cannabisnews.com: Idaho Law Hits Legal Pothole in S.F. 





Idaho Law Hits Legal Pothole in S.F. 
Posted by FoM on January 15, 2002 at 16:15:37 PT
By Ray Delgado, Chronicle Staff Writer
Source: San Francisco Chronicle 
Bay Area pot advocates hailed a San Francisco appellate court ruling that allows Idaho residents to legally drive under the influence of marijuana as long as they are not driving erratically and can pass a field sobriety test. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco ruled yesterday that an Idaho man's impaired driving conviction could not stand because while Idaho law makes it illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol and narcotics, it doesn't classify marijuana as a narcotic. 
The ruling overturned the conviction of 21-year-old Matthew Patzer, who was pulled over by police in September 1998 because of a broken tailgate light but wasn't driving erratically and passed a field sobriety test. The ruling also overturned an illegal weapons conviction against Patzer, who had a cache of homemade grenades and weapons in his truck when he was pulled over. Although the ruling involves a technicality in Idaho law and has no effect on California drivers, marijuana advocates hailed the decision because it recognized a state's drug laws over stronger federal laws that do classify marijuana as an illegal substance. "It's a good ruling for state's rights elements," said Jeff Jones, the executive director of the Oakland Cannabis Club. "I'd like to see the ability for states to implement local laws over the existing federal laws." Dale Gieringer, the coordinator of California's chapter of NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, also supported the ruling because of the impairment standard that it held up. "It makes a lot of sense to show that somebody must be impaired and studies have shown that marijuana users aren't as dangerous on the roads as those who drink," Gieringer said. Gieringer said that law enforcement officers throughout the country should rely solely on field sobriety tests to determine someone's impairment in cases involving all drugs and alcohol and not automatically arrest somebody because they admitted to using marijuana. "When somebody's really stoned, they have a hard time balancing on one foot, " Gieringer said. "It depends on the person, it depends on the pot. You can't measure it in joints. That's why the field sobriety test is what should be used to determine it." According to Gieringer, a National Highway Transportation Administration study conducted in the Netherlands showed that drivers who smoked marijuana drove more cautiously than those who consumed equal amounts of alcohol, who tended to speed up and overcompensate for their diminished capacity. "There is obviously a level of impairment but it's not as high as alcohol," said Gieringer. NORML's Web site also cites a study conducted in Australia that showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free. The research, done by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and an Australian transportation organization, said the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant but could be explained by anecdotal evidence that marijuana smokers were more cautious and drove more slowly because of altered time perception. It is unclear what action will be taken in Idaho as a result of the San Francisco ruling. Idaho Senate Judiciary Chairman Denton Darrington said he had assumed marijuana was a narcotic under state law, and that the statute might need to be reviewed. But he questioned whether yesterday's decision would hold up on appeal. Patzer's attorney, Fredilyn Sison of the office of the Federal Defenders of Eastern Washington and Idaho, applauded the decision. Chronicle news services contributed to this report. Note:  Advocates say ruling good for states' rights. Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)Author: Ray Delgado, Chronicle Staff WriterPublished: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 Copyright: 2002 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 11Contact: letters sfchronicle.comWebsite: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/Related Articles & Web Site:California NORMLhttp://www.canorml.org/ Idaho OKs Marijuana With Driving http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11763.shtmlCannabis May Make You a Safer Driverhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6717.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by FoM on January 15, 2002 at 21:12:03 PT
Sheetrock
Oh it makes my nose hurt just to think that someone might have snorted sheetrock. Yuk.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Jose Melendez on January 15, 2002 at 20:50:50 PT:
The new Prohibition
Check out this letter to the editor about the sheetrock scandal.
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n064/a02.html?397
POLICE CHIEF VALIANTLY FIGHTS THE SCOURGE OF SHEETROCK 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Jose Melendez on January 15, 2002 at 20:25:29 PT:
Close, but about that cigar...
From:
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n060/a07.html?397
Source: Wall Street Journal (US)
Copyright: 2002 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Contact: letter.editor wsj.com
Website: http://www.wsj.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/487
Author: Gary Fields
GOP SENATORS' BILL WOULD ADDRESS DISPARITY IN COCAINE-SENTENCING LAWS WASHINGTON -- In this city, sometimes only the unlikeliest politicians can force action on an issue. In the latest instance of this "Nixon to China" syndrome, a pair of tough-on-crime senators are addressing the disparate sentences meted out for crack and powder-cocaine offenses. 
Just as Congress recessed for the holidays, two conservative Republican senators -- Alabama's Jeff Sessions and Orrin Hatch of Utah -- introduced a bill to narrow the 100-to-1 ratio representing the amount of powder cocaine and the small amount of its crack form that, respectively, mandate five years of prison time for distributing the drug. 
Narrow? How about the disparity on cannabis vs. tobacco or alcohol? It is nice to see Republicans doing something right though, certainly people like Darrington give more weight to people with conservative views. Like not wasting government money on caging people for getting high...
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n060/a07.html?397
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by goneposthole on January 15, 2002 at 20:19:38 PT
I do not like caviar
I wish it would be banned for human consumption. The sturgeon fish stock in the Caspian Sea is in an asymmetric population dispersion. Their roe, caviar, fetches up to 1,000 USD
per kilogram. Outrageous, I think an international law should be enforced prohibiting the taking of all species of sturgean and their roe. Bring jail time for anyone caught violating these laws. All trade, buying or selling, and consumption should be strictly prohibited.Just because I do not like caviar.We should identify every species in each kingdom; animal, plant and protist. Lobby for international laws concerning their relationship to humans. It is the only right thing to do. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by QcStrt on January 15, 2002 at 18:00:53 PT
        Suckup
Idaho Senate Judiciary Chairman Denton Darrington said he had assumed marijuana was a 
narcotic under state law, and that the statute might need to be reviewed. It is time for every one to write this man and tell him to leave the laws well enough alone.
unless he is trying to put a feather he his hat, and like his nose up the shrubs butt.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on January 15, 2002 at 16:19:51 PT
Go after the tailgaters PLEEEAAAASE
The drivers I wish would be targeted for tickets on the highways are those drivers who really believe that staying two or three car lengths behind the person ahead of them at 80 mph is really a good safe way to drive.I'll bet they won't find a single pot smoker among that crowd.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment