Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
Boston - The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is set to hear arguments Friday on whether field sobriety tests can be used as part of cases of driving under the influence of marijuana.
The court case comes less than a month after recreational marijuana became legal in Massachusetts, while remaining illegal at the federal level. Driving under the influence of marijuana, or "drugged driving," surfaced during the ballot campaign, Question 4, to legalize marijuana last fall.
But the case before the Supreme Judicial Court started in 2013 at 12:20 a.m., when a trooper stopped a blue Suzuki Grand Vitara in Millbury.
The trooper who approached the car allegedly saw smoke inside, and when the car window rolled down, he smelled burnt marijuana and spotted cigar tobacco on the floor and a cigar slicer on a key ring in the ignition.
The driver was allegedly Thomas Gerhardt, and he admitted when asked there were a "couple of roaches" in the ashtray, pulling out two smoked roll cigarettes, according to court documents.
He failed a sobriety test -- the one leg stand test -- but was able to recite the alphabet from D to Q and count backwards from 75 to 62.
Gerhardt was eventually charged with one count of operating under the influence, as a result of allegedly failing the standardized field sobriety tests. He was also charged with a lights violation and a number plate violation.
Sobriety tests are "irrelevant to whether a driver has sued marijuana or whether a driver is impaired by the use of marijuana and should not be admissible in court," Rebecca Jacobstein, a public defender working for Gerhardt, wrote in one of the court filings, arguing other tests should be created.
A trial judge agreed, finding that the tests are not a reliable indicator of marijuana impairment.
But Worcester County District Attorney Joe Early is asking the state's highest court to reverse that decision.
Experts in field sobriety tests for marijuana have testified that the one-leg stand is an "accurate" test for marijuana impairment, Early's office argued in its own court filing.
Standardized field sobriety tests measure coordination, balance, dexterity, an ability to follow directions, "all of which may be affected by marijuana as with alcohol," the filing said.
But Gerhardt argued the assumption that "if a drug has been consumed then driving is impaired is not always true."
Marijuana affects the body in different ways than alcohol, he and marijuana advocates say.
"Studies have also shown that alcohol consumption encourages risky driving, whereas marijuana consumption encourages greater caution," Gerhardt's attorney said in her filing.
There isn't agreement in scientific community about sobriety tests accurately assessing marijuana impairment, she added. "Scientists cannot even agree on the extent to which marijuana use impacts an individual's ability to drive, much less the amount."
The case also asks Supreme Judicial Court judges to decide whether police officers should be permitted to offer an opinion to a jury that a person was "high" on marijuana. Gerhardt's attorney says expert testimony should be provided to jurors in conjunction with police officer testimony.
"Neither the effects of marijuana consumption nor the relationship between marijuana consumption and driving are common knowledge," she wrote.
But Early's office said there is a growing public awareness of marijuana and its effects, particularly as additional states move to legalize the substance, like Massachusetts did last year. Massachusetts voters also decriminalized small amounts of marijuana in 2008 and approved marijuana for medical use in 2012.
"Because marijuana use and consumption is now widespread in this country, lay jurors understand from common experience the effects of marijuana consumption, and consequently the effects of driving while under the influence of marijuana," the Early office's court document said.
An officer observing that a driver may have bloodshot eyes, lack of coordination, slow reaction times and relaxed responses, as well as being unable to pass a field sobriety test does not mean expert testimony is needed as well, they argued.
"While there may have been a time when expert opinion might have been necessary to establish impairment from marijuana, as it was to show alcohol intoxication, that time has passed," the document said.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Can Field Sobriety Tests Be Used In Court Cases Of Driving Under Influence Of Marijuana? Mass. High Court To Hear Arguments
Author: Gintautas Dumcius
Contact: MassLive
Photo Credit: Gintautas Dumcius
Website: MassLive
The court case comes less than a month after recreational marijuana became legal in Massachusetts, while remaining illegal at the federal level. Driving under the influence of marijuana, or "drugged driving," surfaced during the ballot campaign, Question 4, to legalize marijuana last fall.
But the case before the Supreme Judicial Court started in 2013 at 12:20 a.m., when a trooper stopped a blue Suzuki Grand Vitara in Millbury.
The trooper who approached the car allegedly saw smoke inside, and when the car window rolled down, he smelled burnt marijuana and spotted cigar tobacco on the floor and a cigar slicer on a key ring in the ignition.
The driver was allegedly Thomas Gerhardt, and he admitted when asked there were a "couple of roaches" in the ashtray, pulling out two smoked roll cigarettes, according to court documents.
He failed a sobriety test -- the one leg stand test -- but was able to recite the alphabet from D to Q and count backwards from 75 to 62.
Gerhardt was eventually charged with one count of operating under the influence, as a result of allegedly failing the standardized field sobriety tests. He was also charged with a lights violation and a number plate violation.
Sobriety tests are "irrelevant to whether a driver has sued marijuana or whether a driver is impaired by the use of marijuana and should not be admissible in court," Rebecca Jacobstein, a public defender working for Gerhardt, wrote in one of the court filings, arguing other tests should be created.
A trial judge agreed, finding that the tests are not a reliable indicator of marijuana impairment.
But Worcester County District Attorney Joe Early is asking the state's highest court to reverse that decision.
Experts in field sobriety tests for marijuana have testified that the one-leg stand is an "accurate" test for marijuana impairment, Early's office argued in its own court filing.
Standardized field sobriety tests measure coordination, balance, dexterity, an ability to follow directions, "all of which may be affected by marijuana as with alcohol," the filing said.
But Gerhardt argued the assumption that "if a drug has been consumed then driving is impaired is not always true."
Marijuana affects the body in different ways than alcohol, he and marijuana advocates say.
"Studies have also shown that alcohol consumption encourages risky driving, whereas marijuana consumption encourages greater caution," Gerhardt's attorney said in her filing.
There isn't agreement in scientific community about sobriety tests accurately assessing marijuana impairment, she added. "Scientists cannot even agree on the extent to which marijuana use impacts an individual's ability to drive, much less the amount."
The case also asks Supreme Judicial Court judges to decide whether police officers should be permitted to offer an opinion to a jury that a person was "high" on marijuana. Gerhardt's attorney says expert testimony should be provided to jurors in conjunction with police officer testimony.
"Neither the effects of marijuana consumption nor the relationship between marijuana consumption and driving are common knowledge," she wrote.
But Early's office said there is a growing public awareness of marijuana and its effects, particularly as additional states move to legalize the substance, like Massachusetts did last year. Massachusetts voters also decriminalized small amounts of marijuana in 2008 and approved marijuana for medical use in 2012.
"Because marijuana use and consumption is now widespread in this country, lay jurors understand from common experience the effects of marijuana consumption, and consequently the effects of driving while under the influence of marijuana," the Early office's court document said.
An officer observing that a driver may have bloodshot eyes, lack of coordination, slow reaction times and relaxed responses, as well as being unable to pass a field sobriety test does not mean expert testimony is needed as well, they argued.
"While there may have been a time when expert opinion might have been necessary to establish impairment from marijuana, as it was to show alcohol intoxication, that time has passed," the document said.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Can Field Sobriety Tests Be Used In Court Cases Of Driving Under Influence Of Marijuana? Mass. High Court To Hear Arguments
Author: Gintautas Dumcius
Contact: MassLive
Photo Credit: Gintautas Dumcius
Website: MassLive
