Acquittal as a minor (underage possession)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anon E Mouse
  • Start date Start date
A

Anon E Mouse

Guest
I appologize if I am wasting your time. I don't want to be dishonest. But, I don't want to disclose any more than required.

I was detained (a different legal standard than an "arrest" in my state), processed as a minor, refused a plea offer, and was acquitted in a juvenile proceeding of underage possession of alcohol by successfully asserting an affirmative defense offered within the statute. The prosecutor got an earful from the magistrate for wasting the court's time and taxpayer's money when no conviction was possible. This record is "sealed", whatever that means in practical terms. I know that state police can see that a "detention" happened to me on a specified date, but there are no details.

I have a legal opinion. But seek a medical one.

Should I disclose this if I apply for a medical certificate? My read is that I do not have to.
 
The Feds can see everything if it was entered into the computers.. sealed or not. Even if it was expunged there is a record of the expungement (lol what a silly word).

Spend the $ and call an FAA medical lawyer and ask them. This is the internet.

Google lists them (its like magic) for expample: https://www.ramoslaw.com/aviation-law/faa-medical-certificate/


"
Can the federal government see expunged records?


Your expunged and sealed criminal record can still be accessed by the Court, prosecutors, and law enforcement agencies including police, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), immigration, and other agencies in a criminal investigation, prosecution, or for sentencing and probation purposes."
 
There are three relevent questions on the medical that you have to answer truthfully whether you think things are expunged or not.

First, is whether you have used illegal drugs in the past two years.
Second, is whether you were arrested/charged with anything involving drugs/alcohol while operating a vehicle.
Third, is whether you were convicted of a misdemeanor or felony.

No idea on the first one for you.
The second would depend if it was while operating a vehicle. Even if the charges were dismissed, the FAA wants to know about it so they can see if you got pleaded down or whatever. How big a deal this is depends on the details.
THe third sounds like did not happen.
 
flyingron said:
There are three relevent questions on the medical that you have to answer truthfully whether you think things are expunged or not.

First, is whether you have used illegal drugs in the past two years.
Second, is whether you were arrested/charged with anything involving drugs/alcohol while operating a vehicle.
Third, is whether you were convicted of a misdemeanor or felony.

No idea on the first one for you.
The second would depend if it was while operating a vehicle. Even if the charges were dismissed, the FAA wants to know about it so they can see if you got pleaded down or whatever. How big a deal this is depends on the details.
THe third sounds like did not happen.
Click to expand...
As a licensed minor, I was employed as a delivery driver. At times the orders I delivered contained liquor, wine, or beer. It is permissible under the relevant state statute to be employed as a minor, and to make sales of alcohol at a licensed point of sale - which my employer was. DUI statutes exclude sealed containers. It is an affirmative defense for a minor to be physically moving alcohol under adult supervision. The DA made a convoluted argument as to why none of the relevant statutes applied.

My attorney, who is not an aviation attorney, gave me a convoluted argument as to why 18v does not apply to me.

Convoluted scares me.
 
Anon E Mouse said:
….
My attorney, who is not an aviation attorney, gave me a convoluted argument as to why 18v does not apply to me.

Convoluted scares me.
Click to expand...

It should. Failure to disclose could become a federal problem for you. You could probably get the best answer from @bbchien.
 
Expungement only applies to the organization for whom the expungement occurs. The Feds can and will find it, resulting in revocations of everything.

In the Oxford English dictionary, the definitions of detained and arrested, overlap considerably. FAA wise,its about puclically docuentented behavior at "arrest".

But you're likely to not have an issuance problem provided you don't have an additional event.
and you can CERTAINLY lose everything if you fail to report.

B
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Expungement only applies to the organization for whom the exupngement occurs. The Feds can and will find it, resulting in revoctions of everything.

In the Oxford English dictionary, the definitions of detained and arrested, overlap considerably. FAA wise,its about puclically docuentented behavior at "arrest".

But you're likely to not have an issuance problem provided yoo don't have an additional event.
and you can CERTAINLY lose everything if you fail to report.

B
Click to expand...
Thank you Doctor.
 
flyingron said:
Second, is whether you were arrested/charged with anything involving drugs/alcohol while operating a vehicle.
Click to expand...
Not quite right.

Here's the instructions for 18.v.:
Letter (v) of this subheading asks if you have ever been: (1) arrested and/or convicted (which may include paying a fine, or forfeiting bond or collateral) of an offense involving driving while intoxicated by, while impaired by, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug; or (2) arrested, convicted and/or subject to an administrative action by a state or other jurisdiction for an offense for which your license was denied, suspended, cancelled, or revoked or which resulted in attendance at an educational or rehabilitation program. Individual traffic arrests and/or convictions are not required to be reported if they did not involve: alcohol or a drug; suspension, revocation, cancellation, or denial of driving privileges; or attendance at an educational or rehabilitation program.
Click to expand...

I don't see how the stated facts fit.
 
Anon E Mouse said:
As a licensed minor, I was employed as a delivery driver. At times the orders I delivered contained liquor, wine, or beer. It is permissible under the relevant state statute to be employed as a minor, and to make sales of alcohol at a licensed point of sale - which my employer was. DUI statutes exclude sealed containers. It is an affirmative defense for a minor to be physically moving alcohol under adult supervision. The DA made a convoluted argument as to why none of the relevant statutes applied.

My attorney, who is not an aviation attorney, gave me a convoluted argument as to why 18v does not apply to me.

Convoluted scares me.
Click to expand...
Did you tell him that? I have no idea why someone would pay an attorney for professional advice, and then trust SGOTI instead.
 
Lindberg said:
You don't think following the advice of counsel vitiates intent?
Click to expand...

I don’t know if it does or doesn’t, but incompetent or unqualified counselors aren’t the ones attesting to the information submitted.

I guess you could argue it with an ALJ agter the denial and/or revocation, but is that really worth paying Bruce for an hour of consultation?
 
TCABM said:
I don’t know if it does or doesn’t, but incompetent or unqualified counselors aren’t the ones attesting to the information submitted.

I guess you could argue it with an ALJ agter the denial and/or revocation, but is that really worth paying Bruce for an hour of consultation?
Click to expand...
It's already been suggested to contact a lawyer with expertise in aviation. Not sure I'd use Ramos (hate his commercials) but there are others. I know and can recommend two but both have moved out of Colorado. The OP can contact me off list if they wish for more info. (fortunately, I've never needed either for legal services, but both are highly regarded)
 
Lindberg said:
Not quite right.

Here's the instructions for 18.v.:


I don't see how the stated facts fit.
Click to expand...
He hadn't made the STATED FACTS you are referring to at the time I responded. While my statement was a paraphrase, it wasn't particularly incorrect. My statement as to the relevence that you omitted was:

The second would depend if it was while operating a vehicle. Even if the charges were dismissed, the FAA wants to know about it so they can see if you got pleaded down or whatever. How big a deal this is depends on the details.
 
Lindberg said:
I don't see how the stated facts fit.
Click to expand...
OTOH, I don't have enough "stated facts" to even hazard a SGOTI guess whether it needs to be disclosed or not. When I have been asked this question professionally, I always check the statute(s) charged, police reports, and court record before forming an opinion.
 
flyingron said:
He hadn't made the STATED FACTS you are referring to at the time I responded. While my statement was a paraphrase, it wasn't particularly incorrect. My statement as to the relevence that you omitted was:

The second would depend if it was while operating a vehicle. Even if the charges were dismissed, the FAA wants to know about it so they can see if you got pleaded down or whatever. How big a deal this is depends on the details.
Click to expand...
Still wrong. It doesn't depend on whether he was operating a vehicle, it depends on whether he was operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
 
midlifeflyer said:
OTOH, I don't have enough "stated facts" to even hazard a SGOTI guess whether it needs to be disclosed or not. When I have been asked this question professionally, I always check the statute(s) charged, police reports, and court record before forming an opinion.
Click to expand...
Certainly knowing what's on the record is critical, but I'm curious, if, as reported, the arrest was for a minor in possession of sealed bottles of alcohol, where would you even potentially report that on the MedXpress?
 
Lindberg said:
Certainly knowing what's on the record is critical, but I'm curious, if, as reported, the arrest was for a minor in possession of sealed bottles of alcohol, where would you even potentially report that on the MedXpress?
Click to expand...
My only point is that when giving advice, "as reported" by the client is irrelevant to me except as an indication of what the client thinks happened.

In 2021, the NTSB said in FAA v Tushin that expunction was not a defense to medical application failure to disclose or intentional falsification. What's interesting about that is that the NTSB was faced with the issue several times before that. It was never addressed before for a very simple reason - the pilot thought there was an expunction, but there wasn't one.
 
read it word for word, if it doesn't apply, NO. if you say yes and it doesn't apply, you are still screwed.
 
midlifeflyer said:
My only point is that when giving advice, "as reported" by the client is irrelevant to me except as an indication of what the client thinks happened.

In 2021, the NTSB said in FAA v Tushin that expunction was not a defense to medical application failure to disclose or intentional falsification. What's interesting about that is that the NTSB was faced with the issue several times before that. It was never addressed before for a very simple reason - the pilot thought there was an expunction, but there wasn't one.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what expunctions have to do with the question in this thread, despite multiple posters bringing it up in response to a question that doesn't ask about it. And lacking attorney-client privilege, the answers that can be given here are necessarily based on the facts as reported. Hence my staring so and quoting from the FAA.

Despite recited facts that don't indicate anything reportable, and a legal opinion from someone who (presumably) is familiar with all the relevant facts, multiple posters have suggested, or even affirmatively asserted, that the OP must report this event. That makes me wonder whether they know something I'm missing, or are just responding without reading or understanding.
 
Lindberg said:
I'm not sure what expunctions have to do with the question in this thread,
Click to expand...
I suppose others may have mentioned it because of the reference to the record being "sealed."

In my case, nothing other than as an illustration of why I don't trust in what someone tells me about the legal process they were in.

midlifeflyer said:
My only point is that when giving advice, "as reported" by the client is irrelevant to me except as an indication of what the client thinks happened.
Click to expand...

IOW, they think they know what happened but they often don't know and are incorrect. I have no doubt that the pilots in those cases where there wasn't an expunction believed there was one. I could have given a dozen other examples.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I suppose others may have mentioned it because of the reference to the record being "sealed."

In my case, nothing other than as an illustration of why I don't trust in what someone tells me about the legal process they were in.
Click to expand...
My question still stands: If the facts are as reported, what would have to be disclosed to the FAA, and what question on MedXpress requires it?

If someone came in here and said, "I painted my toenails green, do I have to report it on my next medical," I think it is reasonable to say, "No, painting your toenails green is not reportable," despite the fact that my answer would change if I knew the poster was high on meth at the time. You might disagree, of course, but I think that if people are going to answer questions with necessarily limited information, they should answer based on the limited information provided, not the additional information they imagined.
 
Lindberg said:
My question still stands: If the facts are as reported, what would have to be disclosed to the FAA, and what question on MedXpress requires it?

If someone came in here and said, "I painted my toenails green, do I have to report it on my next medical," I think it is reasonable to say, "No, painting your toenails green is not reportable," despite the fact that my answer would change if I knew the poster was high on meth at the time. You might disagree, of course, but I think that if people are going to answer questions with necessarily limited information, they should answer based on the limited information provided, not the additional information they imagined.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree but I have certain risks and obligations as a lawyer that makes me more circumspect than the average SGOTI when answering certain questions. "Do I need to disclose based on my understanding of what happened in my criminal/juvenile case" is one of them.
 
I can't see that it's reportable.

18v says, "History of any (1) arrest(s), and/or conviction(s) involving driving while intoxicated, by, while impaired by, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug; or (2) history of any arrest(s), and/or conviction(s), and/or administrative action(s) involving any offense(s) which resulted in the denial, suspension, cancellation or revocation of driving privileges or which resulted in attendance at an educational or a rehabilitation program."

If the charge was "minor in possession of alcohol" and not driving while intoxicated/impaired/under the influence, than the first part doesn't apply. And if his driving privileges weren't denied, suspended, cancelled, or revoked, and there was no attendance at an educational or rehabilitation program, than the second part doesn't apply.

Whether he was arrested or detained, or expunged or sealed, is irrelevant if it's not reportable in the first place.

If the original charge was DUI and it was plead down to possession, that's a different story.
 
Lindberg said:
Still wrong. It doesn't depend on whether he was operating a vehicle, it depends on whether he was operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
Click to expand...
To be really specific (but slightly anonymize): As part of my job, I was delivering a pizza and a six-pack. The law says that I can sell alcohol at the shop, carry a sealed container in my trunk, and carry sealed containers from the shop to my car and to the customers door. The DA argued that by collecting money at the door I was selling beer off-premises which was not covered by the statute.

But the automobile reference is precisely why I am so concerned. I was not ever charged with consuming or with driving under the influence. I was never given any chemical tests, and my driver's license was never suspended or revoked.

In addition, the lawyer I discussed this with specializes in criminal defense, not aviation. So, seeing an aviation specialist is probably money well spent.
 
Don't read things into 18v that aren't there. It doesn't sound like you were arrested for any kind of motor vehicle offense (which is all 18v asks about), even if you happened to be in your car at the time... were you, and if so why did you get pulled over?
 
Dana said:
Don't read things into 18v that aren't there. It doesn't sound like you were arrested for any kind of motor vehicle offense (which is all 18v asks about), even if you happened to be in your car at the time... were you, and if so why did you get pulled over?
Click to expand...
I wasn't the target, my employer was. Driving was my job, but I wasn't "pulled-over". I was never taken into custody, just issued an appearance ticket at work.
 
Anon E Mouse said:
In addition, the lawyer I discussed this with specializes in criminal defense, not aviation. So, seeing an aviation specialist is probably money well spent
Click to expand...
I think it is. I have been in three situations in which I was consulted about a criminal case. One was like yours, whether something needed to be disclosed. In the other two, it was to evaluate a proposed plea deal in a pending case. Non-aviation lawyers were involved in all three.
 
To lighten the mood (and veering slightly off topic is POA), I remember in Ohio back in the late 1980s, we could get beer delivered as long as it came with a food order. We’d call and order large quantities of beer and throw a $0.25 bag of Lay’s chips in with the order to make it legal. No delivery charge. We’d pool our orders with friends so that one bag of unwanted chips and $0.25 was the sacrificial cost. Carlings Black Label 6 pack of squatty bottles for $1.71 when money was “tight”.
 
When I was attending Syracuse in the late 1970s, Fast Break Deli would deliver a large cheese pizza and a six pack of Schmidt's for $5.00. It was the worst pizza in town, tasted and felt like cardboard, and Schmidt's was the worst beer then available (possibly even worse than Black Label), but they delivered until 2am and when you're a hungry but broke college student not wanting to leave the dorm on a snowy night...
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
To lighten the mood (and veering slightly off topic is POA), I remember in Ohio back in the late 1980s, we could get beer delivered as long as it came with a food order. We’d call and order large quantities of beer and throw a $0.25 bag of Lay’s chips in with the order to make it legal. No delivery charge. We’d pool our orders with friends so that one bag of unwanted chips and $0.25 was the sacrificial cost. Carlings Black Label 6 pack of squatty bottles for $1.71 when money was “tight”.
Click to expand...
Now-ish food has to be 51% of the retail price (excluding coupons) and beer is $9 per six.
 
I’d say you either have (or were arrested for) a DUI (or the likes) or you don’t, it sounds like you don’t. I wouldn’t report it.
 
DUI is Driving Under the Influence. You had no Under the Influence, you had zero alcohol consumed, there was no intent to drink (would really cut down on your delivery tip if you showed up with a 5 vs a 6 pack). Sounds like you were at worse case transporting alcohol illegally. I don't see "Bootlegging" in the med express form. Which you weren't even doing that.

Yes, see an aviation attorney to double check. So sorry you're in this mess. Delivering Pizza and Beer just doesn't seem to be any predictor on how well you'd fly a plane.

IF you're going to go on to fly for Delta, etc., then they'll dig even more however. I can't offer any advice on how / when to handle that, what they're reaction would be, etc.

IF you're just flying for fun, get BASIC MED after you get a 3rd class one time and never open a med express form again.
 
Do yourself a favor - Sign up for AOPA's legal services, and get advice from a lawyer.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
To lighten the mood (and veering slightly off topic is POA), I remember in Ohio back in the late 1980s, we could get beer delivered as long as it came with a food order. We’d call and order large quantities of beer and throw a $0.25 bag of Lay’s chips in with the order to make it legal. No delivery charge. We’d pool our orders with friends so that one bag of unwanted chips and $0.25 was the sacrificial cost. Carlings Black Label 6 pack of squatty bottles for $1.71 when money was “tight”.
Click to expand...
I was in Utah just this year and was at a bar that couldn't sell booze without food, so we ordered peanuts or something to go with our drinks.
 
Back
Top