COURT'S MARIJUANA RULING A VICTORY FOR AUTHORITIES

Marijuana users can be arrested for drugged driving weeks after they
toast a joint, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a Jackson
County appeal.

A veteran prosecutor hailed the ruling as a correct interpretation of
the zero-tolerance law that will make enforcement easier. A longtime
defense attorney said the high court has opened the floodgates on
overreaching government.

"This goes to show the Supreme Court does not seem to care about
individual rights," Jackson attorney Jerry Engle said. At issue were
cases from Jackson and Grand Traverse counties. The local case
involved the prosecution of Dennis Kurts for driving under the
influence of marijuana.

Blackman Township police in February 2004 cited Kurts, 44, of Michigan
Center, after he was stopped for driving erratically. He admitted
smoking marijuana, police said. The time frame in which he smoked is
unclear.

A blood test did not detect the narcotic THC, or tetrahydrrocannabinol,
which is in marijuana. Instead, the test showed the presence of
carboxy THC, a benign product of metabolism that can remain in the
blood for a month after marijuana use.

Jackson County Circuit Judge Chad Schmucker dismissed the case in 2004
on the basis that the THC remnant was not an illegal controlled
substance. Wednesday's ruling sends the case back to Schmucker's court.

"The Supreme Court makes it clear carboxy THC is a controlled
substance, and the Michigan Legislature says it is against the law to
drive with any controlled substance in the body," said Jerrold
Schrotenboer, appellate attorney for Prosecutor Hank Zavislak.

Had the ruling gone the other way, prosecutors and defense attorneys
would have to offer dueling expert witnesses to argue the issue,
Schrotenboer said. The high court's ruling considers the THC
derivative and the actual narcotic one in the same, rather than
circumstantial evidence that a driver might have been high.

"This makes it vastly easier for prosecutors to convict on
drugged-driving charges," Schrotenboer said.

That alarms Engle, who argued against Schrotenboer before the Supreme
Court in January. Not all police and prosecutors use discretion, and
some might see the same dollar signs that drive drunken-driving
convictions, Engle said. The Legislature in recent years passed fees
of up to $3,500 against drunken drivers, and those same fees apply to
drugged driving, he said.

"Suppose someone runs a red light into your car. The cop asks if you
have smoked marijuana in the last several weeks," Engle said. "A blood
test shows carboxy THC. The other guy gets a traffic ticket, and you
go to jail."