Question about D.U.I. and marijuana

[Vermicelli]

When somebody is smoking marijuana and driving, and they are pulled over, do they normally get charged with a D.U.I. along with the other relevant charges(paraphnelia, possesion, etc.)? I'm not asking this for personal reasons... I was watching COPS and an officer pulled over a couple teenagers riding around and smoking pot. He let them go with just a possession citation(instead of the heavier paraphnelia charge) because they were cooperative. But he didn't say anything about a possible D.U.I. charge and it didn't really make sense to me. Being under the influence of marijuana and driving has to be as bad or worse than alcohol.

But then again, perhaps there's no good way to test whether somebody's under the influence of marijuana, so it'd get thrown out in court anyway. I'm pretty liberal on my marijuana views. Don't smoke it myself, but I am for decriminalization(not legalization). But people definitely shouldn't be smoking it and driving.

[TPDHellhound]

I do the standard DUI investigation. People high on MJ exhibit similar signs of intoxication that are present during the Walk/Turn and One-Leg Stand. I even have them blow in the intox. Under AZ Admin per Se law, I'm allowed to administer "test or tests" to determine the intoxicant. So after they blow, I make them give blood and urine too.

But if there were no PC for the DUI, then I would just do the possession charge. It would be the same as a driver drinking a beer but not being drunk as he drove.

[ChesCopPodz]

Ditto above. Unless the driver appeared to be actually impaired by the marijuana, there is no Driving Under Influence of Drugs (DUID). I've had the exact situation many times, and have not arrested for DUID because none of them were actually showing signs of impairment. The stops were for expired stickers or minor infractions. No erratic driving associated with DUI + No impairment = No DUID, just possession.

Now if I do believe they are impaired by the drug usage, standard field sobriety, then draw blood.

[Drew27k9]

In Pennsylvania, any amount of a controlled substance,which is not medically prescribed, in your system, you are considered a DUI. It does not make any difference if they are showing signs of being impared or not, you are still a DUI.

[scott715us]

Same in TN. If they exhibit signs of impairment, no matter what's actually causing the impairment (prescription, alcohol, mj), then they get charged with DUI.

But then again, perhaps there's no good way to test whether somebody's under the influence of marijuana, so it'd get thrown out in court anyway

That couldn't be farther from the truth. If they're driving like an idiot, wreak of pot, and exhibit further clues on the SFST's, they get arrested. If the submit to a blood test, great. If not, then they get charged with implied consent along with the DUI charge, possession, etc.

A little bit harder of a case to prove without the blood test, but it can (and has) been done.

[phantasm]

in Ny there's common law dwi (based off my observations) and confirmed by BAC dwi.

Yes someone can be charged with DWI for drugs in NY.

[codered]

Observations of irratic driving, and the obvious odor of marijuana can easily make a case of driving under the influence(blood test will not show this, a urine test is required).

[scott715us]

Observations of irratic driving, and the obvious odor of marijuana can easily make a case of driving under the influence(blood test will not show this, a urine test is required).

???

Blood test(s) due detect THC, at least at the lab we use.

[Valor55]

VA just set per se limits for certain drugs. For other drugs you need a toxicologist to testify to physiological impairment along with the officers observations of impairment.

[jd524]

In Minnesota they could be charged for DWI based on their impairment, but THC is excluded from Minnesota's illegal per se, so you can't rely only on a blood or urine test. Our prosecutor won't usually follow through with a marijuana impairment DWI. He feels it's to tough to prove with just the SFST's, and will usually get them to plea down to a careless.

[Signal_W]

In Memphis our "Whiskey Van" can also have then deposit some urine for test. That can be used in court. :D

[Wombat311]

We've got a salliva test for MJ for drivers. It's still in the pilot/test phase though, so only one unit has it.

[rdp]

We use blood for drug charges.........

Codered is off on the no blood test.

If I can demonstrate impairment, you will go.

[Kenpokev]

If any evidence exists suggesting the use of drugs, NRS provides a blood or combination of breath and urine. Virtually everyone uses the blood test, as it will detect virtually all forms of drugs or intoxicants.

Don't smoke it myself, but I am for decriminalization(not legalization).

Smoking dope is not only against the law, it's stupid. EVERY inmate in our custody on meth related charges started with smokin' joints. Stupid is, stupid does.

[Vermicelli]

Before they started smoking marijuana, they started with drinking alcohol, and smoking cigarettes. There are many arguments for tougher laws against marijuana, and I agree with many of them, but the gateway drug theory is one that just irks me. If anything, people who move on to harder drugs do so because of the environment they get into by the very nature of something they do being illegal.

Now personally, I view marijuana on the same level as alcohol. I don't think it's any better or worse. They're both harmful substances that have a high likelihood of being abused. Neither one should be legal in my opinion. But alcohol is so ingrained into our culture that prohibition causes more harm than good. Marijuana is currently illegal, and I think we should keep the status quo. BUT, I don't think people should be punished harshly for choosing what they do with their own body.

Crack, meth, and harder drugs are a bit different in that a LOT of users eventually turn to crime in order to support their habit. I don't know the exact statistics, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentages are a lot higher than that of alcohol or marijuana. Also, people under the influence of harder drugs have a much higher tendency towards violence. I would even go as far to say that people on alcohol are more inclinded towards violence than people on pot.

Anyway, I didn't really know how to interpret your post. But do you honestly feel that harsh drug laws for marijuana are appropriate? I'm talking about mandatory jail time and $2000 plus fines for first time offenders. I hope I don't catch too much flak for this, but I"m just throwing my humble opinion out, for what it's worth.