SUPREME COURT LIMITS DRUG TREATMENT LAW

The state Supreme Court put limits Thursday on a voter-approved law
providing treatment rather than prison for drug users, ruling that the law
doesn't apply to people convicted of driving under the influence of drugs.

Proposition 36, passed in 2000, requires probation and treatment for anyone
convicted of possessing drugs or drug paraphernalia, using drugs or similar
activities, which are not spelled out in the law. It excludes crimes "not
related to the use of drugs," which the court to ruled unanimously included
driving under the influence.

Laws against drug use are primarily intended to protect the user, while DUI
laws are meant to protect the public, said Chief Justice Ronald George. He
also said excusing drug-impaired drivers from jail sentences would treat
them more leniently than drunken drivers and would undermine sentencing
laws that require jail time for repeat DUI convictions.

The court upheld the six-month jail sentence of Michelle Canty, convicted
of driving under the influence of methamphetamine in Tehama County in 2001.
She had sought to be referred to a treatment program instead of jail.