SDA: Other Preclusions Clarification

[rileypool]

I've ran into what could turn into a problem for me and my hopes to carry a concealed weapon in the very near future.

Subject for Clarification
Title 21 S 1290.11 - Other Preclusions (January 27, 2005 Revision)

6. Two or more convictions of public intoxication pursuant to Section 8 of Title 37 of the Oklahoma Statutes, or a similar law of another state. The preclusive period shall be three (3) years from the date of the completion of the last sentence;

7. Two or more misdemeanor convictions relating to intoxication or driving under the influence of an intoxicating substance or alcohol. The preclusive period shall be three (3) years from the date of the completion of the last sentence or shall require a certified statement from a licensed physician stating that the person is not in need of substance abuse treatment.

My Situation
When I was 20 years and 6 months I was arrested on suspicion of Public Intoxication. I begged for some type of sobriety test including a field test, pricking my finger and breathalyzer from the arresting officer. I was denied and told WE ONLY HAVE TO for DUI's. And that the suspicion of the officer was enough evidence to arrest someone for a Public Intox. I was also written a ticket by the same officer for a gallon of Vodka that was in the car, but the seal had yet to be broken.

Twelve hours later my parents have arrived after visiting my bank and bail me out. I beleive I plead No Contest and ended up receiving a 60-day deffered sentence for both tickets and something along the lines of $100 refund from the county. I completed the 60 days without any problems.

Other than that all I have is a couple of speeding tickets.

My Questions
1. Do those two tickets exclude me from being eligible to carry a concealed handgun?
2. Could me pleading No Contest instead of Guilty change my eligibility and vice versa?
3. A clarification of the following sentence: "The preclusive period shall be three (3) years from the date of the completion of the last sentence;"
3a. Does that mean I can have two convictions but they have to be more than 3 years apart to still qualify?
3b. Or does it mean once three years has passed since the date of completion of the last sentence I am now again eligible to qualify?

[J.P.]

Corerect answer is: 3b

[Flyboy]

Actually, I'm not so sure. First of all, the law says "two public intox" or "two misdemeanor intox or DUI." Your public intox is clearly one, but posession is not intoxication. I'd seek clarification from an attorney on that point.

Second, you said it that you received a deferred sentence. If you're referring to deferred adjudication, the concept is that if you keep your nose clean for your probation (and grease Daddy Government's palms), then it all goes away like it never happened.

Go visit http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/casesearch.asp and do a search in All Oklahoma Courts for your name, and look up your case. A search under my own name (David C. Buckles) reveals two cases: one in Canadian County (Speeding 1-10 over, and multiple errors in the vehicle record...go government clerks!), for which I was convicted, and one in Cleveland County (SPEED NOT REASONABLE AND PROPER), which was dismissed. (Note to all: if you're in a single-car accident, and the cop didn't witness it, plead not guilty; with no witnesses, the State doesn't have a case. And yes, I have caselaw to support that, but a smart DA will realize that and walk away rather than spend the resources on prosecuting it.)

Look up and report back the status of your case...you might just find that it's a non-event. In any case, talk to an attorney; if you're in OKC, the guy who teaches H&H's class, Doug Friesen, seems to be pretty knowledgable, and is a hoot to talk to. Call him, or ask him (or another attorney) in class. Legal advice from the internet is worth what you pay for it (less, if you consider ISP fees).

[rileypool]

Count as filed: NONIN, MINOR IN POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE, in violation of 37 O.S. 241-246
Date of Offense: 05/07/2004
Defendant: Pool, Riley Steven
Disposition Information
Disposed: DISMISSED WITH COSTS, 09/03/2004. Dismissed with Costs.
Disposed Count Code: NONIN
Disposed Statute: 37 O.S. 241-246
Count as disposed: MINOR IN POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE
Resolution
09/03/2004: DISMCOSTS - DISMISSED CC TO DFT

Count as filed: DR1, PUBLIC INTOXICATION, in violation of 37 O.S. 8
Date of Offense: 05/07/2004
Defendant: Pool, Riley Steven
Disposition Information
Disposed: DEFERRED, 09/03/2004. Guilty Plea.
Disposed Count Code: DR1
Disposed Statute: 37 O.S. 8
Count as disposed: PUBLIC INTOXICATION
Resolution
09/03/2004: DEFERRED - DFT EPG--90 DAYS DEFERRED--$10 FINE & COSTS

I was a little off on my original message, but not much. Sorry.

[J.P.]

looks like you are in the clear...now quit drinking! ;)

[capmarine]

dont see a problem.DON'T EVER GIVE ALCOHOL TO A MINOR-FELONY
im not talking about low-point beer.
see only one charge,deferred-it goes away after 90 day(i guess that was your punishment)

[skyydiver]

looks like you are in the clear...now quit drinking! ;)

JP man, that's rash. I had to grab a beer just to get over the suspense of reading the oscn findings. Glad you're good to go rileypool. Now, celebrate with a cold one. Or a range session. But not both. Unless in reverse order. I'm now confused again, I think I'll get another beer. :nolike:

[okla-lawman]

It says comvictions/ If they were deferred they are not convictions. As long as you met the terms they were dismissed.
2) I dont know what court it was but it would have to be a court of record (ie non municipal court except in tulsa and okc). Buty since in your second post it lists state charges it would of been a court of record.
3) Even though it was deferred and dismissed I would contact the court about having it esponged. That away you would not have to worry about it in the future.

[rileypool]

okla-lawman,

After reading the responses to my posts and someone's suggestion to call an attorney. I called the attorney who represented me in those two cases.

He was surprised they even showed up on OSCN and told me they shouldn't have. He also told me since he'll be heading out to Rogers County (where those offenses took place) next week, he would make sure those don't show up anymore. I'm assuming he'll have them esponged.

It's great to see these answers since I just received my packet from the OSBI on Friday!

[J.P.]

Trust me,you have *nothing* to worry about as far as those cases are concerned.
I *know* from experience,dude.
;)