Friday, June 29, 2007
DUI Definition broadened to include drivers hung over from drugs
A state appeals court yesterday ruled a driver who is hung over from using cocaine can be considered impaired / DUI even if the drug is no longer in her or his system.
The legal meaning of "under the influence" is expanded. A driver, who had taken cocaine but was not intoxicated when police stopped him, was ruled to still be a danger to other drivers. While the cocaine was no longer active it was the "proximate cause of his impaired behavior," the judges found.
"While the defendant was not 'high,' he was physically impaired," wrote Appellate Division Judge Thomas Lyons in a nine-page opinion, joined by Judges Ariel Rodriguez and Jack Sabatino. "As a result of ingesting cocaine, defendant's condition was such that his normal physical coordination was impaired so as to render him a danger to others on the highway."
Thiscould have an impact on alcohol-related DUI cases. None knew of a similar decision elsewhere in the country.
Now, they said, it could be possible for a person who had been drinking one night to be charged the next day if he or she had severe hangover symptoms.
"The potential impact is enormous," said John Tumelty, who represented the driver, David Franchetta, in the case. "Where do you draw the line? Even though a guy is not high and a drug is not active in the guy's system, if he's tired and sluggish and hung over from previous use, does that makes him under influence? If they say a drug hangover makes you guilty, what about an alcohol hangover?"
The law has traditionally been interpreted to mean a person is under the influence while a substance is pharmacologically active, said Jeffrey Gold, one of the state's leading experts in DUI law.
"The legislature didn't say hangover," Gold said. "They are really painting with a wide brush here to get as many people as possible. It's one more step to getting people off the road who are using drugs."
Richard Saferstein, the former head of the New Jersey State Police crime lab, who testified for the defense in the case, said he could possibly see the definition of "influence" covering more unusual circumstances, like a person having an LSD flashback long after taking the drug.
Vincent Molitor, assistant Cape May County prosecutor, said he was pleased with the decision and said was not concerned about widespread application of the ruling to drunk driving / DUI cases.
The legal meaning of "under the influence" is expanded. A driver, who had taken cocaine but was not intoxicated when police stopped him, was ruled to still be a danger to other drivers. While the cocaine was no longer active it was the "proximate cause of his impaired behavior," the judges found.
"While the defendant was not 'high,' he was physically impaired," wrote Appellate Division Judge Thomas Lyons in a nine-page opinion, joined by Judges Ariel Rodriguez and Jack Sabatino. "As a result of ingesting cocaine, defendant's condition was such that his normal physical coordination was impaired so as to render him a danger to others on the highway."
Thiscould have an impact on alcohol-related DUI cases. None knew of a similar decision elsewhere in the country.
Now, they said, it could be possible for a person who had been drinking one night to be charged the next day if he or she had severe hangover symptoms.
"The potential impact is enormous," said John Tumelty, who represented the driver, David Franchetta, in the case. "Where do you draw the line? Even though a guy is not high and a drug is not active in the guy's system, if he's tired and sluggish and hung over from previous use, does that makes him under influence? If they say a drug hangover makes you guilty, what about an alcohol hangover?"
The law has traditionally been interpreted to mean a person is under the influence while a substance is pharmacologically active, said Jeffrey Gold, one of the state's leading experts in DUI law.
"The legislature didn't say hangover," Gold said. "They are really painting with a wide brush here to get as many people as possible. It's one more step to getting people off the road who are using drugs."
Richard Saferstein, the former head of the New Jersey State Police crime lab, who testified for the defense in the case, said he could possibly see the definition of "influence" covering more unusual circumstances, like a person having an LSD flashback long after taking the drug.
Vincent Molitor, assistant Cape May County prosecutor, said he was pleased with the decision and said was not concerned about widespread application of the ruling to drunk driving / DUI cases.
| This website & linked blog is made available by this law firm for general information purposes only and to provide a general understanding of the law, not to provide legal advice. Readers of this website/blog are cautioned that reading the website/blog does not create a lawyer-client relationship between the reader and this law firm. |
