Aiding and Abetting DWI in North Carolina
North Carolina's DWI legislation, G.S. 20-138.1(a), establishes that an individual is guilty of impaired driving, including aid and abet impaired driving, if he operates any vehicle or is involved in the operation of any vehicle on any highway, street, or any public vehicular area within the state under the following conditions:
- While being under the influence of an impairing substance;
- Having consumed alcohol to the extent that he has, at any relevant time post-driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more, as proven by a chemical analysis; or
- With any amount of a Schedule I controlled substance, as detailed in G.S. 90-89, or its metabolites in his blood or urine.
Additionally, a person can be in violation of this statute through the theory of aiding and abetting if they knowingly advise, instigate, encourage, procure, or aid another person in committing impaired driving and their actions or statements substantially contribute to the commission of the crime by the other person.
Violation of this legislation is conceivable not just through driving impaired, but also through aiding and abetting, as clarified in State v. Gibbs (1947). In essence, anyone who partakes in the misdemeanor, either as aiders and abettors or otherwise, is guilty.
To be convicted of aiding and abetting, it must be established that another committed the crime; the defendant knowingly supported, induced, promoted, or helped the other person; and the defendant’s actions or statements significantly influenced the crime’s commission (State v. Bond 1936).
Acts constituting aiding and abetting a DWI are evident when a car owner, aware of the driver's impaired state, hands over the car keys and accompanies the impaired driver, as in State v. Gibbs. Here, the owner was as guilty as the impaired driver, having allowed him to operate the vehicle without objection.
However, in cases like State v. Creech (1936), mere ownership and presence in the car without the knowledge of the driver’s condition were deemed insufficient for liability. The ruling emphasized that significant impairment and unawareness at the commencement of the drive excuse the owner from aiding and abetting liability.
In another case, State v. Whitaker (1979), the court found the owner guilty for allowing an intoxicated person to operate his vehicle, resulting in a fatal accident, emphasizing that knowledge and consent make the owner equally culpable.
While it seems a person could be guilty of aiding and abetting DWI without accompanying the impaired driver, no North Carolina cases directly support this notion. The importance is seemingly placed on the owner’s knowledge of the driver’s impaired state.
In the 2001 civil case, Smith v. Winn-Dixie Charlotte, Inc., the court ruled that friends who didn’t prevent an impaired individual from driving didn’t aid and abet the driver’s DWI. The judgment clarified that mere presence and sympathy with the crime, without the intent to aid, don’t equate to guilt.
North Carolina statute G.S. 20-179(f1) outlines the punishment for those found guilty of aiding and abetting DWI as Level Five punishment, inclusive of a fine up to $200 and imprisonment between 24 hours and 60 days. The imprisonment may be suspended, conditional to the completion of at least 24 hours of community service.
If facing a DWI charge, securing legal counsel is crucial.
