OWI for 5ng of Marijuana in system

Discussion in 'Legal Issues' started by Dymanite1, Jul 25, 2011.

  1. Dymanite1

    Dymanite1 New Member

    I was in an accident and received an OWI for 5ng of pot in my system. The law in my state is zero tolerance, so law enforcement can literally write you a ticket for operating while intoxicated a week after you have consumed. Has anyone run into this in their state? Every lawyer Ive talked to all say the same thing "thats just the way the law is written" I was just wondering if there has been any precident set on the unconstitutionality of writing tickets for operating while intoxicated, long after intoxication ends. All the studies Ive read show that after smoking, intoxication lasts up to 8 hours, yet with zero tolerance, law enforcement is free to write tickets for intoxication, when the person isnt. Please help with any ideas.
  2. phuzz01

    phuzz01 Sr. Member

    Toxicology tests usually report two different forms of marijuana in your system: Delta-9-THC and Carboxy-Delta-9-THC. Delta-9-THC is the psychoactive component, and according to a study from the netherlands, a level of 5ng/ml is sufficient to cause impairment. Carboxy-Delta-9-THC is a metabolite, and is not psychoactive. 5 ng/ml of that would not cause any impairment.
  3. Phenom

    Phenom Banned

    The actual cannabinoids that get you high are out of your system in 3-5 hours if you smoke or vaporize it.
    The metabolites or traces of this component are not psychoactive; therefore, you were not impaired at all.
  4. phuzz01

    phuzz01 Sr. Member

    Where did the OP say that he had not smoked within the past 3-5 hours? If he still had 5ng/ml of Delta-9-THC in his system, I would guess that he did. At the very least, I do not think you have enough information to say that he was "not impaired at all."
  5. Dymanite1

    Dymanite1 New Member

    between 19 and 20hrs.

    At the party I was at the night before, it was around 1a.m. the last time I partook, and my accident was 9p.m.the next evening. So my math puts it at about 20hrs. between smoking and my accident, and it was about another hour before I was tested. In the reading I was doing, ng/ml concentrations in the blood can exceed 100ng/ml immediately after smoking, so my math calculates my levels at most, 1/20th of the concentration my blood was at right after I smoked. My original post concerned if there was precedent set in zero tolerance states, concerning marijuana in the system vs. intoxication. The way I read the law in reference to zero tolerance, is you can be ticketed for intoxication if any is found in your system...which is what the atty. I have been in contact with, is telling me. Just wondering if there were any courageous any enterprising victims/attys. that that successfully been able to argue the difference of having marijuana in your system, and being intoxicated from it. Thanks for your replies so far!!!
  6. Phenom

    Phenom Banned

    I thought he meant he smoked a week before the accident. He wasn't clear.
  7. phuzz01

    phuzz01 Sr. Member

    And were the results for Delta-9-THC, or Carboxy (metabolite)?

    You cannot assume that your levels were that high right after smoking. It depends on so many different factors, including body weight, history of prior usage and how much you smoked.

    The question in your original post concerned the constitutionality of such a per se law. I cannot think of any part of the constitution that these laws violate, and I am not aware of any case law establishing per se laws as unconstitutional.

    There are two different types of DWI laws: prima facie and per se. A prima facie DWI law requires that the state prove impairment. A per se law requires that the state prove a certain level of intoxicant in the blood. Many states have both types of law so that the State can convict by proving either impairment or a prohibited level in the blood. So, to use alcohol as an analogy, you have committed DWI in my state if you are EITHER impaired OR have a BAC of .08 or more. If your state has a per se DUID law, then it does not matter whether you can successfully argue that you were not intoxicated by marijuana. The state only has to prove what was in your blood.
  8. keemosaabi420

    keemosaabi420 New Member

    id fight it if i was u id go to court with a lawyer and prove to them that u were not high at the time

Share This Page