Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark decision in American legal jurisprudence, recognizing and solidifying the fundamental right of the people against self-incrimination and limiting the power of the government from abusive overreach. These are towering thoughts and concepts of the law, the bedrock principles of our freedom, the reason that people pour their hearts and souls into the profession.
But, let's face it, the only people who care about that stuff on a daily basis are lawyers, cops and folks who have a run in with the cops. Most people are more interested in important legal issues, like toilets, donkey basketball and drunks on horses. These are kinds of pressing legal issues that lawyers deal with every day, or at least get a chuckle over while daydreaming.
• Game of Thrones. Is the First Amendment implicated by a toilet? A Garland County circuit court will indirectly weigh in on that subject at 8:30 a.m., Aug. 11, 2016. That's the trial date for the appeal of a Garland County woman who was charged and convicted with illegal disposal of solid waste, for her "toilet art." Tonie Atkinson has a bunch of toilets displayed along the roadside of her property on Fox Pass Cutoff. She plants flowers in them, paints them various interesting colors, covers them with designs. But there's no mistaking the underlying objet d'art -- it's a throne.
She was convicted in a lower court in November 2015 and fined $370 for violating Ark. Code Ann. 8-6-205, the state's environmental law on the disposal of trash and debris. There's a similar Garland County ordinance (Sec. 14-72) which, in part, prohibits: "The overt storage of any white goods and other appliances or furnishings normally utilized inside a structure or dwelling." She appealed to circuit court, which will hold a new trial. Her defense? It's art.
The First Amendment protects most artistic expression. Suppose, for the sake of inane supposing, that a person casts a 10-foot tall concrete toilet and displays it in their yard? Certainly not a "white good or appliance normally utilized inside a structure or dwelling." Does it violate the county ordinance? Is it art? Who knows? I'm just glad I got rid of that worm bed I made from an old freezer when I was 10.
• Redneck Polo. In the 1980s I was unceremoniously deposited on the gymnasium floor at Fountain Lake High School by a donkey. The animal had no interest in the outcome of the donkey basketball game and declined to further participate. Someone asked recently if it was legal. There is no specific prohibition on it and the practice still goes on; the words "donkey basketball" do not appear in the Arkansas Code. But the animal cruelty statutes, 5-62-101, et seq., particularly 5-62-104, could be implicated in an extreme case in which a person "knowingly tortures any dog, cat or horse." My own donkey ball experience could have been called torturous, but the donkey came out of it fine, and the crowd certainly didn't mind watching a group of teenage idiots being outsmarted by burros.
• Drunk on a Horse. Arkansas DWI law has an unusual little quirk. You generally can't get a DWI while riding a horse. Don't worry, you're going to get charged with something if you take Silver for a boozy gallop, but the DWI statute, Ark. Code Ann 5-65-103, specifically requires a "motor vehicle." A motor vehicle is defined as "every vehicle which is self-propelled and every vehicle which is propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operated on rails." According to the Arkansas appellate courts, that definition includes ATVs and lawn mowers (with a nod to George Jones). Oddly, though there has been no specific ruling on it, the definition would also appear to include some amusement park rides. So the pertinent question is not can you get a DWI on a horse, but can you get a DWI on old-school electric bumper cars?
Sorry, I was daydreaming. Back to Miranda. I hear she was last seen in Arizona.
Editorial on 04/29/2016