Is the new NJ Underage Drinking law cruel and unusual punishment?
Jan 28th, 2008 | By Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. | Category: Blogs, Criminal & TrafficIn NJ, an underage drinker must now submit to a breath sample for chemical testing. If they refuse, they will be subject to the DWI-DUI Refusal penalties which include:
- Loss of license
- Fines
- I.D.R.C.
- Insurance Point (even though there was no driving)
- Surcharges of $1,000 per year for 3 years
-
Possible enhancements (school zone)
This means that if a New Jersey high school student makes one bad decision by having a sip of beer (.01 B.A.C.) he will be subject to these draconian penalties. Actually, his or her parents will be stuck with these penalties.
How is a high school student to pay fines and an additional surcharge of $3,000 to the State of New Jersey? This is in addition to losing his or her license and then possible a job or afterschool program.
In today’s world, parents cannot monitor their children’s activities every minute, nor prevent teenagers from doing what they choose. This new law appears to punish the parents for their child’s behavior. It would be a different situation if the parents provided the alcohol.
What do you think about this new law?
The author of this Law Blog, Bucks County PA & Mercer County, NJ criminal attorney, Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. of Saile & Saile LLP, Attorneys-at-Law practices both New Jersey and Pennsylvania criminal, traffic violations, and DUI/DWI/DAI law. Check out our website for DUI penalties. We handle all NJ Municipal Court cases including DUI in the following NJ Municipal Courts: Hopewell Township, Ewing Township, Trenton, Lawrence Township, Hamilton, Pennington, and other Mercer County, Burlington County, and Camden County, NJ courts. We also handle lower bucks county DUI and traffic violation cases in the following towns: Bensalem, Southampton, Richboro, Newtown, Levittown, Langhorne, Doylestown, Warminster, Trevose, Feasterville, Warrington, Bristol, Fallsington, Yardley, New Hope, Holland, Washington Crossing, PA, and other Bucks County courts. We handle DUI cases in Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery County, PA. We are located just outside of Philadelphia in lower Bucks County.
This law is far too bad I do not know where to start.
First off, there is no way the law can be enforced to a degree it can be applied equally among all persons under 21 in NJ.
I do not think times have changed that much since I went to highschool.
Drinking was something most kids did during HS age, after scvhool, weekend parties, and of course graduation parties.
If the police raided a HS graduation party, would they even have enough police and testing equipment to enforce such a law? I thin not.
I attended and got my degree form Stockton State College. At this college Keg parties in the court yards were common and happened every thursday night, as well as other nights during the week.
And, at Stockton, when it was founded, and this is where i really want to go, … the professors would hold classes outdorrs with kegs of beer for the students, most of which were under age.
If you can imagine those times, the vietnam war, protests, 18 years old kids dying in rice foelds in anm,… are we really going to say they can not have a beer?
The same applies today, with Iraq, …
Teen age Drinking is a rite of passage, and part of a culture that goes far beyond the law.
This law, if enforeceable, is an attempt to change the culture of our youth.
I see this law only being enforced by the police in cases of the “bad kids” the trouble makers, that they want to make examples out of.
For the police to raid a house adfter a friday night football game, of a HS Joc party, well, i just do not see it happening, therefore the law is unjust and not going to be enforced equally.
What do you think?
How about a law that says there can be no one in law enforcement that even used LSD.
That would wipe out 25% at least of law enforcement on every level.
I personally know a guy who I saw take LSD about 50 times Junior yesr of college who has been an investigsator in a county prosecuotr’s office for almost 20 years.
And what about bars that mistakenly serve underage kids… if this kid is picked up walking home from a bar, lets say age 19, could not the bar then be libel for all monies and penalties inflicted on the underage drinker?
i know when i was 19, i used to get into a bar here called moore’s, on a regular basis, and walk the 2 miles home drunk.
Yes, it is bad that kids get drunk over an amount, but really, as i think back to my days in highschool and college here in nj, drinking was a basic.
kids did just not go up to the park to shoot hoops or throw the football around…. they drank and smoked pot., depending on what they could get, and it was widespread.
from my last gf i had , she had a hs senior, and he and all his widespread group of friends drank.
but you know what, i would be all for a culture changing law like this, that the people of nj want, as long as it was enforced, and enforced to the degree that left no stone unturned in the pursuit of violators… but we all know this is even more impoosible to happen then going after dui.
how about at a regular hs football game, on an average friday night, all the students who attend the game are breathlyzed or alcotested, and if any amount is fount, they are arrested and face these penaltys.
come on.
i just do not like laws that are going to be used against only certain individuals, and not against the general public, or in this case, the general under 21 age population.
allthis law does is make it possible for police to make an extra arrest hear or there, but will not dent the youth culture, because it is completely unenforceable AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I REMEMBER ON MY FRIENDS 16TH BIRSTHDAY, HIS PARENTS TOOK ME OUT TO DINNER WITH MY FRIEND AND THE FAMILY, TO A JAPANESE RESTAURANT, AND WE WERE ALLOWED TO HAVE JAPANESE BEER.
SHOULD WE HAVE LOST OUR FUTURE LICENSES AND PAID SUCH HIGH FINES FOR THIS?
if the point of the law is to save lives, as we have seen a few under 21 non driving alcohol related deaths, i think a couple at rutgers alone this past decade, then we should put the money into enforcing it completely, without prejudice.
however, if this law is just to be enforced arbitraily, against neighborhood bad kids, and maybe a ucky arest here and there for a police officer who wants to make his bones, well, then i say the law is wrong.
what is the burden of proof the police must have in order to designate a person as an underage drinker?
this seems to be a key element in this matter.
the point being, how would the police know a person was an underage drinker– well, i think only be seeing him or her drink, unless they were puking drubk, but in either case, the honest police officer could make the arrest and testify based on that, so what is the need for a breath test?
this goes to dui as well, i have come full circle and am back to questioning why we even need a breath test , the observations alone should be enough to convict anyone who was near the limit of dui.
but getting back to this thread of underage drinking…
what is the actual burden of proof, wouldnt there have to be probable cause, and wouldnt that entail either seeing a kid consume, or a kid being wasted drunk, falling down , puking?
maybe i am just cynical, or dejected, or something, some other word, you tell me… but i feel the lasw, is as good as the ten commandements or the beatitudes, … that is to say, if you break you you are dammed.
nowm, god will enforce every one his his laws, and most people probably believe this or have it in the back of their heads, but mans law, the police law, also needs to be 100 percent ebforceable everytime it is broken, but it is not, and this is what eats at me.
what if we were to make this law retroactive in nj, and what if somehow we were able to say and do, that everyone whoever had a drink under the age of 21, or 18 before the law changed decades ago, step forward, admit you consumed alcohol, and accept you punishment, as this curreent laws states the punishment should be…
i’m afraid millions of the 7 million person population in nj would lose thier licenses and pay the fines.
but, in order to have a clean slate, and change our culture, this is what should happen… but can only happen in maybe a science fiction novel, … it can not happen in real life.
yes, underage drinking can be problamtic and lead to injuries,and death, and even lesser things, domestic violence, kids being picked on, vandalism, ectectect.
all this law does in my opinion, is allow police to go after known highschool “partiers” , troubled teens, and the occassional lucky bust of a party.
at least with dui, everyone on the road has a pretty much fair chance of being caught… but this law, there is no fairness, and must be squashed by the courts.
all that i have said, well… the underage drinking law is nothing new, but this new law, with the enhanced, or shall i say, not to use the legal term, the heightened penalties, gives the police more firepower to go after teen age kids who are just having a good time.
now, i had a medium to small highschool, a graduating class my year of about 314… i would say, that more than half of my graduacting class had a drink of alcohol sometime during their high school years, but i would also say that out of those that did consume a drink, maybe 99% never had problems resulting from this, and went on to college or vocations, and are today sucessful and live healthy normal lives and are producvtice members of society…
that being said, is it really necessary to create a law in an attempt to change youth culture in this way… in my opinion, no.
it is just not a good law.
back in the day, at least around here, as long as you werent a known trouble maker, the police might give you a ride home and say dont do it again , not like that, be smart… but not give the kid a breath test. that is beyond ridiculous.
i wouldnt call the law “cruel or unsual punishment”, under the terms of that meaning in legal reference though.
but i would just simply call the law ridiculous, and not being worthy of the citizenship of nj.
not sure how else to say it, having no legal education, ..but cruel and unusual, no.
i would say, yes, it is cruel in the common sense, if enforced, becvause kids embarking on college educations, their futures, and such, maybe even a military carreeer, should not be subjected to non motor vehicle breath tests.
driving is a whole different story, a whole different thing… and i, and we all, know that dui/dwi, is serious, and that all penaltys related to such as on the record are just.
however, a kid walking home from a friday night party, lets say, a little intoxicated, just wanting to make it home, should not be subjected to a breath test or such penaltys…
these kids deserve to live and learn, but to learn such a harsh penalty nis wrong…
im sorry.
i have an open mind though,
so anyone wishing to debate me, or change my mind, please speak up…
yet again….money.
that’s all this state cares about, increasing fines. as said above, that high of a fine will be paid for by the parent. this state is in such a budget deficit that they need to drastically raise money. in essence this is a tax increase funded by the parents of kids who didn’t run fast enough when the bacon arrived.
lets say a group of teens are walking on a friday night from one house to another– to go watch videos, is it constitutional the police can stop them, detain them, give them breath tests , and ruin their lives with maybe even a false reading??
Tim, to the lawmakers it may be about money, there eyes are blinded by partisan politics and money…
but to the average citizens , its taking away our rights as a free people.
now, i can understand having laws and fines, and even license suspensions for underage kids who were caught drunk.
but i can not see how it is constitutional in give a breath test to kids just walking down the street to go play video games..
again i ask you, what is the probable cause, how will it be applied equally?
and on the bigger picture, everyone needs to obey the law 100 percent…
there now should be zero underage drinking on all nj college campuses, all of our neighborhoods, and homes, ev erywhere.
is this a realistic thing?
i can see the schools informing kids about this law, but how is the State going to inform 18, 19, and 20 year old kids who are not in highschool or college?
there is something wrong with this law.
as i said, on a typical thursday night at the State College i attended, there wuld be several keg parties going on in the court yards, with hundreds of kids milling around, drinking, laughing, you know.. nbow if the police come, would they even have the man power and equipment to arrest hundreds of kids at a party, give them all breath tests, trial them?
I thought I made good arguments
In Philadelphia, if a bar serves underage students and is raided, what is the penalty for it? If a student under 21 is at a private house party that is raided, and he has not been drinking, can he be cited just for being there. Thanks
Patty:
I am not allowed to give you specific legal advice on this law blog, but below I have listed possible Pennsylvania laws that may apply to this issue. Of course there may be other applicable laws that may apply.
Chapter 63. Minors (Refs & Annos)
§ 6301. Corruption of minors
(a) Offense defined.–
(1) Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards, by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime, or who knowingly assists or encourages such minor in violating his or her parole or any order of court, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(2) Any person who knowingly aids, abets, entices or encourages a minor younger than 18 years of age to commit truancy commits a summary offense. Any person who violates this paragraph within one year of the date of a first conviction under this section commits a misdemeanor of the third degree. A conviction under this paragraph shall not, however, constitute a prohibition under section 6105 (relating to persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms).
(b) Adjudication of delinquency unnecessary.–A conviction under the provisions of this section may be had whether or not the jurisdiction of any juvenile court has attached or shall thereafter attach to such minor or whether or not such minor has been adjudicated a delinquent or shall thereafter be adjudicated a delinquent.
(c) Presumptions.–In trials and hearings upon charges of violating the provisions of this section, knowledge of the minor’s age and of the court’s orders and decrees concerning such minor shall be presumed in the absence of proof to the contrary.
(d) Mistake as to age.–
(1) Whenever in this section the criminality of conduct depends upon the corruption of a minor whose actual age is under 16 years, it is no defense that the actor did not know the age of the minor or reasonably believed the minor to be older than 18 years.
(2) Whenever in this section the criminality of conduct depends upon the corruption of a minor whose actual age is 16 years or more but less than 18 years, it is a defense for the actor to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he reasonably believed the minor to be 18 years or older.
§ 6307. Misrepresentation of age to secure liquor or malt or brewed beverages
(a) Offense defined.–A person is guilty of a summary offense for a first violation and a misdemeanor of the third degree for any subsequent violations if he, being under the age of 21 years, knowingly and falsely represents himself to be 21 years of age or older to any licensed dealer, distributor or other person, for the purpose of procuring or having furnished to him, any liquor or malt or brewed beverages.
(b) Minimum penalty.–In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to section 6310.4 (relating to restriction of operating privileges) or this title or other statute, a person who is convicted of violating subsection (a) may be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $500 for subsequent violations. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section.
(c) Adjudication of delinquency.–In addition to any other disposition authorized by law, a person adjudicated delinquent under subsection (a) may be ordered to pay a fine not exceeding $500 for an adjudication of delinquency.
(d) Preadjudication disposition.–
(1) When a person is charged with violating subsection (a), the court may admit the offender to an adjudication alternative program under 42 Pa.C.S. § 1520 (relating to adjudication alternative program) or to any other preadjudication disposition, if the offender has not previously received a preadjudication disposition for violating subsection (a).
(2) The use of a preadjudication disposition shall be considered a first or subsequent offense, whichever is applicable, for the purpose of further adjudication under this section or under section 6310.4.
§ 6308. Purchase, consumption, possession or transportation of liquor or malt or brewed beverages
(a) Offense defined.–A person commits a summary offense if he, being less than 21 years of age, attempts to purchase, purchases, consumes, possesses or knowingly and intentionally transports any liquor or malt or brewed beverages, as defined in section 6310.6 (relating to definitions). For the purposes of this section, it shall not be a defense that the liquor or malt or brewed beverage was consumed in a jurisdiction other than the jurisdiction where the citation for underage drinking was issued.
(b) Penalty.–In addition to the penalty imposed pursuant to section 6310.4 (relating to restriction of operating privileges), a person convicted of violating subsection (a) may be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $500 for the second and each subsequent violation.
(c) Preadjudication disposition.–
(1) When a person is charged with violating subsection (a), the magisterial district judge may admit the offender to the adjudication alternative as authorized in 42 Pa.C.S. § 1520 (relating to adjudication alternative program) or any other preadjudication disposition if the offender has not previously received a preadjudication disposition for violating subsection (a).
(2) The use of a preadjudication disposition shall be considered a first or subsequent offense, whichever is applicable, for the purpose of further adjudication under this section or under section 6310.4.
(d) Notification.–The police department making an arrest for a suspected violation of subsection (a) shall so notify the parents or guardian of the minor charged.
(e) Exception for compliance checks.–
(1) An individual who is under 21 years of age may purchase, attempt to purchase, possess or transport liquor or malt or brewed beverages if all of the following apply:
(i) The individual is at least 18 years of age.
(ii) The individual is an officer, employee or intern of the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement of the Pennsylvania State Police.
(iii) The individual has completed training specified by the bureau.
(iv) The individual is acting within the scope of prescribed duties.
(v) The individual is acting under the direct control or supervision of a bureau officer who is an adult.
(2) Under no circumstances may individuals under 21 years of age consume liquor or malt or brewed beverages.
(3) The Pennsylvania State Police shall promulgate regulations prescribing the manner in which compliance checks are to be performed. Compliance checks under this subsection shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the regulations. Regulations shall require, at a minimum, all of the following:
(i) Prior to participation in the compliance check, the officer, employee or intern shall undergo training approved by the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement.
(ii) A person licensed to sell liquor or malt or brewed beverages that is found to be in compliance with this section during a compliance check shall be notified in writing of the compliance check and the determination of compliance.
(iii) A person licensed to sell liquor or malt or brewed beverages that is found to be noncompliant with this section during a compliance check shall be immediately verbally advised by the supervising bureau officer and shall be notified in writing of the failure to comply within ten working days of the date of the compliance check.
§ 6309. Representing that minor is of age
(a) Offense defined.–A person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree if he knowingly, willfully, and falsely represents to any licensed dealer, or other person, any minor to be of full age, for the purpose of inducing any such licensed dealer or other person, to sell or furnish any liquor or malt or brewed beverages, as defined in section 6310.6 (relating to definitions), to the minor.
(b) Minimum penalty.–In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to this title or other statute, a person committing an offense under this section shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $300. There shall be no authority in any court to impose on an offender any lesser sentence than the minimum sentence mandated by this subsection. In no case shall the sentence exceed the maximum sentence prescribed by law. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section.
§ 6310. Inducement of minors to buy liquor or malt or brewed beverages
(a) Offense defined.–A person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree if he hires or requests or induces any minor to purchase, or offer to purchase, liquor or malt or brewed beverages, as defined in section 6310.6 (relating to definitions), from a duly licensed dealer for any purpose.
(b) Minimum penalty.–In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to this title or other statute, a person convicted of an offense under this section shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $300. There shall be no authority in any court to impose on an offender any lesser sentence than the minimum sentence mandated by this subsection. Nothing in this section shall prevent the sentencing court from imposing a sentence greater than the minimum sentence mandated in this subsection. In no case shall the sentence exceed the maximum sentence prescribed by law. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section.
(c) Exception for compliance checks.–
(1) An individual who is under 21 years of age may purchase, attempt to purchase, possess or transport liquor or malt or brewed beverages if all of the following apply:
(i) The individual is at least 18 years of age.
(ii) The individual is an officer, employee or intern of the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement of the Pennsylvania State Police.
(iii) The individual has completed training specified by the bureau.
(iv) The individual is acting within the scope of prescribed duties.
(v) The individual is acting under the direct control or supervision of a bureau officer who is an adult.
(2) Under no circumstances may individuals under 21 years of age consume liquor or malt or brewed beverages.
(3) The Pennsylvania State Police shall promulgate regulations prescribing the manner in which compliance checks are to be performed. Compliance checks under this subsection shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the Regulations. Regulations shall require, at a minimum, all of the following:
(i) Prior to participation in the compliance check, the officer, employee or intern shall undergo training approved by the Bureau of Liquor Control Enforcement.
(ii) A person licensed to sell liquor or malt or brewed beverages that is found to be in compliance with this section during a compliance check shall be notified in writing of the compliance check and the determination of compliance.
(iii) A person licensed to sell liquor or malt or brewed beverages that is found to be noncompliant with this section during a compliance check shall be immediately verbally advised by the supervising bureau officer and shall be notified in writing of the failure to comply within ten working days of the date of the compliance check.
§ 6310.1. Selling or furnishing liquor or malt or brewed beverages to minors
(a) Offense defined.–Except as provided in subsection (b), a person commits a misdemeanor of the third degree if he intentionally and knowingly sells or intentionally and knowingly furnishes, or purchases with the intent to sell or furnish, any liquor or malt or brewed beverages to a person who is less than 21 years of age.
(b) Exceptions.–The provisions of this section shall not apply to any religious service or ceremony which may be conducted in a private home or a place of worship where the amount of wine served does not exceed the amount reasonably, customarily and traditionally required as an integral part of the service or ceremony.
(c) Minimum penalty.–In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to this title or other statute, a person who is convicted of violating subsection (a) shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $1,000 for the first violation and a fine of $2,500 for each subsequent violation. There shall be no authority in any court to impose on an offender any lesser sentence than the minimum sentence mandated by this subsection. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section. Nothing in this section shall prevent the sentencing court from imposing a sentence greater than the minimum sentence mandated in this subsection. In no case shall the sentence exceed the maximum sentence prescribed by law.
§ 6310.3. Carrying a false identification card
(a) Offense defined.–A person commits a summary offense for a first violation and a misdemeanor of the third degree for any subsequent violation if he, being under 21 years of age, possesses an identification card falsely identifying that person by name, age, date of birth or photograph as being 21 years of age or older or obtains or attempts to obtain liquor or malt or brewed beverages by using the identification card of another or by using an identification card that has not been lawfully issued to or in the name of that person who possesses the card.
(b) Minimum penalty.–In addition to any other penalty imposed pursuant to section 6310.4 (relating to restriction of operating privileges) or any other statute, a person who is convicted of violating subsection (a) shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than $500 for the second and subsequent violations. No court shall have the authority to suspend any sentence as defined in this section.
(c) Adjudication of delinquency.–In addition to any other disposition authorized by law, a person adjudicated delinquent under subsection (a) may be ordered to pay a fine not exceeding $500 for an adjudication of delinquency.
(d) Preadjudication disposition.–
(1) When a person is charged with violating subsection (a), the court may admit the offender to the adjudication alternative as authorized in 42 Pa.C.S. § 1520 (relating to adjudication alternative program) or any other preadjudication disposition if the offender has not previously received a preadjudication disposition for violating subsection (a).
(2) The use of a preadjudication disposition shall be considered a first or subsequent offense, whichever is applicable, for the purpose of further adjudication under this section or under section 6310.4.
(e) Notification.–The police department making an arrest for a suspected violation of subsection (a) shall so notify the parents or guardian of the minor charged.
§ 6310.4. Restriction of operating privileges
(a) General rule.–Whenever a person is convicted or is adjudicated delinquent or is admitted to any preadjudication program for a violation of section 6307 (relating to misrepresentation of age to secure liquor or malt or brewed beverages), 6308 (relating to purchase, consumption, possession or transportation of liquor or malt or brewed beverages) or 6310.3 (relating to carrying a false identification card), the court, including a court not of record if it is exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 1515(a) (relating to jurisdiction and venue), shall order the operating privilege of the person suspended. A copy of the order shall be transmitted to the Department of Transportation.
(b) Duration of suspension.–When the department suspends the operating privilege of a person under subsection (a), the duration of the suspension shall be as follows:
(1) For a first offense, a period of 90 days from the date of suspension.
(2) For a second offense, a period of one year from the date of suspension.
(3) For a third offense, and any offense thereafter, a period of two years from the date of suspension. Any multiple sentences imposed shall be served consecutively.
Reinstatement of operating privilege shall be governed by 75 Pa.C.S. § 1545 (relating to restoration of operating privilege).
(c) Nondrivers.–Any person whose record is received by the department under subsection (a) and who does not have a driver’s license shall be ineligible to apply for a learner’s permit under 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 1505 (relating to learners’ permits) and 1507 (relating to application for driver’s license or learner’s permit by minor) for the time periods specified in subsection (b). If the person is under 16 years of age when he is convicted or adjudicated delinquent or admitted to a preadjudication program, his suspension of operating privileges shall commence upon his 16th birthday for the time periods specified in subsection (b).
(d) Insurance premiums.–An insurer shall not increase premiums, impose any surcharge or rate penalty, or make any driver record point assignment for automobile insurance, nor shall an insurer cancel or refuse to renew an automobile insurance policy on account of a suspension under this section.
§ 6310.5. Predisposition evaluation
(a) General rule.–If an individual is convicted, adjudicated delinquent or offered preadjudication disposition for a violation of section 6307 (relating to misrepresentation of age to secure liquor or malt or brewed beverages), 6308 (relating to purchase, consumption, possession or transportation of liquor or malt or brewed beverages) or 6310.3 (relating to carrying a false identification card), the following shall apply:
(1) For a first violation of any of the preceding offenses, the court may, in addition to other requirements, require the individual to be evaluated prior to an adjudication of delinquency, sentencing or receiving preadjudication disposition.
(2) For a subsequent violation of any of the preceding offenses, the court shall, in addition to other requirements, require the individual to be evaluated prior to sentencing or receiving preadjudication disposition.
(3) Evaluation under this subsection may consist of evaluation techniques if deemed appropriate by the court to determine the extent of the individual’s involvement with alcohol.
(b) Program of education, intervention and counseling.–Based on the results of the evaluation authorized under subsection (a) and any additional information, the court may require that the person successfully complete a prescribed program of education, intervention or counseling approved by the Department of Health.
(c) Costs.–Costs of any and all requirements applied under this section shall be in addition to any other penalty required or allowed by law and shall be the responsibility of the person upon whom the requirement is placed.
§ 6310.7. Selling or furnishing nonalcoholic beverages to persons under 21 years of age
(a) Offense defined.–A person commits a summary offense if he intentionally and knowingly sells or furnishes nonalcoholic beverages to any person under 21 years of age.
(b) Definitions.–As used in this section, the term “nonalcoholic beverage” means any beverage intended to be marketed or sold as nonalcoholic beer, wine or liquor having some alcohol content but does not contain more than 0.5% alcohol by volume.
Mr. Saile, what is the penalty for not following a court order?
It is just up to the court, different from court to court?
Is it a misdemeanor?
does it depend on the order itself?
I think the punishments should be far more severe.