It's really not surprising to hear that about Colorado Springs. Aren't recreational dispensaries still banned in the city limits?
Regarding Oklahoma I'd say this is noteworthy.
https://oklahoman.com/article/565260...rs-in-december
I wonder how long it's going to be before the national GOP finally comes around on cannabis. Support for legalization at the grassroots level is bipartisan at this point but in terms of the politicians, we have a situation where most Republicans are against it and most Democrats are for it.
His advice, shut up and no field tests I get, but the article is less clear about blood test. If you don't, it's automatic suspension of your license for up to three years. Let's say you used some MJ a couple of nights ago legally and blood test shows positive two days later. Then what? Since there is no threshold, automatic charge for DUI which a lawyer would then attempt to challenge on various defenses, like illegal stop? Maybe argue that you weren’t impaired?
Yep, part of why I posted it.
Really hard to answer this in a nutshell but will give basic. It is a catch 22. If you refuse the test, you will lose your license for refusing to take a state's test. That will carry a 180 day if first time or 1 year or 3 years if prior revocations. If yu take the test and only have marijuana in your system....there is no license loss as long as you don't take a conviction for DUI on criminal side. Although taking the test will show presence, we can ask for an independent test which will show active vs. inactive metabolites which can be argued that you are not impaired. A lot of this depends on the facts of each case. If the officer is asking you to take the test, then you have already been arrested and you are going to get a DUI charge whether you take the test.
Thanks for the input!
Moonmix with another recall.
I hope Jeep can answer this, but what are the chances of a class action lawsuit since they advertise 100% pesticide free on their packaging?
I would think possible. However, unless you can show some type of physical harm.....damages would be very limited. Would be easy to determine the class though as I assume (but could easily be mistaken) each sale is recorded and then would be able to determine who is in the class. The question is whether there are sufficient insurance or assets. Doesn't do any good to get a judgment if they don't have anything to recover. Ie...can't squeeze blood out of a turnip.
Is there any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, regarding the frequency of DUI arrests for cannabis since the legalization of medical? Just wondering I suppose how often someone has been pulled over and DUI'd for cannabis intoxication. Anecdotally, are the law enforcement groups starting to realize the sheer scope of users, and just simply let's say write the speeding ticket, even though the person ticketed may smell of cannabis?
We are one of the two (if not the largest) largest DUI Defense firms in the State. I haven't seen any actual numbers but I can tell you that we haven't seen any major increase in DUI-D charges since the law change. There has been a few but not a lot. The same guy that would drive impaired now would have been driving impaired before with the only difference being now he bought it legally. If I get a chance today...I'll see if there are any readily available numbers.
You still have to have probable cause for an arrest so if you are taking theraputic levels and aren't impaired...the officer will have difficulty establishing PC for arrest.
Thank you for taking the time to answer. Are there legally accepted rules for cannabis field sobriety tests, or are there just field sobriety tests? Which then of course devolves into the whole mess of what is "impairment" for a medical cannabis user, and how that might be litigated. Coming up on 2 years since implementation, strange there is not a lot of public knowledge with respect to medical. I know people that have not been without a cannabis high for multiple decades.... and show none of the outward signs that a regular person would consider impairment ala alcohol or pills. Yet, if arrested by a cop as they are "expert witnesses" they would test positive according to the levels measurable as listed above. But my understanding is that no state has really come to full grips with this issue. Thanks again!
I'd be curious to hear an attorney's thoughts on how this would stand up in court.
https://www.news9.com/story/5ec4947b...-pilot-program
Lol. I remember talking to TLO but never saw the story.
To answer the other question Standardized Field Sobriety Tests were designed and tested for alcohol impairment. Police also now use DRE (Drug Recognition Evaluation) which was designed by 2 LA cops. They try and claim some validity to it but it is basically junk voodoo. After their SFST course (40 hours), DRE school is a 7 day course (taught by cops...not toxicologists, pharmacists or medical professional) in which supposedly the officer can determine not only that you are impaired but can determine what you are impaired by.
That sounds like the "have someone write out a statement and you can solve an investigation by looking at their wording choices" thing I saw go by earlier this year. Why do police use so many investigation methodologies that are just trash? Rhetorical question, of course.
Good news here with several other states now legalizing. Oregon just decriminalized ALL drugs which is a great step forward.
https://apple.news/ANgJxy5ZfSeSIaNN8U4I3_Q
South Dakota passed full legalization last night, both rec & med. If that state can pass rec, then I would think the same thing stands a pretty good chance of passing in Oklahoma whenever it gets onto the ballot.
I just wish we could legalize recreational before it gets legalized nationally. We could be pulling in money hand over fist from Texas and other surrounding states right now with recreational marijuana. Although our medical is basically recreational already, you still have to have an Oklahoma address. It’s basically recreational for okies only. Absolutely stupid to leave all of that potential revenue on the table. Especially since recreational becoming legal nation wide is inevitable anyway.
Agree with this. Living in CO, l was against rec. pot at first but there is definitely a negative correlation between pot use and alcohol use. DUIs dropped 15% the first 3 years.
The main suggestions l would have for OK, if it hasn't already been changed, is to allow communities to opt out if they wish and to limit where shops can be and prevent concentrations.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks