I'll have to remember this acme of legal reasoning...
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/08/11/of....ap/index.html
Burrito defense a success
Monday, August 11, 2003 Posted: 12:08 PM EDT (1608 GMT)
NORTH PLATTE, Nebraska (AP) -- Those burritos do have bite.
A judge has ruled in favor of a man's claim that he had alcohol on his breath not because he drank, but due to his eating of burritos made with beer-and-tequila marinated meat.
William Dolge, 45, was accused of violating his work release for having alcohol on his breath when he returned to jail from his job last month.
After reviewing the burrito recipe, Lincoln County District Judge John Murphy agreed that the Mexican food was to blame.
"The court feels it is unnecessary to conduct a taste test of the burritos in question to determine their potency," Murphy wrote in his ruling Thursday. "The list of ingredients indicates that there is sufficient alcohol in the burritos for a preliminary breath test to register positive."
Dolge ate four burritos that were brought to his work place by a fellow employee, according to court records. The recipe included one bottle of red Irish beer, 1 1/2 cups of tequila and three-quarters of a bottle of dark ale.
"No rational person would use a 'burrito' defense as a means of covering up the consumption of alcohol during a period of work release," Murphy wrote.
Dolge originally was granted work release while serving 364 days in jail for driving with a suspended license.
If Dolge's work release is reinstated, the judge advised him to limit his meal selection in the future to "less potent fare."
Linear Mode
