PA Courts rule that "sleeping it off" in your car might not lead to a DUI

In a reversal of one of the most asinine rules I have ever encountered, it seems that some judges are now using a little common sense on the issue of an intoxicated person sitting in a vehicle.

Prior to this ruling if you were drunk and sitting in a parked car, with the key in your possession, or the car running, you were considered in control of the vehicle. The officer could arrest and charge you with a DUI. This created a problem for people who had more to drink than they anticipated and had to "sleep it off" in their car. They knew better than to drive, and decided to take a nap in their car. It still resulted in a DUI and resulted in loss of their license, large fines, and increased insurance.

The article states;

The key issue in the Verdekal and other cases revolves around a provision within the drunken driving statute that permits police to charge a driver - even if the vehicle is not moving - as long as the officer can show the operator was in “actual physical control” of the vehicle. The problem for police has been in how appellate courts have interpreted what constitutes “actual physical control,” McMonagle said.

DUI Decision Frustrated Officials

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker 

To think that everyone who is in a vehicle and has had too much to drink is going to drive is asinine! There will be those who will drive drunk...and the job of the police is to stop those people, but not to punish those who they assume will break the law. The line needs to be drawn with operation and not potential operation.

As written in the previous article, if the officer can see that there was operation of the vehicle by the intoxicated individual then arrest and charge, but if the car is parked in a safe location or running in a parking lot, then there should be no reason to "think" the person is going to commit a crime.