Every weekend students are charged and convicted of Possession of Alcohol Under the Legal age, also known as “PAULA.”
This offense has existed since alcohol age restrictions have been around. But even in the last few decades, the penalties have gone from comically low to ridiculously high.
With the new (July 2009) surcharge of 35%, and the new court costs of $60.00, the penalty for a 1st offense PAULA has risen to $330.00.
That’s a pretty steep penalty for a night out drinking. And I’m not going to comment on the size of flat screen TV that could be bought for the fees on a 2nd offense.
These tickets used to be called “Ten Dollar Tickets” based on the fine that existed in the 1980’s. The surcharge and court costs were considerably less at that time as well.
Also, before the late 90’s, many of these tickets were paid and lost in the depths of the county courthouse. Now they are available for potential employers and boards of admissions as part of a public database on the Internet. These charges can be discovered even before guilt is established.
The benefits of the incredible fine can be debated.
But the “criminal history” ramifications are more important.
I have had former students contact me stating they did not get their job due to a “criminal history” from a PAULA ticket.
Remember that the PAULA offense does not even mean that a defendant was intoxicated or acting disorderly.
I have seen convictions when the testimony was “I was holding this drink for my girlfriend (who is 21) while she went to the restroom.” The defendant was standing by the door of the restroom when this happened. The officer noticed no effects of consumption or intoxication of the defendant.
And the judge found her guilty.
And that was the right decision.
The law only requires “possession.” If you admit to holding a drink, you are guilty.
So what is the remedy?
Defendants need to be given some sort of second chance. Felony offenders have a second chance – it’s called a deferred judgment. Serious and aggravated misdemeanors have a second chance as well.
But “scheduled” simple misdemeanors, such as PAULA, have no second chance. It’s an immediate criminal record.
Maybe this lack of due process made sense when a defendant was only dealing with a $10 ticket that nobody would ever see. But now it’s a potential job loss.
Solution one would be to make deferred judgments allowable for scheduled offenses. Personally, I think that’s too messy.
The best solution would be similar to the law that currently exists for public intoxication. Under a 1st offense public intox, a defendant can have the charge expunged if he receives no criminal convictions (aside from Iowa-based traffic offenses) for 2 years following the conviction.
Why can’t this be made available to PAULA “convicts.” And can we make in retroactive?