 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Raye v. Jones9/23/2003
age drinking and driving and would be entitled to a jury trial on the DUI charge. See Rothweiler, 100 Ariz. at 47, 410 P.2d at 486; see also A.R.S. § 28-1381(A), (F).
We conclude, therefore, that the offense of underage drinking and driving does not involve sufficient moral turpitude to require jury eligibility.
Grave Consequences
"An offense not of moral turpitude may nevertheless be jury eligible... depending on the severity of the consequences to the defendant's life." Benitez, 198 Ariz. at 96, 21, 7 P.3d at 105. Under Benitez, the loss of the privilege of driving is not viewed as a grave or serious consequence and is not supportive of a right to a trial by jury. In commenting on the impact of a license suspension on the defendant's employment, the supreme court in Benitez said:
This court does not recognize driving as a right. Instead we view it as a privilege. See State v. Harrison, 164 Ariz. 316, 318, 792 P.2d 779, 781 (App. 1990) ("The loss of a privilege is not nearly so serious or burdensome as the loss of a recognized right"). We recognize that license suspension limits the job functions of those who must drive for a living, but we cannot base our analysis of jury eligibility on the effects of a conviction upon a particular occupation or field. Jury eligibility is determinable on the basis of the offense, not the defendant. When faced with consequences to the employment function, the courts must decide whether the effects are sufficiently widespread to create a grave offense with a jury right. Because we do not view the potential loss of the driving privilege as a grave or serious consequence, we hold today that the inability to get to and from work created by the suspension of one's license does not support a right to trial by jury.
Id. at 96-97, 26, 7 P.3d at 105-106 (emphasis added). Following this guidance from our supreme court, we conclude that the license suspension that accompanies a conviction for underage drinking and driving does not constitute a grave consequence sufficient to support jury eligibility.
CONCLUSION
For these reasons, we hold that underage drinking and driving, made unlawful by A.R.S. § 4-244(33), is not a jury eligible offense. We accept jurisdiction but deny relief. The judgment of the superior court is affirmed.
CONCURRING
G. MURRAY SNOW, Presiding Judge
JON W. THOMPSON
Page 1 2 3 4 Arizona DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|