On the front page of the NY Times:

New York State would make it a felony to drive while intoxicated with a child in the vehicle ... under a bill passed by the State Assembly on Tuesday.

The measure, which would significantly toughen penalties for drunken driving, could be passed by the Senate and sent to the governor this week. It would make New York the second state, after Arizona, in which drivers under the influence of alcohol could be charged with a felony if they have children as passengers.

Details.

[Anyone see anything wrong with the NY Times crack fact checking staff?]

Nope. Just their normal high level of reporting. Just cause they missed us, we're flyover anyway

Not much of a reporter/newspaper! And when did Arizona become so significant? With TV and the internet for the rapid-fire-less-than-accurate-reporting, you would think the papers with more time for reflection could publish reliable information. Why take a paper any more? Newspapers need to figure out their role in the electronic age.

JAS

In what year did Texas add felony DWI with Child to the Penal Code?

They only concern themselves with us when the death penalty is on their chopping block.

I think it was 2003.

I thought it was 2005.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boyd Kennedy:
I think it was 2003.

---

Winner!

Hey if you write them they will print a correction. They have it in a long list in the paper. Now if the famous JB writes them who knows it may get even more publicity.

I emailed the reporter this morning and got the following reply this afternoon:

"Thank you for your email. As I understand the Texas statute, driving while intoxicated with a child passenger is a "state jail felony,"
which seems analogous to a high-level misdemeanor offense in most other states.

Am I incorrect about that? "

It seems to me that a felony is a felony is a felony, but I don't work for the New York Times.

That is some fancy-pants East Coast talk. In Texas, homey don't play that.

The state jail felony is otherwise a fourth degree felony. Heck, the Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that it is enough of a felony to deprive a citizen of the right to bear arms. It also results in loss of voting rights and other important civil rights.

The defendant, who can spend up to twice as long in confinement as for the most serious misdemeanor, probably doesn't much appreciate the niceties of calling it a high-level misdemeanor.

Bottom line is that the reporter got it wrong. Perhaps it is too much to expect him to admit it.

See, JB should have emailed him.

I'd rather get a rope.

Why would anyone think something called a "State Jail Felony" is anything but a misdemeanor? Makes perfect sense to me.