| RCW 66.44.270 (2) (a) it is illegal to possess for a | | | | the defendant on the basis of insufficient |
| person under the age of 21 or consuming alcohol. | | | | evidence. According to the case of Roth:- Felony |
| This offense is accused commonly referred to as | | | | lawyer |
| a minor in possession, or MIP. Conviction for MIP | | | | The accused has a controlled substance if he |
| may result in jail time, loss of license and the | | | | knows of the presence of the substance, the |
| health of fines. Law enforcement often makes | | | | substance is immediately accessible, and the |
| the mistake of thinking that the law permits them | | | | defendant exercises dominion and control over |
| to arrest and a small fee, if the minor has | | | | the substance. State v. Hornaday, 105 Wn.2d120, |
| consumed the signs of the issuing of alcohol. As | | | | 125, 713 P.2d 71 (1986). The property can be |
| we shall see, makes this to be false. | | | | either constructive or actual. State v. Dalton, 72 |
| The mere presence ofAlcohol in a system is not | | | | Wn. App. 674, 676, 865 P.2d 575 (1994). Whether |
| sufficient to prove MIP | | | | the defendant had possession of a substance is |
| The court in State v. Roth, 131 Wn. App. 556 | | | | determined by the trier of the facts by the |
| (2006) with the question of whether evidence | | | | totality of the circumstances must be examined. |
| that a small exhibition was treated under the sign | | | | State v. Partin, 88 Wn.2d 899, 906, 567 P.2d 1136 |
| of alcohol consumed sufficient to support a | | | | (1977). The mere presence of alcohol in a system |
| conviction under RCW 66.44.270 (2) too. In Roth, | | | | is not enough support on their own to a |
| the 20-year-old defendant went to a party where | | | | conviction. Dalton, 72 Wn. App. at 676th However, |
| alcohol was present. No one saw the defendant is | | | | if evidence of prior consumptioncombined with |
| not to consume alcohol, but noticed Mr. Roth, | | | | other corroborating evidence, this may be |
| when she contacted the police that he staggered | | | | sufficient to prove possession beyond a |
| and exude a strong odorAlcohol on the breath, so | | | | reasonable doubt. Id. No single factor is |
| they issued a ticket for MIP. Mr. Roth was | | | | determinative of the existence of dominion and |
| convicted in the wake of the MIP in the district | | | | control. State v. Turner, 103 Wn. App. 515, 521, 13 |
| court.- Felony lawyer | | | | P.3d 234 (2000). Emphasis Added. |
| On appeal, the Court annulled Roth conviction of | | | | |