Posted on 07/06/2007 8:05:29 PM PDT by Coleus
A state appeals court yesterday ruled drivers who are hung over from using cocaine can be considered impaired even if the drug is no longer in their systems. In a 3-0 ruling that expands the legal meaning of "under the influence," the judges ruled a Cape May County driver, who had taken cocaine but was not intoxicated when police stopped him, was still 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 While the cocaine was no longer active it was the "proximate cause of his impaired behavior," the judges found.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." The reaction to the decision was swift from experts in the field and lawyers in the case, who said it could 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?"
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
I assume this must include driving with a classic alcohol hangover, too, bleary-eyed, head throbbing, with a mouth tasting like vacuum-cleaner entrails.
Dixon was alive again. Consciousness was upon him before he could get out of the way; not for him the slow, gracious wandering from the halls of sleep, but a summary, forcible ejection. He lay sprawled, too wicked to move, spewed up like a broken spider crab on the tarry shingle of the morning. The light did him harm, but not as much as looking at things did; he resolved, having done it once, never to move his eyeballs again. A dusty thudding in his head made the scene before him beat like a pulse. His mouth had been used as a latrine by some small creature of the night, and then as its mausoleum. During the night, too, he’d somehow been on a cross-country run and then been expertly beaten up by secret police. He felt bad.— Kingsley Amis, Lucky Jim.
“dusty thudding...”
Nothing beats good writing.
Proximate cause? My, that is far-reaching. The possibilities are endless.
About this.... Drugs aren't healthy but this could turn ugly. If you take a prescribed pain pill and drive tomorrow, if a trace shows in your system are you impaired?
Paging Al Gore III, paging Al Gore III...
The HANGOVER is PROOF that there is life after death.... :-)
This is over the top. You either IZZ or you ain’t!
If you ain’t, there should be no charges filed. Too
big of a stretch!
Oldplayer
I’ve had quick onset migraines that were far worse than any hangover. I’d be screwed because the cops would swear it was a hangover.
lesson here is to not submit to a blood test after passing a breath test.
hangover also an impairment
You’re damned right it is now will you please shut up!
If you take a prescribed pain pill and drive tomorrow, if a trace shows in your system are you impaired?
Or if you have a bad case of the flu or severe allergies? Define “impaired.”
What about lack of sleep? Or an illness—such as the flu, or cancer, or congestive heart failure?
How about being tired from a night of wild sex?
:::::
The courts, like every other branch of government, has gone power-mad. And legislation from the bench, as illegal as it is, is appearing more and more. Thanks to the liberal mindset of power-mad pols.
what about an IQ under 80, or complete social ignorance? Those people need not be on the road either.
“it was the ‘proximate cause of his impaired behavior,’ the judges found.”
What’s the “proximate cause” of idiotic rulings by Judges:
Low IQ? Attendance at Harvard?
Maybe it’s the infamous Petter Principle that says “everyone rises to their own level of incompetence.”
I wonder if this includes PMS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.