Drunkenness In Public And Criminal Law
1. Overview: Drunkenness in Public
Drunkenness in public refers to being intoxicated by alcohol or drugs in a public place to such an extent that the individual is a danger to themselves, others, or public order.
Why is drunkenness in public criminalized?
Protect public safety and order
Prevent harm to the individual and others
Deter disruptive or dangerous behavior
Enable intervention and treatment if necessary
Legal focus:
Public intoxication itself may be an offense.
Intoxication combined with disorderly conduct, public nuisance, or endangerment may lead to criminal charges.
Many jurisdictions have specific laws or ordinances about “drunk and disorderly” behavior.
2. Types of Offenses Related to Drunkenness in Public
Being drunk in a public place.
Disorderly conduct while intoxicated.
Operating a vehicle under influence (DUI/DWI).
Public nuisance caused by intoxication.
Assault or other crimes committed while intoxicated.
3. Key Case Laws Explaining Drunkenness in Public as a Criminal Offense
Case 1: Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968)
Facts: Powell was arrested for public intoxication in Texas. He argued that his chronic alcoholism meant his intoxication was involuntary and that penalizing him was unconstitutional.
Issue: Whether convicting a chronic alcoholic for public intoxication violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Held: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the conviction, ruling that public intoxication is a valid offense and does not violate constitutional protections, even for alcoholics.
Significance: The Court distinguished between punishing status (being an alcoholic) and conduct (being intoxicated in public), allowing laws criminalizing conduct while intoxicated.
Case 2: City of Chicago v. Morales, 527 U.S. 41 (1999)
Facts: Chicago’s gang congregation ordinance criminalized loitering by gang members, which included drunkenness in public.
Issue: Whether the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague and violated due process.
Held: The Supreme Court invalidated the ordinance for vagueness but discussed public intoxication laws as they relate to public order.
Significance: Clarified the importance of specificity in laws addressing public drunkenness and disorderly conduct.
Case 3: People v. Dumas, 21 Cal. 3d 289 (1978)
Facts: Dumas was convicted of being drunk in a public place.
Issue: Whether the defendant’s level of intoxication met the legal standard for criminal liability.
Held: The California Supreme Court ruled that public intoxication requires proof that the defendant was unable to care for themselves or others or was a danger.
Significance: Established that mere intoxication is insufficient; it must cause a public danger or disorder.
Case 4: R v. Harris (1836) (UK Case)
Facts: Harris was charged with being drunk and disorderly in a public place.
Issue: What constitutes “drunkenness” legally?
Held: The court defined drunkenness as a state that impairs control and behavior to the extent of disturbing the peace.
Significance: Early legal definition emphasizing behavior, not just consumption.
Case 5: State v. Shurtleff, 43 Ohio St. 3d 174 (1989)
Facts: Shurtleff was arrested for public intoxication but argued he was not a danger or disruptive.
Issue: What constitutes “public intoxication” under Ohio law?
Held: The court held that public intoxication is a status offense only if it interferes with public order or safety.
Significance: Reinforced the idea that intoxication must affect public order for criminal liability.
Case 6: People v. Goldstein, 104 Misc. 2d 553 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1980)
Facts: Goldstein was arrested for public intoxication after refusing medical help.
Issue: Can refusal of aid while intoxicated be criminalized?
Held: Court ruled that refusal could factor into disorderly conduct but not necessarily intoxication itself.
Significance: Shows how intoxication can interplay with other offenses.
4. Legal Principles Emerging from These Cases
Conduct vs. Status: Criminal law penalizes the conduct of public intoxication, not the mere status of being an alcoholic.
Danger or disorder requirement: Intoxication must pose a danger to self or others, or disrupt public order.
Vagueness: Laws must be clear and specific to avoid arbitrary enforcement.
Right to treatment: Some courts acknowledge alcoholism as a disease but maintain public safety as paramount.
Interaction with other laws: Public intoxication can be a standalone offense or part of larger crimes like disorderly conduct or assault.
5. Summary
Drunkenness in public is often a summary or misdemeanor offense.
The focus is on protecting the public and preventing harm.
Courts have consistently upheld laws against public intoxication but require a clear demonstration of danger or disruption.
Modern laws try to balance individual rights and public welfare, sometimes incorporating options for treatment or diversion.
RELATED Blog
0 comments