Request an invitation to our KY lawyers discussion forum

Are You Ready for the New
"Drugged Driving" Law?

Excerpted from the KACDL June Video Seminar,"2010 Legislative Update"
Ernie Lewis, KACDL Legislative Agent

"[At hearings] we argued that drugged driving was already illegal. We argued that per se only made convictions easier. And we argued that innocent people would be found guilty of DUI because the impairment did not have to be shown, that proof was going to be simply that there was a drug in the blood, and that there were going to be drugs that do not impair that result in DUI convictions.

"For example, a person can take their spouse's Ambien at 10 PM, sleep well, wake up the next morning completely refreshed, and have an accident on the
way to work. If Ambien is found in the blood then the person can be charged
with DUI or, perhaps, vehicular homicide as a result of the new per se law.

"There has to be a blood test that is shown to be scientifically reliable, and
that has to be taken within two hours of operation or control. If it's taken
outside that two hour period of time, then it's inadmissible in a prosecution
for drugged driving. The blood test results can only be admitted under
the per se law when blood is taken within two hours.

"So how do you advise your clients when they call you up in the middle
of the night and ask, 'Should I consent to a blood test?'"

The Drugged Driving law and much more will be covered in

KACDL's ADVANCED DUI SEMINAR

Louisville, Friday, September 17th

Lexington, Friday, October 15th

Registration Form

Daubert News

UCLA Receives Grant to Study
Error Rates in Fingerprint Evidence

UCLA has received a grant from the National Instutute of Justice to establish a scientific method to quantify the accuracy and error rates of latent fingerprint examination. The interdisciplinary study will be completed in the summer of 2012.

"This research will make a major step toward providing some of the much-needed information about accuracy and reliability for latent fingerprint identification," [project leader and law school professor Jennifer] Mnookin said. "Even though we have been using fingerprint evidence in court for almost a hundred years, not nearly enough is known about how often fingerprint examiners might make mistakes, or in what circumstances."

Knowledge about error rates is important to the courts in assessing reliability under Daubert v. Merrell Dow, a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case that determined the standard for admitting expert testimony in federal courts. "Based on our research, courts could choose to enact different precautions or a different degree of scrutiny for the most difficult fingerprint identifications," she said. "The research will also provide a context for informing juries about the degree of confidence appropriate for any particular identification or exclusion... There have been a number of challenges to the admissibility of fingerprint identification evidence in courts around the country. While nearly all courts have continued to admit fingerprint evidence, there are many scholars, myself included, who believe that it does not yet sit on an adequate research foundation. This research will help develop that necessary research foundation."

Read the full press release

SEARCHES:  KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!
POLICE MAY GIVE YOU BAD LEGAL ADVICE
When are police legally allowed to search me?
What is "probable cause"?
When do I have to show ID?
Are the police allowed to lie?
When can police order me out of the car?
Roadblocks: What's the deal?
What are my rights in a college dorm?
Can I be arrested for videotaping or photographing police?
Get answers to these questions and more!

Watch
BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters
on YouTube