cannabisnews.com: Officials To Fight Marijuana Loophole Officials To Fight Marijuana Loophole Posted by FoM on January 21, 2002 at 19:30:46 PT By Sean Ellis - Journal Writer Source: Idaho State Journal Bannock County Sheriff Lorin Nielsen is happy some legislators will try to close a loophole in the law that may allow people to drive high on marijuana in Idaho as long as they don’t drive recklessly. “Any kind of impairment is a danger to you when you’re driving,” Nielsen said. “You need to be in full control of your faculties.” In overturning an impaired driving conviction, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Jan. 14 that a loophole in Idaho law means marijuana users can drive legally as long as they don’t drive erratically and can pass a field sobriety test. A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based court wrote that Idaho’s impaired driving law makes it illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol and narcotics. But Idaho doesn’t list marijuana as a narcotic. “I am reviewing the court’s decision ... and sure enough, our code does not define marijuana as a narcotic. It has a separate definition of its own,” said Idaho Senate Judiciary Chairman Denton Darrington, R-Declo, in an interview with the Journal last week. “We will analyze it and take a look ... and see what we can do that’s useful to solve this problem,” Darrington said. “Obviously, we don’t want a bunch of marijuana smokers who may be impaired driving vehicles in the state of Idaho.” “The reason people smoke marijuana is because of the impairment it causes and they should not be driving,” Nielsen said. Michael J. Fica, an assistant U.S. attorney in Pocatello, said the government was considering asking the circuit court to review its decision, or requesting the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. Darrington said he hopes the decision is appealed successfully to the U.S. Supreme Court, because of the circuit court’s reputation for being overturned by the Supreme Court. “But that takes a lot of time,” Darrington added. “In the meantime, we’ve got a message out there that says, ‘You can smoke marijuana and drive in Idaho.’ That’s a message we don’t particularly want out.” Nielsen said “Senator Darrington has been a very good supporter of law enforcement” and hopes “our Legislature takes a good, hard look at this and corrects it this session.” “I would support closing the loophole,” Rep. Kent Kunz, R-Pocatello, said. “I think it’s likely to (be reviewed this session) now that it’s been highlighted with the overturning of this case,” said Sen. Evan Frasure, R-Pocatello. “We are already in communication with the attorney general’s office and the governor’s office.” Frasure said re-examining the law could open up an opportunity to take a look at some of the newer designer drugs. Idaho Attorney General Al Lance’s office issued a press release this week that said the court’s decision “does not overturn Idaho’s prohibition against driving a vehicle while under the influence of marijuana.” Lance said driving under the influence of any intoxicating substances is prohibited by Idaho Code 18-8004(1)(a), which states, “It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of alcohol, drugs or any other intoxicating substances....” “The Ninth Circuit did not consider or make any reference to Idaho Code ... in deciding the case,” Lance said. “There should be no misunderstanding; it is a crime to drive while under the influence of marijuana in the state of Idaho.” The court said that because marijuana is not listed as a narcotic, Matthew Patzer could not automatically be presumed impaired, like motorists who have been drinking alcohol. After a New Plymouth police officer noticed his glassy eyes, Patzer admitted to smoking marijuana at a party on Sept. 27, 1988. Patzer passed two field sobriety tests before being arrested for driving impaired. “Given the distinction drawn by the statute, there is no basis to conclude that impairment may be presumed upon admission of use of a non-narcotic drug,” the appeals court wrote. Note: Court rejects impaired driving conviction. Source: Idaho State Journal (ID)Author: Sean Ellis - Journal Writer Published: January 21, 2002Copyright: 2002 Idaho State JournalContact: letters journalnet.comWebsite: http://www.journalnet.com/Related Articles:Idaho Law Hits Legal Pothole in S.F. http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11769.shtmlIdaho OKs Marijuana With Driving http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11763.shtmlCannabis May Make You a Safer Driverhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6717.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by i420 on January 22, 2002 at 04:43:33 PT Forget the ballot box sic em at the cash register. No more prohibitionist Idaho Potatoes for me!! I am BUYING CANADIAN !!! Support marijuana reform don't buy AMERIKAN prohibition ONLY BUY CANADIAN PRODUCTS !! [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Elfman_420 on January 21, 2002 at 21:04:11 PT Any impairment is dangerous, but not illegal “Any kind of impairment is a danger to you when you’re driving,” Nielsen said. “You need to be in full control of your faculties.” There are a lot of impairments that are not illegal: Radio, conversation, eating, smoking tobacco, cell phones, and the biggest one of all which DS mentioned, fatigue. These are all 'legal' impairments, and there are many more on the list.The thing I like about this loophole is that it requires the failure of an impairment test for conviction. I have no problem with this, as I would have no problem passing an impairment test high. Also, if somebody can pass an impairment test, by definition they are not impaired, so why should they get in trouble for being impaired? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Dark Star on January 21, 2002 at 20:03:22 PT Muddled Thinking “The reason people smoke marijuana is because of the impairment it causes and they should not be driving,” Nielsen said. Oh, that's not the only reason. Heard of medicine, mister?"The court said that because marijuana is not listed as a narcotic, Matthew Patzer could not automatically be presumed impaired, like motorists who have been drinking alcohol."“Given the distinction drawn by the statute, there is no basis to conclude that impairment may be presumed upon admission of use of a non-narcotic drug,” the appeals court wrote. Amen. If Marinol can be legal for driving, than cannabis must have logically equal candidacy. This is the only reasonable standard. Most road accidents are secondary to fatigue, but it ain't illegal yet. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment