Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Lamont Meek was involved in a single car accident while driving with his wife and two minor children. One of Meek’s children was injured in the accident and Meek’s wife left the scene with the child by ambulance. A police officer was dispatched to the scene and observed Meek sitting on the curb. The officer stated in his police report that, after repeated attempts to get Meek’s attention, Meek stood slowly and had trouble keeping his balance. Meek told the officer that he lost control of the car because he had been “crazy driving” to entertain his children. The officer stated in his report that Meek did not seem to understand the dangers created by “crazy driving.” The officer observed that Meek had watery, bloodshot eyes and a smell of alcohol on his breath. The officer also noted that Meek spoke with “a thick tongue.” After Meek said he had had two glasses of wine, the officer administered a preliminary breath test that registered an alcoholic content of nearly twice the legal limit. The officer further stated that Meek exhibited a variety of clues that he was intoxicated while performing the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, the “walk and turn” test and the “one leg stand” test. The officer arrested Meek for driving while intoxicated. On Nov. 2, 2004, the Texas Department of Public Safety sought suspension of Meek’s license at a hearing before an administrative law judge. After hearing the evidence, the judge suspended Meek’s license, and Meek appealed the ruling to the county court at law. The trial court upheld the suspension. Meek then brought this appeal. HOLDING:Affirmed. A warrantless arrest for driving while intoxicated will be upheld, even if the officer did not see the person driving, if the person committed the offense of public intoxication in the officer’s view and there is no proof of sham or fraud. Meek contends he could not have been arrested for public intoxication because there was no indication that he was a danger to himself or others. Meek relies on the officer’s testimony that Meek’s car was so badly damaged in the accident that it could no longer be driven. Meek argues that, because he no longer had a functioning vehicle, he no longer posed a threat. The fact a person has already been involved in a car accident is sufficient to show he poses a danger to himself or others. Carrasco v. State, 712 S.W.2d 120 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986). Furthermore, an intoxicated person can pose a threat to himself or others regardless of whether he has access to a vehicle. Although Meek did not commit any dangerous acts in the officer’s presence, it is sufficient that the officer observed him to be intoxicated to the extent that he posed a potential danger to himself or others. Meek admittedly drove the car that was involved in the one-vehicle accident resulting in injury to his minor child. After the accident, the officer observed Meek acting in an intoxicated manner and his preliminary breath test registered an alcoholic content of twice the legal limit. According to the officer, Meek did not seem to understand the dangers inherent in his “crazy driving,” particularly after having consumed alcohol. Furthermore, Meek remained on a public street. The court concludes this evidence is sufficient to show that Meek posed a potential danger to himself or others and there was probable cause to arrest him for public intoxication. Because there was probable cause to arrest Meek for public intoxication, his warrantless arrest for driving while intoxicated was valid, the court concludes. OPINION:Morris, J.; Morris, Wright and Richter, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.