A state statute provides “It shall be unlawful to sell alcoholic beverages to any person under twenty-one (21) years of age,” and imposes a fine of $1,000 for violation of the statute. The state courts have interpreted the statute as creating strict liability.
The regional manager of a retail package store chose a manager for the store. She delegated all decision making concerning operations to him.
The store manager hired a clerk to sell liquor during the afternoon shift. He told her to check the identification of all prospective purchasers and to refuse to sell to anyone under age 21. One afternoon a customer, who was 18-years old but looked older, purchased a bottle of scotch without showing any identification. An inspector from the state liquor commission was watching the store and, by checking the customer’s age, established a violation of the statute. The regional manager was convicted by the trial court of violating the statute and has appealed on the ground that her conviction would violate the U.S. Constitution.
The appellate court should:
A. Uphold the conviction, because regulatory offenses are not subject to due process limitations.
B. Uphold the conviction, because she was in a position to exercise control over the sale of liquor by store.
C. Reverse the conviction, because it is a violation of due process to punish without a voluntary act.
D. Reverse the conviction, because criminal liability is personal and the store is the seller, not the regional manager.
{ 6 comments }
