Minors in possession of alcohol by consumption

RCW 66.44.270 (2) (a) it is illegal to possess a person under the age of 21 years consume alcohol. The complaint is commonly called a minor in possession, or MIP. The conviction for MIP may lead to imprisonment, loss of license and fines of health. The performance is a common mistake to think that the law allows them to stop and a small amount, if the child consumes the characters of intoxication issue. As we shall see, this proves to be false.
The mere presence ofAlcohol in a system is not sufficient to demonstrate MIP

The state court against Roth, 131 Wn. App 556 (2006) addressed the question of proof that if a small exhibition was sufficient under the sign of alcohol consumed in support of a conviction in RCW 66.44.270 (2). In Roth, the defendant 20 years, went to a party where alcohol is present. Nobody saw the defendant is not alcohol, but if Mr. Roth has contacted the police had noticed undecided and emits a strong smell ofThe alcohol in his breath, he issued a ticket for MIP. Mr. Roth was subsequently sentenced by the District Court of PID.

On appeal, the Court raised the conviction Roth agreed on the basis of insufficient evidence. According to the ruling Roth

The accused had a controlled substance if he knows the presence of the substance, the substance is immediately accessible, and a defendant exercises his power and control of the substance. C. Hornaday State, 105 Wn.2d120, 125, 713 P.2d 71 (1986). Possession may be actual or constructive. State V. Dalton, 72 Wn. App 674, 676, 865 P.2d 575 (1994). That the defendant of possession of a substance on the ground Trier to consider all the circumstances. C. Partin State 88 899 Wn.2d 906, 567 P.2d 1136 (1977). The mere presence of alcohol in a system not of itself sufficient to justify a conviction. Dalton, 72 Wn. But App 676, when the first consumer testin combination with other clear evidence may be sufficient to demonstrate possession of any doubt. Id No single factor is decisive for the existence of dominance and control. State V. Turner, 103 Wn. App 515, 521, 13 P.3d 234 (2000). Emphasis added.
This means that a young man accused of PID should be able to get the case thrown out of court before trial, unless other evidence to prove possession. If you or someone charged with MIP basedOnly the smell of alcohol is better to speak with a lawyer right after his release.