Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Super_C_Complex t1_iwm88oe wrote

Reply to comment by sintactacle in Chester County man convicted of 12th DUI: Lancaster DA by sintactacle

Yeah no. He did State time on his last DUI. 1 year minimum.

But on this one. It appears it was a marijuana DUI. Which means he could be in full compliance with the medical marijuana act, and then drive to Wawa and end up in jail. It's horseshit.

But sure. He's only getting a license suspension. /S

−23

AlVic40117560_ t1_iwmbns5 wrote

How does the medical marijuana act work? Are you allowed to drive with THC in your system?

17

ult420 t1_iwmcszj wrote

No, but it stays in the system for 30 days. Every time a patient drives it’s a gamble for a dui. People have been trying to change this for a while

18

AlVic40117560_ t1_iwmdrt6 wrote

Got it. Is there another effective way to detect if somebody is currently high vs just that they have smoked weed within the past 30 days? If you smoked weed 2 weeks ago, you’re obviously fine to drive today so that way of doing it seems pretty off base.

5

Petkorazzi t1_iwmgl5j wrote

Well, it's tricky. Normally a field sobriety test would be a good general indicator but THC doesn't cause horizontal gaze nystagmus so it's more subjective. Plus cops lie, so...yeah.

To my knowledge there's no "weed breathalyzer" and even if there were THC concentrations aren't necessarily indicative of level of impairment.

Haven't had the chance to look at the legal codes for states that have legal cannabis usage but I'd be curious to see what they've got on the books for this.

15

SlutMachine t1_iwn38hm wrote

They are about to pilot the breathalyzer in Warren county.

1

Super_C_Complex t1_iwmi7hw wrote

Can't drive with any amount if THC or metabolite in your system

It's dumb

8

signedpants t1_iwmctm2 wrote

No, weed reduces your reaction time and you can't drive with it in your system.

−13

acm8221 t1_iwmqyaj wrote

Weed reduces your reaction time while you're high. THC stays in your system for 30 days. You aren't impaired for 30 straight days.

24

ActualPopularMonster t1_iwmy8mr wrote

>You aren't impaired for 30 straight days.

You are if you get high every day.

But seriously, yeah, you're right.

7

signedpants t1_iwmrhc7 wrote

That's correct and I'm not quite sure where they are on creating a new test for it. I think I read Colorado and Oregon (maybe?) were trying to create a new test that accounts for that, but for now there's some unfair stuff around DUIs with weed in your system. Better safe than sorry.

−3

zorioneku t1_iwnoe4e wrote

>The DA’s office stated that a State Trooper observed Caraballo driving a red 2002 Dodge Ram southbound on State Route 472. He was observed crossing the center line and fog line multiple times and nearly struck an oncoming vehicle,

So it wasn’t just “oh he had some THC in his system muahahaha we got him” this guy was a clear and present danger to himself and others.

8

thunderGunXprezz t1_iwofpys wrote

I mean he was driving under a suspension anyway so the dui at that point is kinda tertiary. I feel like driving under a suspension should be a lifetime ban anyway regardless of the circumstances. You're knowingly breaking a law and thus should be forced to give up that privilege for life.

6

Super_C_Complex t1_iwohau1 wrote

Here's a fun fact.

Cops lie. A lot Specially during trials

1

zorioneku t1_iwqg0wi wrote

A) there should be dash cam footage to support this

B) cops do lie, a lot

C) which is more likely- the cops have lied about this one guy 12 times, or he’s a habitual drunk driver who should never be allowed behind the wheel again.

3

Super_C_Complex t1_iwrdvob wrote

> which is more likely- the cops have lied about this one guy 12 times, or he’s a habitual drunk driver who should never be allowed behind the wheel again

That the cops saw that he was suspended for DUI and used that....

0

zorioneku t1_iwrft1s wrote

I am as skeptical of the police as the next guy, but really have a hard time believing there is a vast conspiracy targeting this guy.

If his license was already suspended, he shouldn’t have been driving in the first place- let alone driving impaired again.

This jerk is lucky he didn’t kill someone!

1

Super_C_Complex t1_iwrgk1h wrote

It's not about just this guy

Police are notoriously shit about being honest about why they pull someone over.

As a defense attorney, I routinely see people pulled over for de minimis infractions.

And I don't see the people pulled over for de minimis infractions for the wrong reason that aren't ultimately charged with anything

1

zorioneku t1_iwrlbpm wrote

Thank you for your work, defense attorneys are a critical part of the justice system.

In this particular scenario though, I think it’s fair to focus on this individual rather than a systemic issue.

There’s no reason he should have been driving at all. He deserves a fair trial and a vigorous defense, but if he’s convicted I fully believe he should be incarcerated.

1

Super_C_Complex t1_iws88lt wrote

Fun fact. If he were to be pulled over now with marijuana in his system. He would be charged with a second degree felony with a maximum of ten years, which by state is required to be imposed. He would also be looking at, I believe but I'm not 100% sure since it's a new last, that it would be a 2 year mandatory minimum which would, again by law, have to be served consecutive to any other sentence he is currently serving or that would be imposed

2

zorioneku t1_iws8w8d wrote

If he’s pulled over NOW ?!? For a Baker’s dozen of DUIs?

My guy should never be allowed to drive again.

1

SilentHunter7 t1_iwproq2 wrote

So do addicts. If you were on the jury, who would you believe? A guy who got suspended for DUI 12 times insisting he's innocent, or the officer with dash cam footage?

2