, will consolidate the charges.

If our section covered both possession and consumption, we would just cite for the one section even if both were present. It's not the description written on the cite that matters, it is the code section and the elements contained within.

If the officer can articulate ONLY an admission of consumption as "proof" of a violation, then the case stands a good chance of being dismissed with a .00 BAC. An admission, by itself, is insufficient grounds for conviction in most any crime. I seriously doubt that the only thing here is an officer walking by and asking a kid if he had a drink.

- Carl