Iowa Supreme Court ponders the question "Can someone be arrested for public intoxication when they're standing on the front steps of their home?"

Waterloo resident Patience Paye was arrested by police in July of 2013 after a breathalyzer test showed she had a blood alcohol reading of 0.260.  It was her second arrest on public intoxication charges.

But Paye has made an interesting argument to the Iowa Supreme Court--that Waterloo Police had no business arresting her because she was standing on the front steps of her house at the time.

Public defender Rachel Regnold on Wednesday night told Iowa Supreme Court justices that the front steps of a single family home "are not a public place."  She said the property right of privacy is stronger than the right of police to make arrests of intoxicated people.  Justice Thomas Waterman seemed to agree, asking, "Wouldn't most people be surprised to learn they could be arrested on their front steps?"

But State of Iowa attorney Benjamin Parrott told the justices the state legislature acted broadly in writing the law and definied "public places" the same way the dictionary defines it--as a place where the public has access, even if it doesn't have ownership.  Supreme Court justice Bruce Zager noted that in Paye's case, she had called police to her home--thus granting them access to her front steps.

The Iowa Supreme Court previously ruled that state law defines the front steps and common hallway of an apartment building as "public spaces," but that ruling involved multi-family housing.  Now the Supreme Court will be called upon to rule on whether that definition should also involve the front steps of single family homes.