Massachusetts top court rules field sobriety tests not definitive for cannabis impairment

Abiqua

Well-Known Member
http://www.jurist.org/paperchase/2017/09/massachusetts-top-court-rules-field-sobriety-tests-not-definitive-for-marijuana-impairment.php


[JURIST] The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court[official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Tuesday that evidence of a field sobriety test is not conclusive evidence of driving under the influence of marijuana.

The court found that although there is clear scientific evidence that the field sobriety test performance can be used to measure blood alcohol content of at least 0.08 percent, no scientific evidence exists showing the correlation of performance on the sobriety tests and marijuana intoxication.

The case involved a challenge to the admissibility of field sobriety test results as evidence in driving under the influence of marijuana cases. The court ruled that the evidence can still be admitted, but there are restrictions to how it is to be presented.

Instead of "field sobriety tests," the tests will instead be referred to as "roadside assessments." There shall also be no statements regarding if driver "passed" or "failed" the assessment and no statement can be made that the results indicated impairment.

The results of the roadside assessments can still be used to indicate a driver's "balance, coordination, mental acuity, and other skills necessary to safely operate a motor vehicle." However, it cannot be used as a definitive test of impairment.

The court also ruled that because there is no scientific consensus on the physical characteristics that indicate marijuana intoxication, no lay person may "offer an opinion as to the defendant's sobriety or intoxication," although they still may still testify on the defendant's observable appearance, behavior, and demeanor."

In December, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker delayed [JURIST report] the implementation of a voter approved marijuana legalization initiative by six months. Licensing of cannabis shops is now scheduled to begin July 1, 2018.
 

greg nr

Well-Known Member
I love this state. ;)

In Massachusetts, you are under no legal obligation to take field sobriety tests and can refuse the tests without any adverse consequences. but you can't refuse a field breathalyzer (or blood test if they arrest you but they need cause to do that). They can take you to a hospital for a blood draw if they arrest you, but again, there is no standard for blood levels and impairment.

So it looks like you should ask if you are being detained, and tell them you are exercising your right to remain silent. Refuse the assessment, and force them to justify a blood test.
 

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Bummer, now if they find a roach in your car you are fucked. Its all about money. Bail, lawyers, fines.
 

greg nr

Well-Known Member
Bummer, now if they find a roach in your car you are fucked. Its all about money. Bail, lawyers, fines.
They passed an open container law along with the other changes recently. Even unburnt flower or joints will get you a citation similar to an open bottle of vodka. They have to be out of reach. Like in a trunk.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
http://www.jurist.org/paperchase/2017/09/massachusetts-top-court-rules-field-sobriety-tests-not-definitive-for-marijuana-impairment.php


[JURIST] The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court[official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Tuesday that evidence of a field sobriety test is not conclusive evidence of driving under the influence of marijuana.

The court found that although there is clear scientific evidence that the field sobriety test performance can be used to measure blood alcohol content of at least 0.08 percent, no scientific evidence exists showing the correlation of performance on the sobriety tests and marijuana intoxication.

The case involved a challenge to the admissibility of field sobriety test results as evidence in driving under the influence of marijuana cases. The court ruled that the evidence can still be admitted, but there are restrictions to how it is to be presented.

Instead of "field sobriety tests," the tests will instead be referred to as "roadside assessments." There shall also be no statements regarding if driver "passed" or "failed" the assessment and no statement can be made that the results indicated impairment.

The results of the roadside assessments can still be used to indicate a driver's "balance, coordination, mental acuity, and other skills necessary to safely operate a motor vehicle." However, it cannot be used as a definitive test of impairment.

The court also ruled that because there is no scientific consensus on the physical characteristics that indicate marijuana intoxication, no lay person may "offer an opinion as to the defendant's sobriety or intoxication," although they still may still testify on the defendant's observable appearance, behavior, and demeanor."

In December, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker delayed [JURIST report] the implementation of a voter approved marijuana legalization initiative by six months. Licensing of cannabis shops is now scheduled to begin July 1, 2018.
This needs to go nationwide. In some states, a field sobriety test with determination by the officer that the driver was DUI due to MJ will be placed in your record even if subsequent blood test shows no MJ in your system. If any thc is found -- ANY -- and the state is a prohibition state, you'll be charged regardless of how small the amount was.
 

Abiqua

Well-Known Member
This needs to go nationwide. In some states, a field sobriety test with determination by the officer that the driver was DUI due to MJ will be placed in your record even if subsequent blood test shows no MJ in your system. If any thc is found -- ANY -- and the state is a prohibition state, you'll be charged regardless of how small the amount was.
I agree but even the seemingly "Gotchas" were turned over real quick and really when was the last time you saw a car accident headline not including the former governors son, Logan, recently, that was cannabis related in 503? its been a bit....

remember this pedestrian death across the river just after the vote for M91, the driver was charged, but then let go. Now part of that was the circumstances albeit, but he did [like a fucking dumbass [facepalm]] admit to being high or consuming before they drove......thats a seperate issue however
Basically my point is I heartily agree and I go one step further, just about everywhere they have tried to implement this crap, it has essentially failed, thats the good news. Bad news, is we know LEO, doesn't really give a fuck in some situations either and science is clearly disdained is this case, otherwise they things would never stand up realistic common sense :peace: ....


http://kval.com/news/local/police-driver-high-on-marijuana-hits-kills-pedestrian-in-vancouver
 

Abiqua

Well-Known Member
They passed an open container law along with the other changes recently. Even unburnt flower or joints will get you a citation similar to an open bottle of vodka. They have to be out of reach. Like in a trunk.
I remember trips, long trips too, with the Volcano car kit. Would have never made it otherwise. I drive a lot unfortunately, but I also have chronic back pain, like Dilaudid worthy back pain, but cannabis keeps it in check and I haven't done a pill in 20 years. The VA wanted to give me 12 types one time.....fuck that
My problem is I still need surgery, although I will probably just deal.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
I remember trips, long trips too, with the Volcano car kit. Would have never made it otherwise. I drive a lot unfortunately, but I also have chronic back pain, like Dilaudid worthy back pain, but cannabis keeps it in check and I haven't done a pill in 20 years. The VA wanted to give me 12 types one time.....fuck that
My problem is I still need surgery, although I will probably just deal.
I can't recall ever hearing someone say "man, I'm glad I had that back surgery!" It's almost always a horror story. I'd pass on that shit if I were you...especially if weed helps keep it in check.
 
Top