Former governor’s son cannot recall details before car crash

Former governor’s son cannot recall details before car crash— A former Oregon governor’s teenage son who pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of intoxicants and assault says he cannot remember what caused him to swerve into the opposing traffic, causing a car crash along the coast.Logan Kitzhaber, 19, told police he was driving a car registered under his father’s name to go play miniature golf in Lincoln City. Kitzhaber said he had only been driving for 15 minutes before the crash in 2016.Kitzhaber told officials that he had been smoking marijuana the night before and remembered drinking a beer before he started driving. Hospital records do not show alcohol in the teen’s blood test.Motorcyclists said they had seen the teen drive aggressively and erratically while he tried to pass cars in a two-lane highway, according to police reports. A witness said after the teen passed him, he clipped a road barrel. Other drivers reported having to swerve out of Kitzhaber’s way to avoid a crash.Kitzhaber pleaded guilty and was sentenced March 27 to seven days in jail and five years of probation. He was also ordered to undergo drug and alcohol treatment and his license was suspended for five years.PauseCurrent Time 0:00/Duration Time 0:00Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%0:00Fullscreen00:00MuteLincoln County Deputy District Attorney Kylie Andrisa declined to comment on the case.Get news headlines sent daily to your inbox Sign Up!The Washington couple whose motorhome Kitzhaber crashed into survived the incident, but say they were left badly injured and traumatized.

Source: Former governor’s son cannot recall details before car crash | State and Regional |

Denmark: Men whose car smashed into WWII memorial charged with drug-driving – Yahoo

Denmark: Men whose car smashed into WWII memorial charged with drug-driving Police in Denmark have charged two men with driving under the influence of drugs after their car crashed into a war memorial. Neither would say who was driving when they crashed into the WWII memorial at Fovrfeld Gravlund cemetery in Esbjerg, Jutland – so police charged them both. The men drove down a no-through road and onto grass before hitting the war memorial, causing considerable damage to the memorial. TheLocal website reports the memorial consists of a bronzed relief and vertical stones with names inscribed on them. Police believe the men were trying to find a short cut.”They continued to drive over the lawn and into the monument,” said South Jutland Police duty officer Erik Lindholdt. “Many of the stones are lying in pieces at the scene.”

Both men were charged with driving under the influence of narcotics and have had their blood tested. If found guilty they could both face a three-year driving ban. They will also have to pay a hefty bill for damages.

Denmark’s “zero tolerance” approach to driving under the influence has caused controversy as special “narkometers” used to detect traces can identify cannabis use eight weeks after taking the drug. Civil rights campaigners say the narkometers are being used to “harass” dope smokers who might not be affected by the drug when they are non longer taken,

Fovrfeld Gravlund is Denmark’s largest war cemetery and lists the names of locals who died during the conflict and German occupation. According to the tourist website, “1150 allied airmen and German soldiers and 151 German refugees from 2. World War have found their last resting place in Esbjerg.”

Source: Denmark: Men whose car smashed into WWII memorial charged with drug-driving – Yahoo

Drunk Driver Sideswipes Tree: Police – East Hampton, NY Patch

The drunk driver, arrested Sunday morning, had two prior convictions in the past 10 years, police said.

EAST HAMPTON, NY — A Sagaponack woman drove drunk and sideswiped a tree, police said.

According to East Hampton Town Police, Kiera A. Egan, 29, was arrested on Sunday at 11:10 a.m. on Daniels Hole Road and charged with aggravated DWI: Per Se, .18 of 1 percent or more alcohol, two prior convictions within 10 years, a felony; using a leased, rented or loaned vehicle without an interlock device, a misdemeanor, first degree aggravated unlicensed operation, commit aggravated unlicensed operation 2/alcohol or drug, a felony, and DWI, two prior convictions of designated offenses within 10 years, a felony, police said.

Egan was driving a 2008 Pontiac northwest on Daniels Hole Road when she was in a crash where she left the roadway and sideswiped a tree, police said.

Source: Drunk Driver Sideswipes Tree: Police – East Hampton, NY Patch

Sterling man charged with DUI, possession of controlled substance |

Sterling man charged with DUI, possession of controlled substance: A Sterling man was arrested Saturday morning after running his car into a gully and trying to walk away from the scene.Binyam Yilma, 27, of Sterling, was located by Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office deputies near Cascades Parkway and Potomac View Road around 2:30 a.m. Saturday. Yilma was arrested and charged with two counts of possession of a controlled substance, driving under the influence, refusal of a breath test and driving on a suspended or revoked license.

Source: Sterling man charged with DUI, possession of controlled substance |

C.A. Again Upholds Deputy P.D.’s Driver’s License Suspension

Says Agreeing to a Blood Test, Conditioned on Officers Obtaining a Warrant, Does Not Meet Requirements of Implied Consent Law; No Excuse Seen for Refusing Breath Test


A deputy public defender, who won a rehearing in the Court of Appeal following its Jan. 12 decision upholding a one-year suspension of her driver’s license for failing to submit to a chemical test to determine her blood alcohol content, fared no better on Friday, with the Fourth District’s Div. Two again affirming the trial court’s denial of a writ of administrative mandamus.

The Department of Motor Vehicles properly ordered the license suspension even though motorist Bernice Espinoza agreed to a test of her blood, Justice Art McKinster said in the old and the new opinions in the case, because she conditioned her consent on the California Highway Patrol obtaining a search warrant, and did not give consent to a breath test.

Espinoza—who then worked for the Riverside Public Defender’s Office and now is a deputy public defender in Sonoma County—told officers that she knew the law, and that under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 opinion in Missouri v. McNeely, they were obliged to obtain a search warrant.

That case, McKinister pointed out, dealt with nonconsensual searches.

In  Friday’s opinion, he added a footnote spelling out that a Vehicle Code section “requires a motorist to consent in writing to submit to chemical testing or to a preliminary alcohol screening test, when requested by a peace officer, as a condition of obtaining or renewing a California driver’s license.”

Supreme Court Opinion

In both the Jan. 12 opinion and the little-changed one filed Friday, McKinster made note of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Birchfield v. North Dakota. He wrote:

“[A]s the Supreme Court clearly held in Birchfield, the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the police from forcing a motorist to submit to a warrantless breath test incident to his or her arrest, the motorist has no right to refuse to submit to a breath test or to condition his or her submission on the police obtaining a warrant, and the motorist’s refusal to submit to the breath test may be the basis of criminal penalties….In light of that clear holding, we conclude refusal to submit to a breath test incident to arrest may also be the basis of imposing civil penalties under the implied consent law, including suspension or revocation of the motorist’s driver’s license.”

In a new passage, the jurist said:

“Prior to issuance of the decision in Birchfield, we would have agreed with the Department that Espinoza’s refusal to submit to a blood test would have been a sufficient basis for her license suspension, and we would have had no need to address breath tests. But…it is unclear whether the high court would approve of a civil license suspension based solely on a motorist’s refusal to submit to a warrantless blood test. Therefore, we err on the side of caution and affirm the suspension based on Espinoza’s refusal to submit to a breath test.”

References to Crying

The prior opinion said:

“Espinoza’s crying, her initial refusal to get out of her vehicle, her complete refusal to answer field sobriety questions or to perform field sobriety tests, and her repeated requests to be let off with a citation, were additional factors a reasonable officer could properly consider when determining whether there was probable cause to believe Espinoza drove while under the influence of alcohol.”

In the rewritten test, reference to her “crying” was omitted, though the opinion still relates that Espinoza “was crying and very emotional the whole time” an officer spoke with her following the traffic stop. Gonzalez spoke to her.

The case is Espinoza v. Shiomoto, 2017 S.O.S. 1609.


Copyright 2017, Metropolitan News Company


Source: Metropolitan News-Enterprise Online

The items cited in the opinion by themselves would not satisfy probable cause for an officer in Colorado to request a test. If you add an odor of alcohol, bloodshot eyes and slurred speech, then there would be.

Driver tries to evade police, crashes into Hillcrest building – The San Diego Union-Tribune

Driver tries to evade police, crashes into Hillcrest building.  A man was seriously hurt when his car plowed into a building in Hillcrest as he tried to elude police Tuesday night.He ran away but didn’t get far before officers arrested him, police said.An officer had stopped the vehicle on Park Boulevard south of Robinson Avenue after the suspect drove past a road-closed sign, police Officer John Buttle said.As the officer walked up to the car, the driver sped away, and a brief pursuit ensued.

Source: Driver tries to evade police, crashes into Hillcrest building – The San Diego Union-Tribune

The problem with America’s marijuana DUI laws: science

The problem with America’s marijuana DUI laws: scienceEVERYONE CAN AGREE THAT DRIVING WHILE STONED IS DANGEROUS, BUT HOW DO STATES REMEDY THE FLAWED SCIENCE BEHIND MARIJUANA DRUG TESTS? You have people that are just baked’ Singh rolled a “fat blunt” before he hit the slopes at Lake Tahoe on a sunny Wednesday morning.By the end of the day, he needed a refill, so he drove to Reno and stopped at one of the local medical marijuana dispensaries. With his Patagonia jacket and bleached-blond man-bun, Singh was eager to head to his hotel and smoke.The only reason he wouldn’t be smoking while driving to the hotel was because he believes Nevada cops are stricter than the ones in the Bay Area.“Yeah, I roll my blunts while I’m driving. I smoke while I’m driving,” said Singh, 26, who owns a logistics business and a “party bus” in Oakland, Calif. “I don’t get high after two blunts. I just get tired and lazy.”With the passage of recreational marijuana in November, Nevada is grappling with questions of how to handle the issue of driving while stoned. And while driving high is still illegal, determining what exactly constitutes “high” is not as easy as it sounds.Just how much pot is an ounce? Watch our explainer:CLOSESince Nevada legalized recreational marijuana, anyone 21 and over can possess up to 1 ounce in-state. How many people actually could look at an ounce and identify it, though? We’re here to help educate you.Jenny Kane/RGJAmong states with legal recreational marijuana, Nevada has the strictest limit on how much of the chemical THC can be in the bloodstream — the weed equivalent of blood-alcohol content — before the driver is considered impaired. Nevada’s limit is even lower than the federal standard for Department of Transportation employees.But catching drugged drivers has become more complicated since recreational marijuana became legal in January across the state.No real-time, accurate test exists.  Officers have no accurate Breathalyzer test; blood, urine and saliva tests exist but are imperfect.On top of that, no scientific evidence backs up that a specific amount of marijuana in a person’s system means impairment. That means that limits for marijuana similar to those for alcohol use can be problematic.“You have people that are just baked, they have that Spicoli persona and yet they ace the driving test. You have others who are totally sober and they flunk that blood test,” said Chris Halsor, a former Colorado prosecutor currently serving as Nevada’s temporary traffic safety resource prosecutor.Nevada law says that anyone with 2 nanograms of marijuana in their system while driving is impaired.Critics of the limit point out that it’s so low that people who have smoked marijuana in the distant past but are not impaired could be convicted of DUI under the current law.However, advocates of the limit point out that driving under the influence cases involving marijuana are already difficult to prove and a limit is necessary.Despite the inconsistencies, states must adapt, Halsor said. It’s an issue every state that legalizes marijuana faces, finding varying solutions.“You have to go into every case being able to prove impairment without toxicology,” Halsor said.A legal puzzleThe question of marijuana DUIs has been at the forefront of bipartisan discussions among lawmakers since Nevadans voted in November to legalize recreational marijuana. Anyone 21 and over can possess up to 1 ounce of recreational marijuana, even though it remains a federal offense.Medical marijuana has been legal in Nevada since 2000, and recreational marijuana officially became legal as of Jan. 1, though it is still a misdemeanor to drive under the influence of marijuana and can be a felony depending on circumstances.Just as Nevada has a .08 blood alcohol limit, the state also has a 2 nanograms per milliliter of blood limit for marijuana. Colorado and Washington’s limit is 5 nanograms.Most states and Washington, D.C., that have legalized recreational marijuana — California, Oregon, Massachusetts, Maine, and Alaska — have no set limit. States without set limits also establish that impaired driving is illegal and can be proven by a defendant’s behavior and statements at the time of arrest.“States are trying to figure out what is a fair nanogram limit – what should they use for guidance, and should we have a nanogram limit? Neither is good, right? I don’t think it’s appropriate to institute a rule that doesn’t work. I don’t understand the point of having a limit if that doesn’t tell you what you need to know,” said Dr. Ryan Vandrey, associate professor of behavioral pharmacology research at Johns Hopkins University Medical School in Baltimore. “If you are going to punish people for not being under the influence of a drug that you just legalized, that’s not fair. You can’t take corrective action.”While it would seem logical to model drugged driving laws after existing

Source: The problem with America’s marijuana DUI laws: science

St. Patrick’s Day weekend checkpoints lead to 66 drunken driving arrests | The Kansas City Star

66 drivers arrested during DUI checkpoints in Kansas City on St. Patrick’s Day weekend Sobriety checkpoints for second night in a row Saturday led to the arrest of 24 drivers on suspicion of drunken driving. That brought the total number of suspected drunken drivers arrested at checkpoints in Kansas City this St. Patrick’s Day holiday weekend to 66 people. Sobriety checkpoints held in Kansas City for the second day in a row overnight Saturday led to the arrest of 24 drivers on suspicion of drunken driving.That brought the total number of suspected drunken drivers arrested at checkpoints to 66 people for the St. Patrick’s Day holiday weekend.Kansas City police held their sobriety checkpoint at 4040 Main Street checking southbound traffic on Main.ADVERTISINGDuring the checkpoint, police checked 544 cars and arrested 14 drivers on suspicion of violating city and state driving under the influence laws.Police also indicated that there were three traffic and one narcotics violation. They also arrested one fugitive. Another 52 vehicles attempted to avoid the checkpoint.At the same time, the Jackson County Sheriff’s office had a separate checkpoint in the same location checking the northbound traffic on Main.Deputies stopped 590 vehicles and arrested 10 people on suspicion of drunken driving, including two drivers who were repeat offenders and will face felony charges.Deputies also arrested two people on felony possession of controlled substance.During the checkpoint, deputies also checked several taxi cabs, ride sharing cars and party buses with visibly intoxicated passengers.The sheriff’s office issued a special “thank you” to those passengers for selecting a safe ride home.The arrests came on a second night of sobriety checkpoint. On Friday night, the Missouri Highway Patrol, the Jackson County Sheriff’s office and Kansas City Police Department arrested 42 drivers on suspicion of driving under the influence.That checkpoint was at 33rd Street and Southwest Trafficway. Officers stopped 1,314 vehicles at the checkpoint.

Source: St. Patrick’s Day weekend checkpoints lead to 66 drunken driving arrests | The Kansas City Star

If you were arrested on St. Patricks Day and have not retained an attorney yet, you are not protecting your rights.

Police are using new mouth-swab tests to nab drivers under the influence of marijuana and other drugs – LA Times

Police are using new mouth-swab tests to nab drivers under the influence of marijuana and other drugs. Drivers on pot could be detected with new device. San Diego police have a new way to confirm the presence of marijuana and other drugs in impaired drivers — a mouth-swab device that is already being used by police departments in more than a dozen states and is expected to become more popular with the legalization of marijuana.The two Dräger DrugTest 5000 machines, which cost about $6,000 each, were donated by the San Diego Police Foundation last week.ADVERTISINGThey are expected to debut Friday night at the St. Patrick’s Day DUI checkpoint in downtown San Diego.The machine, about the size of a mini bookshelf stereo system, tests for the presence of seven drugs — marijuana, cocaine, opiates, methamphetamine, amphetamine, methadone and benzodiazepines. The device does not read the level of intoxication; drivers would have to take a blood test for that information.Paid Post WHAT’S THIS? Best Casual RestaurantsA Message from The Daily MealThese restaurants may not be temples of gastronomy, but they sure offer some mighty good food.See More“It’s a huge concern of ours with the legalization of marijuana that we’re going to see an increase in impaired drugged driving,” Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman said at a news conference Thursday near the Ingraham Street Bridge in Mission Bay, a common DUI checkpoint spot.California voters approved the use and cultivation of recreational marijuana by passing Proposition 64 in November.To prepare for the effects of the law, a team of San Diego narcotics officers went to Denver to learn how Colorado has fared since recreational marijuana was legalized there and found that the region has seen an uptick in drugged driving, Zimmerman said. The numbers have been growing in California as well.In 2014, 38% of drivers who were killed in motor vehicle crashes in California tested positive for drugs, whether legal or illegal, according to the state Office of Highway Safety. That’s up from 32% the year before.“We want to get these impaired drivers off the streets,” the chief said.The Dräger 5000 premiered in the U.S. in 2009 and is used by police in places such as Los Angeles, New York, Arizona and Nevada, as well as in other countries such as Australia, Belgium and Germany.In San Diego, the machines will be used primarily at DUI checkpoints for now.Like the handheld preliminary alcohol screening devices frequently used in the field to test for booze, drivers cannot be forced to submit to a Dräger 5000 test.Officers trained to recognize the symptoms of drug impairment will first look for various indicators that a driver is high, such as an unsafe driving maneuver, bloodshot eyes, the odor of marijuana and blank stares, San Diego police Officer Emilio Ramirez said. Once there is ample suspicion of drug use, the officer can then request to perform field sobriety tests or for a driver to take the Dräger 5000 test.If the driver refuses at that point, the officer can force the person to submit to a blood test.To use the machine, the driver is handed a mouth swab and instructed to run it around the inside of the mouth for up to four minutes. The swab is then placed into the machine, along with a vial of testing solution, and the machine does its work. It takes about six to eight minutes for results to print out.A positive result will likely send the driver to a police phlebotomist for a blood test to determine precise drug levels.If the mouth swab test is negative but the officer still has a suspicion of impairment, then a blood draw might still be mandated, because the Dräger 5000 measures for only seven kinds of narcotics, Ramirez said.When it comes to detecting marijuana, the machine only looks for the active THC compound that is responsible for the high. That component, delta-9 THC, can stay in a person’s system for a few hours or longer, depending on how the cannabis was ingested and how the person’s body processes the drug. The machine does not look for the inactive THC compounds, which can stay in a person’s system for weeks, police said.In other words, if someone legally smoked marijuana two days ago, there would be nothing to worry about if tested on the machine.Evidence from the Dräger 5000 will be admissible in court, although the machine is not expected to have a notable effect on how drugged driving cases are prosecuted, attorneys said.Under California law, there is no legal threshold for the amount of drugs in a person’s system when it comes to driving. Alcohol cases are more black and white — a .08% blood-alcohol level or higher is illegal.Officers and prosecutors have instead had to rely on subjective measures and observations to build a case of drug impairment, which can be different from person to person.

Source: Police are using new mouth-swab tests to nab drivers under the influence of marijuana and other drugs – LA Times

Word for the Day While Pumping Gas

Why does it flash by so quickly. Too fast if it is early in the AM. I knew the word today and how to pronounce it. But if I did not, the word was not spoken and I may have not been able to learn the pronuciation. Also it was the same word on 4/1 and 4/3. April fools?