Arizona court decision upholds driving ruling for marijuana

PHOENIX An appeals court has issued a ruling that upholds the right of authorities to prosecute pot smokers in Arizona for driving under the influence even when there is no evidence that they are actually high.

The ruling by the Court of Appeals focuses on the chemical compounds in marijuana that show up in blood and urine tests after people smoke pot. One chemical compound causes drivers to be impaired; another is a chemical that stays in peoples systems for weeks after theyve smoked marijuana but doesnt affect impairment.

The court ruled that both compounds apply to Arizona law, meaning drivers dont have to actually be impaired to get prosecuted for DUI. As long as there is evidence of marijuana in their system, they can get a DUI, the court said.

The ruling overturns a decision by a lower court judge who said it didnt make sense to prosecute a person with no evidence theyre under the influence.

The lower court judge cited the proliferation of states easing their marijuana laws, but the Court of Appeals ruling issued Tuesday dismissed that by saying Arizonas medical marijuana law is irrelevant regarding DUI.

The Legislature adopted the decades-old comprehensive DUI law to protect public safety, so a provision on prohibited substances and their resulting chemical compounds should be interpreted broadly to include inactive compounds as well as active ones, the Court of Appeals said.

The case stems from a 2010 traffic stop in Maricopa County. The motorists blood test revealed only a chemical compound that is found in the blood after another compound produced from ingesting marijuana breaks down.

According to testimony by a prosecution attorney, the compound found in the mans blood doesnt impair the ability to drive, but it can remain detectable for four weeks.

The mans lawyer argued Arizonas DUI law bars only marijuana and its metabolite, so only the first derivative compound that actually impairs drivers is prohibited.

Two lower court judges agreed, with one upholding the others dismissal of the case against the motorist, Hrach Shilgevorkyan.

Superior Court Commissioner Myra Harris ruling noted that several states have decriminalized pot, and that a growing number of states, including Arizona, have legalized medical marijuana.

Residents of these states, particularly those geographically near Arizona, are likely to travel to Arizona, Harris said in her 2012 ruling upholding the dismissal. It would be irrational for Arizona to prosecute a defendant for an act that might have occurred outside of Arizona several weeks earlier.

However, the Court of Appeals sided with prosecutors who appealed, saying that allowing the testing for marijuanas active compound would unduly restrict law enforcement.

The ruling said it serves the Legislatures intention to have a flat ban on driving under the influence to interpret the DUI laws reference to a prohibited substance and its metabolite as covering both a substances active and inactive compounds.

Michael Alarid III, a lawyer for Shilgevorkyan, said hell ask the Arizona Supreme Court to consider an appeal.

He added the testing issue is increasingly important because people legally using pot in two Western states Washington and Colorado that last year approved marijuana decriminalization laws could be convicted of DUI if arrested while driving in Arizona weeks later.