Opinion letter to the Honorable Lawrence F. Gepford

OPINION NO . 449 (1963) No . 27 (1964) (Answered by Letter - Stevens ) June 24, 1964 Honorable Lawrence P. Gepford Prosecuting Attorney Jackson County I ndependence, Mi ssouri Dear l(r. Gepford: - FILED d. 7 This is in reply to your opihion requeot of November 1, 1963, r~ard1ng the newly enacted, 11drivinr; uhilc intoxicated statute, namely 564.44o, V.A.K.S., 1963, in which you nsk the following: "Is the uniform traf'fie ticl:et sUf- ficient to serve as both a ~mplaint and infomation? I f not, is it the opinion of your office that the uniform traffic ticket is legally sufficient to serve as a complaint only, with a separate informat ion being filed, or should both complaint and information be filed as in othor misdemeanor cases 'l" Section 564.44o, V.A.M.S., 1963, states that a person operating a motor vehicle in an intoXicated condition shall be guilty of a mi sdemeanor upon conviction f or the first tHo violations with different puniahoents for each of such convictions. For the third and all subsequent violations, he shall be guilty of a felony . (We aasuoe you are inquiring only regarding the use of the uniform traffic ticket when the violation constitutes a misdcmeanol' . ) Pa.ge T\io Honorable Lf.ntrencc F. Gepford June 24, 1964 I n promulgo.ting Chapter 37 on Rules for Traffic Courts, 1 t was no doubt the intention or the Supr eme Court to have the "Uniforo. Traf1'1.c Ticket" serve not only as a S\ll!llilOns, but aloo an a co~laint and ~~ information, sea Supreme Court Rul~ 37 .46, o.mended 1963. I t is noted tha.t the formo or ti1e Unifor:m Traffic Ticket, an set out in Rule 37.1162 are entitled. "Suggested Forms" . Further Rule 37.466 specifically states that a uoore detailed-' information mey be filed . This is an indication by the court that the Prosecuting Att orney may file an information nt his option. RuJ.e 37 .1.8 requires that 11 the information or complaint shaJ.l be plain, concise o.nd dofini te." Tho queotion prescntod is : Co.n the forms aa filled out by tho arresting officer at the scene be aoondcd and be used aa a complaint tmd 1nforca.tion char~~ the crime of dr1 ving while intoxicated under Section 564. 4ll0. The short answer i s - yes, and where possible, it may be desirable. We believe, hol'Tever , that such une tl&y not aluays be praoti c&1 for the following reo.oonst (1) 'l'he officer c.n..k:Lng the arrest might not be informed aa to previous convictions~ thus noceoaitat+nc an runanded complaint or infor.mation, if needed~ nnd {2) Bccnuoc there is not aufric1cnt space to add inrormat1on mah~g tn~ cooplete, such a.s the endorsement of the S ta. te ' s l-11 tnea oco ns required under Supreme Court Rule 27.17; also, thoro :lo not sufficient apace to properly dcocribo the of fense, nor io there suff ·.cient space for the required jurat. We auc;gcot, however, that ticl-:ets could be so prepared and printed follol~lnz tho suggeoted form, oo that adequate space could be provided to fully comply vi th all rule l'equir-enenta. I n the co.sc of City of Ra.ytot·m v. Roach, 36o s . W. 2d 741, the de. cnda.nt nas charged ui th o. violation of a city ordlnance . The complaint was filed on tho form designated "Miaaauri Uniform Traffi c Ticlcot" 1 uhich is practically i dentical to the one discussed here. ~le court did not criticize the use of this fortl, but it did otate tbat the 1nforr::tation or cotipla.int tiUot contain a. definite stateoent of tho facts constituting tho offense charged. ' Page Three Honorable Lawrence P. Gcpford June 24, 1964 The information or complaint must contain an allega- tion that the accused drove a notor vehicle on a public road ·uh1lc in an intoxicated condi tion at a certain time a.nd place. The "'l'ra.ffic Tic:tet" form should be amended so as to accoznplish this. Supretlo Court Rule 24.01 states that an information sha.l~ contain a plain, concise and def'in1 te trri ttcn statement of tho esaenti.al facts. It is possible to use the oric;ina.l ticket as a complaint \:!hen properly executed by tho officer in a misdemeanor case, and also in traffic courts or municipal courto. However, it would bo cumbersome to use t hese forms ln a maglstrate court ~~d in felony cases bec~use or the lack of space provided in the t i ckets as ~w printed. It io our belief that tho ~ae of those tor.ms may result in sot1e confusion, and that the better practico , .. 'Ould be for the prooecutor to redraft <=Qmplainto and in:tormat1ons based on the facts taken from theae tickets, or i n the alternative, ticket forms should be so prepared and printed to provlde adequate space for compliance with the rules of court. We truot this :!.s the in!'ortllltion tha.t you desire, and if we can be of further help to you, do not hesitate to call on uo. OHS/fh Very truly youro, THOMAS F . EAGLETON Attorney General