Tis issue is now being played out in


the Courts. Based upon 2016 data in a Colorado Report (Colorado has a 5 nanograms permissive inference per se level), “cases involving only alcohol saw a 92% percent conviction rate, while cases involving only THC . . . saw conviction rates of 69%.”20


Additionally, three out


of the four cases under 5 nanograms of THC had prosecutorial dismissal rates of around 20%, while 5 nanograms or more had a dismissal rate of 9.7%.21


All of this


data may be indicative of the hurdles that the prosecution faces when prosecuting marijuana cases based upon per se THC blood nanogram concentration levels. So far there is only one lower court


constitutional challenge that challenges a per se marijuana driving law. Te defense argued that the 5 ng/mL blood content threshold that constitutes a DUI in Montana isn’t supported as a scientific point of impairment. Tis case relied upon the aforementioned AAA Study. Te Court held that marijuana consumption was not a fundamental right meriting constitutional protection and, despite potential uncertainty regarding the reliability of testing for impairment by marijuana/THC, “the law did still fit within the legislature’s “responsibility to pass laws that provide for the general welfare.”22


was not brought to the appellate level. As time goes by, either the science will become clearer, or there will be more challenges to THC per se driving laws. In the midst of this state of affairs,


marijuana roadway testing pilots are moving forward in several states and countries, and U.S. caselaw is emerging regarding what constitutes indicia of marijuana impairment and whether standard field sobriety testing is applicable to detecting marijuana driving impairment. More on these developments in the next issue. ❚


4


References 1


Cognitive and Psychomotor Effects in Males after Smoking a Combination of Tobacco and Cannabis Containing up to 69 mg Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Hunault CC, Mensinga TT, Böcker KB, Schipper CM, Kruidenier M, Leenders ME, de Vries I, Meulenbelt J. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2009 May; 204(1):85-94.


2


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278966939_ Cannabis_Effects_on_Driving_Lateral_Control_With_and_ Without_Alcohol.


3


Ronen et al., (2010). The Effect of Alcohol, THC, and their Combination on Perceived Effects, Willingness to Drive and Performance of Driving and Non-Driving Tasks. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42(6), 1855-1865; Anderson, B., Rizzo, M., Block, R., Pearlson, G., and O’Leary, D. (2010). Sex Differences in the Effects of Marijuana on Simulated Driving Performance. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 42(1), 19-30.


Ramaekers, Johannes G., et al. “Tolerance and Cross- Tolerance to Neurocognitive Effects of THC and Alcohol in Heavy Cannabis Users”, Psychopharmacology vol. 214,2 (2010): 391-401. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC3045517/.


5


https://www.thestar.com/news/cannabis/2018/10/15/mcgill- research-finds-significant-driving-impairment-five-hours-after- cannabis-use.html.


6


https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/ EvaluationOfDriversInRelationToPerSeReport.pdf.


7


https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/ documents/812440-marijuana-impaired-driving-report-to- congress.pdf.


8


https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/ documents/812440-marijuana-impaired-driving-report-to- congress.pdf.


9


https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/View%20the%20 recently%20adopted%202018%20Resolutions.pdf.


10 11 https://www.sheriffs.org/sites/default/files/2018-01.pdf.


Kleiman, M. A. R., Jones, T., Miller, C. J., & Halperin, R. (2018). Driving While Stoned: Issues and Policy Options. Journal of Drug Policy Analysis, in press, DOI: 10.1515/jdpa- 2018-0004.


12


https://www.npr.org/sections/health- shots/2016/09/06/492810932/the-difficulty-of-enforcing- laws-against-driving-while-high.


13 Unfortunately this case holding 14 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7870889/.


Hart et al., 2010. Neurophysiological and Cognitive Effects of Marijuana in Frequent Users. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC5858872/.


15


Eldreth DA, Matochik JA, Cadet JL, Bolla KI. Abnormal Brain Activity in Prefrontal Brain Regions in Abstinent Marijuana Users. Neuroimage. 2004;23:914–920. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.032. See also Schwope DM, Bosker WM, Ramaekers JG, Goerlick DA, Huestis, MA (2012). Psychomotor Performance, Subjective and Physiological Effects of Whole Blood Delta-9-THC Concentrations in Heavy, Chronic Cannabis Smokers Following Acute Smoked Cannabis. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 36: 405-12.


16


Pope HG, Gruber AJ, Hudson JI, Huestis MA, Yurgelun- Todd D. Cognitive Measures in Long-Term Cannabis Users. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42:41S–47S; Pope H, Gruber A, Hudson J, Huestis M, Yurgelun-Todd D. Neuropsychological Performance in Long-Term Cannabis Users. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58:909–915.


17


Karschner, Erin L., et al. “Do Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Concentrations Indicate Recent Use in Chronic Cannabis Users?” Addiction (Abingdon, England) vol. 104,12 (2009):


18


2041-8. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC2784185/.


Karschner, Erin L., et al. “Extended Plasma Cannabinoid Excretion in Chronic Frequent Cannabis Smokers during Sustained Abstinence and Correlation with Psychomotor Performance.” Drug Testing and Analysis, vol. 8,7 (2015): 682-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC4676741/#R42.


19


http://www.alternet.org/drugs/oregons-sets-massive- precedent-refuses-enforce-thc-blood-limit-driving.


20


http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2018-DUI_ HB17-1315.pdf; https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/ crime/new-report-shows-nearly-3-in-4-arrested-for-impaired- driving-in-colorado-are-men.


21


http://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ors/docs/reports/2018-DUI_ HB17-1315.pdf.


22


http://billingsgazette.com/news/crime/how-distracting-is-thc- to-drivers-enough-for-a-marijuana/article_eb719a0b-3235- 54b9-81c2-afb629918f86.html.


Judge Mary A. Celeste (ret.) sat on the Denver County Court bench from 2000 to 2015. She was the Presid- ing Judge for 2009 and 2010 and the co-founder of


the Denver County Court Sobriety Court. She is the current chair of the ABA National Conference of Specialized Court Judges and Faculty for the National Center for DWI Courts (NCDC) and the National Judicial College (NJC). She has served as the presi- dent of the American Judge’s Association and the Colorado Women’s Bar Association Foundation, and as a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) judicial outreach liaison. She has written many articles and is a national speaker on the topics of marijuana, marijuana drug- impaired driving, and specialty courts. She has presented to NADCP, APPA, AJA, ABA, DATIA, NHTSA, Lifesavers, Pennsylvania DUI Association, Michigan and Louisiana Association of Drug Court Professionals, and to judges, specialty court conferences, and safety highway offices in the states of Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, North Caro- lina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, and in Canada.


54


datia focus


spring 2019


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56