Source: Columbus Dispatch
Pot smokers have another reason to be paranoid now. Starting today, a state law makes it easier to nail Ohioans who drive stoned.
It has long been illegal to drive under the influence of drugs, but the new law spells out specific limits for marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, heroin, LSD and PCP, as well as for the byproducts of marijuana, cocaine and heroin.
Backers of the law say the limits for each drug are designed to be equivalent to the 0.08 percent blood-alcohol content for drunken drivers.
But local defense attorneys warn that drugs such as marijuana remain in a person's system long after the drug affects them. So a motorist who smokes a joint on a Friday night could test over the marijuana limit on Tuesday, said Columbus lawyer Jon Saia.
"How will the officer know if the person smoked marijuana three days before?" he asked.
Officials of the State Highway Patrol say the limits were set high enough to measure only drugs taken within a few hours of the test. The levels match those set by Nevada, the first state to enact a law setting levels at which a motorist is presumed to be impaired. Ten other states have similar laws.
The Ohio law is expected to make it easier to convince a jury or judge that a motorist was under the influence of drugs. Previously, to convict a drugged motorist, the prosecution had to rely primarily on the arresting officers' observations and how the person performed on roadside tests, said Lt. Shawn Davis of the Highway Patrol.
When a motorist was tested for drugs, prosecutors had to bring in an expert witness, Davis said.
"If I testified the driver tested having 500 nanograms of marijuana, everyone said, 'What does that mean?' " he said. "That's one of the things we always battled."
Cases sometimes were thrown out of court because of uncertainty about impairment levels, he said.
Under the new law, motorists are presumed to be impaired if they have, for example, at least 10 nanograms of marijuana per milliliter of urine or two nanograms per milliliter of blood. (A nanogram is a billionth of a gram, and a milliliter is one thousandth of a liter.)
Mitchell Ford was tested for drugs on Sept. 30, 2003, after he made an illegal turn in Xenia and crashed into 38-year-old motorcyclist Duane Thomas, killing him. Ford tested positive for marijuana, but the results couldn't be used in court, because the officer didn't observe signs of impaired driving.
Ford was charged with aggravated vehicular homicide. He pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, involuntary manslaughter, and was sentenced to a year in jail and lifelong loss of his driver's license.
Ford's sentence likely would have been harsher had there been no doubt that his system contained enough marijuana to affect his driving, said Thomas' sister, Deborah Eick.
"I know he'd be serving more time," she said. "People think they're flying under the proverbial radar when they're smoking marijuana or taking other drugs."
The penalty for the first conviction for driving under the influence of drugs is the same as for the first drunken-driving offense: up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine and a license suspension for three years. Drivers who refuse to submit to a drug test lose their license for a year.
The new law says that any motorist testing over the drug limits is impaired, just as the drunken-driving law says that a driver whose blood-alcohol level is 0.08 percent or above is impaired.
But "unlike someone who's drinking and gets behind the wheel, a person who's smoking marijuana and is high (often drives) more cautiously," said Alfred Staubus, a forensic toxicologist and retired Ohio State University professor who often testifies at trials. "Some studies show marijuana can
be found to even enhance driving - because they're concentrating so hard to not get stopped."
The law exempts prescription medications, and a driver can't be stopped on suspicion of impairment alone. But if an officer thinks a traffic regulation has been violated and stops a car, then smells pot, sees drugs or thinks the driver is impaired, the officer can ask the driver to perform fieldsobriety tests, such as walking a straight line.
There is no equivalent of the Breathalyzer test for motorists suspected of being high on drugs. But if a driver fails the roadside tests, the officer can request that he or she submit to a urine or blood test for drugs.
The urine sample can be collected at a police station or Highway Patrol office. The blood sample must be taken at a hospital.
Defense attorneys commonly challenge the validity of urine tests because of the room for error, Saia said.
Saia does not expect a sharp increase in drug testing of drivers. As he put it, to arouse an officer's suspicion, "the person is going to have to be acting really crazy."
Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Author: Alayna DeMartini, The Columbus Dispatch
Published: Thursday, August 17, 2006
Copyright: 2006 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact: letters@dispatch.com
Website: http://www.dispatch.com/
"How will the officer know if the person smoked marijuana three days before?" he asked.
Officials of the State Highway Patrol say the limits were set high enough to measure only drugs taken within a few hours of the test. The levels match those set by Nevada, the first state to enact a law setting levels at which a motorist is presumed to be impaired. Ten other states have similar laws.
The Ohio law is expected to make it easier to convince a jury or judge that a motorist was under the influence of drugs. Previously, to convict a drugged motorist, the prosecution had to rely primarily on the arresting officers' observations and how the person performed on roadside tests, said Lt. Shawn Davis of the Highway Patrol.
When a motorist was tested for drugs, prosecutors had to bring in an expert witness, Davis said.
"If I testified the driver tested having 500 nanograms of marijuana, everyone said, 'What does that mean?' " he said. "That's one of the things we always battled."
Cases sometimes were thrown out of court because of uncertainty about impairment levels, he said.
Under the new law, motorists are presumed to be impaired if they have, for example, at least 10 nanograms of marijuana per milliliter of urine or two nanograms per milliliter of blood. (A nanogram is a billionth of a gram, and a milliliter is one thousandth of a liter.)
Mitchell Ford was tested for drugs on Sept. 30, 2003, after he made an illegal turn in Xenia and crashed into 38-year-old motorcyclist Duane Thomas, killing him. Ford tested positive for marijuana, but the results couldn't be used in court, because the officer didn't observe signs of impaired driving.
Ford was charged with aggravated vehicular homicide. He pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, involuntary manslaughter, and was sentenced to a year in jail and lifelong loss of his driver's license.
Ford's sentence likely would have been harsher had there been no doubt that his system contained enough marijuana to affect his driving, said Thomas' sister, Deborah Eick.
"I know he'd be serving more time," she said. "People think they're flying under the proverbial radar when they're smoking marijuana or taking other drugs."
The penalty for the first conviction for driving under the influence of drugs is the same as for the first drunken-driving offense: up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine and a license suspension for three years. Drivers who refuse to submit to a drug test lose their license for a year.
The new law says that any motorist testing over the drug limits is impaired, just as the drunken-driving law says that a driver whose blood-alcohol level is 0.08 percent or above is impaired.
But "unlike someone who's drinking and gets behind the wheel, a person who's smoking marijuana and is high (often drives) more cautiously," said Alfred Staubus, a forensic toxicologist and retired Ohio State University professor who often testifies at trials. "Some studies show marijuana can
be found to even enhance driving - because they're concentrating so hard to not get stopped."
The law exempts prescription medications, and a driver can't be stopped on suspicion of impairment alone. But if an officer thinks a traffic regulation has been violated and stops a car, then smells pot, sees drugs or thinks the driver is impaired, the officer can ask the driver to perform fieldsobriety tests, such as walking a straight line.
There is no equivalent of the Breathalyzer test for motorists suspected of being high on drugs. But if a driver fails the roadside tests, the officer can request that he or she submit to a urine or blood test for drugs.
The urine sample can be collected at a police station or Highway Patrol office. The blood sample must be taken at a hospital.
Defense attorneys commonly challenge the validity of urine tests because of the room for error, Saia said.
Saia does not expect a sharp increase in drug testing of drivers. As he put it, to arouse an officer's suspicion, "the person is going to have to be acting really crazy."
Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Author: Alayna DeMartini, The Columbus Dispatch
Published: Thursday, August 17, 2006
Copyright: 2006 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact: letters@dispatch.com
Website: http://www.dispatch.com/