Legal question...driving under influence?

KFC911 · 03-04-2015, 11:25 AM

I'm going to be contacting the DA's office, but wanted to ask the PPOT brain trust too. What are the legal implications for someone who insists upon driving while taking relatively high doses of methadone (pain management, not H withdrawal) from a clinic? The docs seem to think it's OK, but I've had two LEOs tell me the exact opposite....I dunno. I suspect it's relative (i.e. 1 beer is OK, 6 isn't), and the person would NOT appear to be impaired normally FWIW. A Highway Patrol cop told my friend and I a few years ago that "he" wasn't going to charge my friend's wife with DUI (even though she "nodded out" on prescription Morphine and totaled 3 cars...fortunately no SERIOUS injuries) but that if she had caused any, that the DA would likely charge her with some serious chit (and rightfully so imo) even if it wasn't her fault.

My take: If you're taking VERY high levels of narcotics ...don't drive even if you don't appear intoxicated. I'm pretty sure we can all agree on that, but I'm specifically looking at the legal aspects now. Thanks in advance...

Todge · 03-04-2015, 11:36 AM

Short answer.....Same as driving under the influence of alcohol. Impaired driving is impaired driving. At least that's how it is here in CA.

Longer more uninteresting detailed answer.....(In CA) there are two sections for driving under the influence. One is driving under the influence, a misdemeanor which encompasses alcohol/drugs. The second section is for .08% BAC or more. Typically, someone driving drunk is going to get charged with both sections. Someone under the influence of drugs can just be charged with the first section.

As far as penalties go, the courts see the violation as the same, the DMV views driving under the influence of drugs slightly better? The DMV repercussions aren't as bad for a driver under the influence of drugs vs one under the influence of alcohol (in terms of suspensions and license restrictions).

Now, in any state, it doesn't matter if you're taking a small dosage, one small enough where its not affecting your ability to drive. Unfortunately for your scenario, Methadone is not an easy one to hide, as far as the symptoms.

Hope that answers it!
Todge

KFC911 · 03-04-2015, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todge

....Now, in any state, it doesn't matter if you're taking a small dosage, one small enough where its not affecting your ability to drive. Unfortunately for your scenario, Methadone is not an easy one to hide, as far as the symptoms.

Hope that answers it!
Todge

Thanks Todge! I equate this person with a "drinker" who can down several drinks (and "appear" to be perfectly sober due to tolerances) but would certainly be over the legal limit for driving per the law. Individual is not the greatest driver to begin with and does NOT appear to be impared....what happens if an accident occurs?

Jeff Higgins · 03-04-2015, 12:55 PM

Here in Washington, the "legal limit" is widely misunderstood. .08% BAC is the "legal limit" before which you are prosecuted for a DUI. Anything under .08% BAC can still be prosecuted (and in our money grubbing state usually is) as a "negligent 1" charge. You can pass every test they give you, but if your driving is suspect and the officer deems you to be "impaired", you will get the negligent 1 charge. They use that for drug impairment as well. And, truth be told, it's actually harder to beat a neg 1 than a DUI, because so much rests upon the officer's "judgement".

LakeCleElum · 03-04-2015, 01:59 PM

It's all black and white when it comes down to a Toxicology Report. Doc's should be aware of limits. Their advice would usually border on being conservative to avoid getting sued in case of a crash. Some reading for you:

Toxicology and pathology of deaths related to methadone: retrospective review
http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/drug_toxicology_for_prosecutors_04.pdf