“An Arizona appeals court has ruled that marijuana users don’t need to be actually impaired to be successfully prosecuted for driving under the influence. The ruling came Tuesday in the case of a man who tested positive for an inactive marijuana metabolite that remains in the body for weeks after the high from smoking marijuana has worn off. The ruling in Arizona v. Shilgevorkyan overturned a decision by a superior court judge who said that it didn’t make sense to prosecute people for driving under the influence if they’re not actually under the influence.”
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2013/feb/14/az_court_says_you_dont_have_be_h
(Visited 65 times, 1 visits today)
Related posts:
Use of secretive ‘Stingray’ FBI cell phone tracking tool ruled lawful by judge
How to make a fortune out of the upcoming IPOs in Dubai and Abu Dhabi
Former ECB Chief Economist: Buy Gold; Economic System is 'Pure Fiction'
Glenn Greenwald: The lame rules for presidential debates: a perfect microcosm of US democracy
A bold investment that might just pay off [2012]
Couple handcuffed for passing out End the Fed literature near Liberty Bell
Colorado, Oregon, Washington or … Uruguay, who will be first?
James Bamford: The Secret War
Why 60% of All Americans Now Think Government Has Too Much Power
Gov. Standards Agency Suggests Dropping NSA-Influenced Algorithm
U.S. Home Prices at Record High, Surpasses 2006 Market Peak
Summers vs. Yellen: Tweedledumb vs. Tweedledee
Angry Protesters Rally Over Dog Killed By Hawthorne Police
The room with 260 million surfaces: 3D printed architecture is here
U.S. Regulations Require Use of Biofuel That Doesn't Exist