COURT: MARIJUANA LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL

State Justices find DUI Violates Equal Protection

Treating people equally under the law has led the state's Supreme Court to
condemn Georgia's DUI law as it pertained to marijuana.

The Georgia Supreme Court ruled the marijuana-driving under the influence
law is unconstitutional because it treats drivers differently, violating
equal protection under the law. ``If the state creates two classes of
people, it must show a direct relationship to public interest,'' Augusta
attorney Leon Larke said. ``In this case, there was no rational purpose.''

That's what the Supreme Court decided in its June 1 opinion, which was
mailed out in late June. The state cannot justify its position that a
driver with any level of marijuana in his system is guilty under the DUI
law if a driver with a medical prescription for marijuana is not judged the
same.

The law carved out an exception for the medical marijuana user, that such a
person could be convicted of DUI only if it could be proven that he was
impaired.

``In light of ... the fact that the effects of medically prescribed
marijuana are indistinguishable from the effects of recreational use of
marijuana, we are unable to hold that the legislative distinction between
sanctioned and unsanctioned users of marijuana is directly related to the
public safety purpose of the legislation ... Accordingly, we conclude that
the distinction is arbitrarily drawn, and the state is an unconstitutional
denial of equal protection,'' the opinion reads.

Richmond County State Court Solicitor Sheryl Jolly expects to drop less
than 25 pending DUI cases involving marijuana alone without evidence of
impaired driving, she said.

``It did impact some, but it's a relatively small number,'' she said.

Ms. Jolly estimated that of around 50 DUI cases processed through court
each week, maybe five cases involve marijuana without evidence of alcohol.

They have been hard cases to prosecute if the accused sought a jury trial
because there is often little evidence of impaired driving, as compared to
alcohol-related driving, she said.

But, she warned, ``Marijuana cases are still alive and well.''

A driver who uses marijuana can still be prosecuted under the driving less
safe provision, she said. The punishment is equal to DUI, she added.

Ms. Jolly doesn't see the Supreme Court justices condoning marijuana use by
the decision. ``I believe they were concerned with the primary issue of
someone who previously used marijuana but was no longer under the influence
was still presumed guilty of driving under the influence.

``I believe the Supreme Court is requiring the Legislature to come up with
a level (of marijuana metabolites in a person's system) similar to what
level constitutes an impaired driver under the influence of alcohol,'' Ms.
Jolly said.

``The law wasn't fair,'' said Augusta attorney Sam Sibley.

The law didn't take into account that the driver may have gotten the
marijuana metabolites in his system through second-hand smoke or by
ingesting the drug two minutes or two weeks before driving, Mr. Sibley said.