TexasCHLforum.com

bronco78 wrote:

i8godzilla wrote:I know this place well and am a regular customer (no, not for daiquiris).

Well that leaves beer, propane or renting a U-haul

You are three for three...............

bronco78 wrote:

jmra wrote:As I read this thread I can't help but laugh thinking about all the drive-through daiquiri shops I would see everyday in New Orleans. Louisiana also has an open container law. I wonder if the Styrofoam cup with the plastic lid is considered a closed container but becomes an open container when the straw is pushed through the lid.

I think in Texas, as long as the straw wrapper and lid are taped in place, it is considered a closed container.. or at least, that is what i have been told by two departments in the FT Hood area when i asked. BUT.. is it a tamper proof tape? i've never looked, so do not know. We have one of those drive though places in Copperas Cove, i stop in to get select beer once and awhile or propane .. but have never looked at the other offerings.

I know this place well and am a regular customer (no, not for daiquiris). I have talked to the owner about this once before. According to him, the TABC said that as long as the tape over the straw opening stays in place it is considered unopened. He told me at one time he tried to use lids without the straw opening but some folks complained. My guess is that it made it too hard to drink it on the way home.

AFCop wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:Ok -- I can see that there will be no agreement here. I cannot interpret the law the way you've described, and have it hold together logically. Even your use of the word "or", and interpreting it as an "and" make no sense, at least to me. Regarding your successful cases, I just have to wonder who the defending lawyer was -- public defender, perhaps? I can even make a case for going into a liquor store and buying 3-4 bottles, which the proprietor places in an open liquor box, partially filling it. Since that "container" (the box) is open, and (or) the box is partially empty, I'd be guilty. Your interpretation of this law is FAR to ... fragile? There are just way to many ways a partial case of beer can exist in a car without anybody drinking it IN the car to be able to support the law as you've described it. It would be shot down in a minute by any defense attorney worth his salt.

By the way, I understand you're currently deployed -- A heartfelt "thank you" for your service!

I haven't interpreted or as an "and" I think it is written the way it is to cover the very scenario I have used it in... a bottle/can that is opened, has been opened, seal is broken or other receptacle of which the contents are partially removed. Ultimately it is not what I think that matters... It is the judge or jury that matters.

You're welcome, its what I do.....

On a different note I was in the airport, obviously in uniform, in Las Vegas heading over and a little girl walked up to me with her dad in tow, shook my hand and thanked me for "keeping our country safe" I got on my knees and told her it was people like her and her daddy that made it worth doing.... Then I got a hug...... and then I teared up.....

Just so happens there's a thread going on right now about Jury Nullification.

AFCop wrote:US District Court for the Western District of Texas

So the missing container was based on Federal Law/Regulation, not the Texas PC, correct?

AFCop wrote:I personally have a conviction on an open container enhancement with a DWI with an open 30 pack with cans missing and no open cans in the car.

Is the Air Force/Federal or in an actual Texas Court?

Lambda Force wrote:

AFCop wrote:Short answer is yes you are correct, you could receive a citation for your 1 missing beer.

I hope the judge would question the sobriety of a cop who wrote a ticket because someone over 21 had 5 unopened beer cans.

I would enter the plastic ring into evidence and ask you--as the arresting officer--to make in contain alcohol. If it is really a container you should have not problem doing this.

I do not believe that the cardboard container nor the plastic ring is anymore an 'alcohol container' than the plastic bag the store put it into. What if you went to the store and bought two bottles of wine and the store put them in the same paper bag. You tun a corner and one slips out. Is this now illegal?

AFCop wrote:My comment about the contents partially removed was a paraphrase to indicate it doesn't have to be an open bottle.....

(1) "Open container" means a bottle, can, or other receptacle that contains any amount of alcoholic beverage and that is open, that has been opened, that has a broken seal, or the contents of which are partially removed.

Ok, I will pick this apart....

A bottle or can that is open, that contained alcohol and contents have been partially removed...... i.e. open and consumed bottle/can of alcoholic beverage

Other recepticle, broken seal, or the contents of which are partially removed.... applies to the six pack of beer that is held together by the plastic ring/placed in a carboard opentop box - IF one or more of the cans/bottles is missing from the plastic ring/box also meets the definition of other receptical that contains alcohol beverage and is open with the contents partially removed.

While I didnt state this earlier, it can be a bottle or can, with cold liquid partially missing but it doesn't have to be to meet the elements of the offense as I listed out. I hope this eliminates the confusion created..

A cardboard carton is NOT a container of alcohol! It is a container that holds other containers. Since Coors beer is delivered in a boxcar, under your definition, as soon as the distributor removes it from the boxcar it is an open container. That means that those cargo vans that make 'hotshot deliveries' with cases in the van are transporting open containers.

Next, how are you going to prove there is a beer missing and that I did not purchase only five cans. Since you cannot have an open container at a store that sells alcohol for off premise consumption do you go to every 7/11 and make sure that the singles actually came as singles and not in 6/12/18/24 packs?

To me it seems you are twisting the law to make a criminal out of a otherwise law abiding person. Might hold up to non-judicial UCMJ punishment but I think someone fresh from the Bar Exam will squash this in most courts.