Pubdate: Tue, 11 Dec 2012
Source: Denver Post (CO)
Copyright: 2012 The Denver Post Corp
Contact:  http://www.denverpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/122
Author: Jessica Fender
Page: 1A

The Legalization of Marijuana

COLORADO HEADING TOWARD A TOO-STONED-TO-DRIVE LAW

Provision That Aids Defendants Could Put Law Over the Top

With pot smoking now legal in Colorado, the state is closer than ever 
to defining just how stoned is too stoned to drive, say legislative 
leaders who've seen similar proposals die again and again at the state Capitol.

Law enforcers want to set the legal limit at 5 nanograms of active 
THC per milliliter of blood and recently made a critical compromise 
to get that standard into the state's DUI statute.

Under the latest draft, people caught over the THC limit could argue 
in court that they weren't impaired, an opportunity not afforded 
booze-drinking drivers caught over the legal blood-alcohol limit.

Disagreements over whether one size truly fits all marijuana smokers 
when it comes to the amount of active THC needed to impair driving 
abilities have confounded three attempts at passing 
driving-under-the-influence-of-drugs bills in two years.

But newly elected House Speaker Mark Ferrandino said that allowing 
DUI defendants to argue their side seems to be swaying people who 
have opposed similar bills in the past.

And pro-pot activists are giving tentative nods to the idea.

"With Amendment 64, it's going to be important that we clarify a lot 
of laws, and that is definitely one of them," Ferrandino, D-Denver, 
said of the drugged-driving question. "Some of the people in my 
caucus who have not been supportive of the bill before do support 
(this proposal). It gives me some hope that we'll have something that 
can be supported in a bipartisan way."

Gov. John Hickenlooper on Monday signed a proclamation officially 
adding Amendment 64 to the state constitution, legalizing private pot 
use by most adults and allowing people to grow a small number of plants.

Buying and selling anything but medical marijuana remains illegal 
until the state legislature approves a regulatory framework next year.

Unlike Washington state, where voters also legalized pot in November, 
Colorado's Amendment 64 included no provisions setting a cap on the 
amount of psychoactive THC that a driver could legally have in his or 
her bloodstream.

Washington set its limit at 5 nanograms per milliliter of blood. Two 
other states have set legal limits at 2 nanograms in criminal 
statutes, and several more have zero-tolerance policies.

But the science used to arrive at those limits is relatively young - 
and highly debated - compared with what is known about the effect of 
alcohol on drivers.

This proposal could give jurors and the pot-consuming public a better 
measuring stick of what's safe and will also make it easier for 
prosecutors to win drugged-driving convictions, says House Minority 
Leader Mark Waller.

"It's hugely important. If you ask any person on the street, 'What 
does it mean to be driving under the influence of alcohol, they'll 
talk about (blood-alcohol content). Society has come to know that 
standard," said Waller, R-Colorado Springs. "There's no standard 
associated with marijuana, which is becoming as prevalent as alcohol 
in this state."

A person deciding when he or she has ingested too much pot to drive 
will likely be trickier than counting empty cocktail glasses to gauge 
a blood-alcohol level. Pot potencies vary depending on the strain, 
how the marijuana is consumed and other factors.

Waller is part of the group of police officials, prosecutors, 
lawmakers, defense attorneys and advocacy groups called the 
Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice that crafted the draft 
legislation that Waller will carry this year along with Rep. Rhonda 
Fields, D-Aurora, and state Sen. Steve King, R-Grand Junction.

Waller backed the decision to cut from draft legislation the 
so-called "per se" provision - which said anyone caught at 5 
nanograms or higher was too stoned to drive, period - and instead 
allow pot users to present evidence that they weren't impaired by the 
THC in their system.

Even those who have opposed DUI limits for marijuana in the past, 
such as defense attorney Sean McAllister, acknowledge that the 
compromise on the drugged-driving front will likely lead to the 
passage of a legal standard.

Still, McAllister points out that an amount of THC that would impair 
an infrequent smoker may have little effect on chronic users, such as 
medical-marijuana patients, who typically have much higher base 
levels of the chemical in their systems.

He would like to see that population exempted from the DUI-drugs 
bill, which he thinks will still lead to more DUI convictions of pot users.

"Unless you have some really good facts and experts on your side, 
you're likely to be convicted anyway," McAllister said. "There is an 
unfairness to convicting medical-marijuana patients who aren't taking 
the drug for recreational uses."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom