Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Evidence sufficient to support verdict of drugged driving

Walworth County v. James E. Robinson, Jr., 2015AP2504-FT, 5/18/16, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including memo briefs)

The County needed to prove Robinson drove his motor vehicle on a highway while under the influence of a drug to a degree which rendered him incapable of safely driving, § 346.63(1)(a). It succeeded.

It succeeded by presenting: testimony about Robinson’s erratic driving (¶¶3, 20); the arresting officers’ testimony about Robinson appearing  to be “out of it,” his performance on field sobriety tests, and his admission he was on “numerous medicines” for mental health issues (¶¶4-8, 21); and “drug recognition expert” testimony that Robinson was under the influence of a narcotic analgesic (which Robinson hadn’t taken, but which has similar effects to the central nervous system depressants Robinson had taken) (¶¶9-13, 22).

For more on so-called “drug recognition experts,” see here.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment