Mason v. State
1979 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 288, 1979 OK CR 132, 603 P.2d 1146 (1979)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An intoxicated individual who is unconscious behind the steering wheel of a motor vehicle with the engine running is in 'actual physical control' of that vehicle and may be prosecuted for driving under the influence.
Facts:
- On May 10, 1978, at approximately 12:30 a.m., Officer Fry found Don Roger Mason inside his car, which was idling in a business parking lot.
- The vehicle's engine was running, the headlights were on, and the doors were shut.
- Mason was positioned in the front seat with his legs under the steering wheel, near the pedals.
- His upper body was lying on the passenger side of the seat, and he was unconscious and intoxicated.
Procedural Posture:
- The State prosecuted Don Roger Mason in the District Court of Pontotoc County, a trial court.
- Mason was convicted of the crime of Actual Physical Control of a Vehicle While Intoxicated.
- The court sentenced him to six months in jail (with all but five days suspended) and a $250 fine.
- Mason, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is an unconscious, intoxicated person found in the driver's seat of a running vehicle considered to be in 'actual physical control' of that vehicle for the purposes of an intoxicated driving statute?
Opinions:
Majority - Cornish, Presiding Judge
Yes, an unconscious, intoxicated person in the driver's seat of a running vehicle is in 'actual physical control' of it. The legislative intent behind the statute is to apprehend intoxicated drivers before they can cause harm. The defendant created a dangerous situation by placing himself behind the wheel and starting the engine while intoxicated, thereby 'directing influence' over the vehicle. Allowing unconsciousness to serve as a defense would perversely benefit the most intoxicated offenders while punishing those who are less intoxicated. The key factor is the creation of a potential hazard, not the defendant's state of consciousness at the moment of discovery.
Analysis:
This decision broadens the definition of 'actual physical control' to include situations where a driver is not actively operating the vehicle or even conscious. It establishes that control is determined by the potential for the individual to operate the vehicle, rather than their immediate capability or intent. The ruling reinforces a preventative approach to DUI enforcement, allowing prosecution of individuals who are 'sleeping it off' in a running car, thereby deterring the creation of inherently dangerous situations. This precedent makes it significantly easier for prosecutors to secure convictions in cases where the defendant is found intoxicated in a parked but running vehicle.
