COURT: TRACE OF POT IS ENOUGH

Motorists Can Be Charged Even If Not Intoxicated

TRAVERSE CITY -- Any trace of marijuana in a driver's blood could mean
stiff penalties after a crash if someone is injured and killed, even
if the driver was not impaired, a sharply divided state Supreme Court
ruled.

The decision came after the court considered two cases, including a
Grand Traverse County case of a woman who lost control of her sport
utility vehicle in snowy conditions on M-72 and crashed into a car.
The crash killed a passenger in the car and left two girls, then 10
and 11 years old, paralyzed.

Delores Marie Derror faces charges of operating a vehicle under the
influence of drugs causing death and three charges of causing serious
injury.

In a reversal of a Court of Appeals decision that came last year, the
Supreme Court in a 4-3 decision found that a metabolite of THC -- the
psychoactive substance in marijuana -- found in a driver's blood is
enough to support the charges, even though the THC metabolite does not
indicate intoxication.

In a decision written by Justice Maura D. Corrigan and signed by
justices Clifford W. Taylor, Robert P. Young, Jr., and Stephen J.
Markman, the court found that the Legislature's intent was to
criminalize driving with any amount of a schedule 1 controlled
substance in a person's body.

"It is irrelevant that a person who is no longer 'under the influence'
of marijuana could be prosecuted under the statute," Corrigan wrote.
"If the Legislature had intended to prosecute only people who were
under the influence while driving, it could have written the statute
accordingly."

Grand Traverse County Prosecutor Alan Schneider said he was pleased
the issue has been finally resolved.

"The THC metabolite was an ... issue that had not been addressed
before, so our obligation was to litigate it fully and take it to the
highest court and let them make a decision," he said.

"Now we will go back to where we were and it will be set for a
trial."

The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Michael F. Cavanagh and
signed by justices Elizabeth A. Weaver and Marilyn Kelly, called the
majority's interpretation unconstitutional.

"This means that weeks, months, and even years after marijuana was
ingested, and long after any risk of impairment has passed, a person
cannot drive a car without breaking the law if a test can detect the
presence of 11-carboxy-THC," Cavanagh wrote.