Court Opinion

ID: 9784407
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 20:44:14.766107+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:35:54.301981
License: Public Domain

BOB McCOY, Justice,
concurring.
I concur that the trial court abused its discretion by entering the judgment it entered concerning testing for alcohol use but for a different reason than enunciated by my fellow justice. I believe that the trial court has the right, and in fact, the obligation to order alcohol testing depending on the circumstances. I further believe that there is sufficient evidence in this case to warrant testing pursuant to the court’s judgment except as to the timing of the testing. To test within twelve hours of possession of Natalie seems to imply that it is to be within twelve hours after the beginning of the possession of Natalie, but as worded, could also theoretically be from twelve hours before the beginning of the possession of Natalie until twelve hours after the end of possession of Natalie. It is only testing at the later time that accomplishes the obvious purpose of the requirement,, that is, to ensure that Clayton not drink alcohol while in possession of his daughter. Any testing while in *724possession, or prior to possession of Natalie, would allow Clayton to drink alcohol after the test but while in possession of his daughter.
For the foregoing reason, I concur in the outcome reached by my fellow justice.