The Honorable Mark Stodola Prosecuting Attorney, Sixth Judicial District P.O. Box 1979 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203
Dear Mr. Stodola:
This is in response to your request for an opinion regarding Sections 1 and 2 of Act 1257 of 1993, which provide for the amendment of A.C.A. §§
With regard to Act 1257, you note in your correspondence that Juvenile Judge Joyce Williams Warren has interpreted the deletion of the phrase, "of alcohol," from sections 1 and 2 of the act as meaning that courts no longer have the authority to suspend driver's licenses of minors for possession of alcohol, for public intoxication, or for any other alcohol related charge. You also note that Judge Warren has interpreted the addition of the phrase, "or of any drug offense," in sections 1 and 2 of Act 1257 as authority for courts to revoke the driver's licenses of minors who are charged with offenses such as loitering for purposes of drugs, possessing drug paraphernalia, or possessing or using any counterfeit substances. See Memorandum, page 1, Judge Joyce Williams Warren, Sept. 13, 1993. With regard to Judge Warren's interpretation of Sections 1 and 2 of Act 1257 of 1993, you have posed the following questions:
1. Do Sections 1 and 2 of Act 1257 of 1993 amend A.C.A. §§
5-65-116 5-64-710 in such a manner as to effectively remove the sanction of denial of driver's privileges for minors who plead guilty or nolo contendere to, or who are found by a juvenile court to have committed, offenses involving the illegal possession or use of alcohol? If not, what offenses are still subject to such sanction?2. Do Sections 1 and 2 of Act 1257 of 1993 amend A.C.A. §§
5-65-116 5-64-710 in such a manner as to include the sanction of denial of driver's privileges for minors who plead guilty or nolo contendere to, or who are found by a juvenile court to have committed, the offenses of (a) loitering for purposes of drugs; (b) possession of drug paraphernalia; (c) offenses involving counterfeit substances; or (d) any drug-related offense found within the Controlled Substances Act?
After researching these questions, I have determined that any attempt to address them in an opinion would violate this office's longstanding policy against questioning the judgments of courts. Our policy on such matters is compelled, primarily, by the separation of powers doctrine. See Ark. Const., Art.
The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was prepared by Assistant Attorney General Nancy A. Hall.
Sincerely,
WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General
WB:cyh
