Common concerns with drug-impaired driving cases
| Author | Nathan Baker |
| Pages | 131-134 |
CHAPTER
IO
Common
Concerns
with
Drug-Impaired
Driving
Cases
Given
the
relative
novelty
of
drug-impaired
driving
cases
or
rather
the
manner
in
which
they
are
currently
being
prosecuted,
it
is
not
surpris
ing
to
find
that
many
judicial
officers,
lawyers,
and
members
of
the
pub
lic
are
struggling
to
understand
them.
Drug-impaired
driving
has
existed
alongside
alcohol-impaired
driving
for
decades.
However,
it
has
been
rec
ognized
throughout
that
drug-impaired
driving
is
particularly
difficult
to
prosecute.
With
the
introduction
of
DRE
and
SFST
testing,
it
was
hoped
that
such
a
difficult
and
complicated
area
of
law
might
be
simplified
in
some
way.
Unfortunately,
it
seems
that
the
opposite
effect
has
occurred.
With
the
legalization
of
marijuana
and
the
increasing
prevalence
of
drugs,
both
medically
prescribed
and
illicit,
being
present
in
society,
it
is
import
ant
that
triers-of-fact
are
properly
educated
as
to
the
purpose
and
abilities
in
the
current
testing
provided
for
by
law.
A
drug
recognition
expert
officer
is
given
their
expertise
without
the
need
for
a
Mohan
voir
dire.
However,
it
is
sometimes
forgotten,
especially
where
a
jury
is
not
present,
that
such
a
voir
dire
can
serve
to
educate
the
trier-of-fact
as
to
the
use
and
weight
that
can
be
apportioned
to
the
evidence
before
them.
Just
because
one
is
not
required
does
not
mean
that
it
may
not
still
be
a
good
idea
to
perform
some
function
of
reviewing
the
science
behind
the
testing
to
better
inform
the
trier-of-fact
as
to
the
usefulness
of
the
evidence
being
provided.
In
short,
there
may
be
little
that
is
required,
as
impairment
may
be
obvious.
However,
in
the
cases
where
the
impairment
is
not
so
obvious,
then
that
131
To continue reading
Request your trial