cannabisnews.com: Attorney Challenges Law in Williams' Case Attorney Challenges Law in Williams' Case Posted by CN Staff on June 26, 2002 at 08:24:11 PT By Sean Whaley, Review-Journal Capital Bureau Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal Jessica Williams should have her conviction overturned in connection with the death of six Las Vegas teen-agers working along the freeway in 2000 because she was found guilty under an unconstitutional law, her attorney told the Supreme Court on Tuesday. Also, in a one-hour hearing before the seven-member court, Las Vegas attorney John Watkins said the Clark County district attorney's office failed to preserve properly a blood sample for independent tests, and he questioned the validity of the test performed by the district attorney's office. "You can't put someone in prison if the test is not accurate," Watkins told the court. "The state's test was unscientific, illogical and would not pass a sixth-grade science teacher's scrutiny." Williams was sentenced to 18 to 48 years in prison for driving her Ford minivan into the teens, who were picking up trash in the median of Interstate 15 on March 19, 2000. Clark County Deputy District Attorney Bruce Nelson said the law passed by the Legislature in 1999 is constitutional. The law prohibits drivers from having specified levels of illegal drugs in their blood or urine. Williams exceeded the levels for marijuana in tests performed by the prosecution, and her case will be the first challenge of the law to the Supreme Court. "In sum, their constitutional arguments are zero," Nelson told the court. Nelson rejected Watkins' claim that the test used by a jury to convict Williams was flawed or that Williams' case was harmed by the deterioration of one of her blood samples Watkins had tested more than 10 months after it was collected. Watkins challenged the 1999 law under the equal protection and rational basis clauses of the constitution. He argued that the levels of marijuana set by the Legislature for a conviction of driving while under the influence of a controlled substance were unscientific. Such trace amounts of marijuana could in no way be correlated with driving while impaired, he said. Justice Deborah Agosti asked Watkins if he thought the drug law was not similar to the statute for driving under the influence of alcohol. It sets a blood alcohol limit of 0.10 percent to be presumed guilty of the offense. But Watkins said upholding the drug law, which he said offers no valid medical connection between the use of a drug and impairment, could lead to prosecution of any drug user if they were involved in a car crash. "You are being punished because you used," he said. Testimony at trial showed that Williams, now 23, and a friend used the drug Ecstasy about 10 hours before the accident, then stayed up all night talking. In the morning they drove to Valley of Fire, where they smoked marijuana about two hours before the accident. They ate lunch, climbed some rocks and started back to Las Vegas. At 1:40 p.m., the minivan driven by Williams drifted into the median of I-15 near the Las Vegas Motor Speedway and ran into the teens, who had been assigned to pick up garbage as part of a youth offenders program. Killed were Anthony Smith, 14; Scott Garner Jr., 14; Alberto Puig, 16; Maleyna Stoltzfus, 15; Rebeccah Glicken, 15; and Jennifer Booth, 16.Note: Justices hear criticism of 1999 drug law. Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV)Author: Sean Whaley, Review-Journal Capital BureauPublished: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas Review-JournalContact: letters lvrj.comWebsite: http://www.lvrj.com/Related Articles:Williams Files Appeal, Challenges Drug Lawhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10040.shtmlJudge: Blood Test Cannot Be Used in Crash Case http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9683.shtmlBlaming Jessica: Drug Use, DUI or Reckless Driving http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8796.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #2 posted by westnyc on June 26, 2002 at 11:40:08 PT November NV Ballot Well! Coincidence! I'll bet the house that the antis will use this tragic incident to promote continued prohibition this November. The death of six kids all because some MJ drug-abuser, hooked-on weed, went into a drug fueled driving frenzy. Does anyone think the antis will use this to fuel anti MJ propaganda in NV this year? If so, do you think the battle for responsibilty in this state is already over? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by John Markes on June 26, 2002 at 09:00:14 PT another possibility... It should also be ruled inadmissable because tests for marijuana do not test for the constituent that gets you high (THC), but for a non-psychoactive metabolic byproduct from it's beakdown in the body. A person could possibly use that to show they couldn't be under the influence as it has all been broken down in order for the test to register whatever it showed... ARDPArk [ Post Comment ] Post Comment