The Drug Recognition Expert Police Officer: A Response to Drug-Impaired Driving



Similar documents
The DRE DUI & DRUGS. Captain George Crum Fullerton Police Department

The Drug Evaluation and Classification Program

DRE Program: NE History and Current Status

Drug Evaluation and Classification Program

I. The New Drug Recognition Expert (DRE)

CHAPTER 4 DRUGS. Although it has already been discussed in Chapter 1, the relevant portion of the DUI statute relating to drugs is as follows:

The methodological quality of three foundational law enforcement drug influence evaluation validation studies

A FLORIDA VALIDATION STUDY OF THE STANDARDIZED FIELD SOBRIETY TEST (S.F.S.T.) BATTERY

Manchester, New Hampshire

Drug and Alcohol Abuse Training revised: October 2015

Evaluation of the Impact of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program on Enforcement and Adjudication

DRUG DRIVING OFFENCES

Chapter 18 Driving Under the Influence

Drug-Free Workplace Policy (revised 10/01/13)

Update on Drug Impaired Driving. WTSC Impaired Driver Conference SeaTac, December 2006

EXPERT THINKING FROM MILLIMAN. Predictive analytics, text mining, and drug-impaired driving in automobile accidents

STATE OF COLORADO. Standards for the STANDARDIZED FIELD SOBRIETY TESTING (SFST) PROGRAM

Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE)

CONSEQUENCES AND SANCTIONS FOR POLICY VIOLATIONS

Drugs and Drug Po Hey. The Control of Consciousness. Alteration. Second Edition. Clayton J. Mosher. Washington State University Vancouver

Drug-Impaired Driving: Legal Challenges on the Road to Traffic Safety

ALPHA RECOVERY CENTERS Application & Screening Data

How To Treat A Drug Addiction

METHODS FOR DEFENDING AGAINST DRUG DWI CHARGES AND THE NEW AGE OF DISCOVERY

DU I ARRESTS 1999 CRIME IN TEXAS DEFINITION. Nature ANALYSIS. Volume. Persons Arrested. Rate. DUI Arrests DWI Arrestees by Age and Sex

Chapter SeleCted NoN-INdex CrImeS

CBT/OTEP 937 Street Medicine Street Drugs

2013 Annual Toxicology Report

DWI Detection and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing

H&S Code Section Article Defined

MONTHLY VARIATION IN SUBSTANCE USE INITIATION AMONG FULL-TIME COLLEGE STUDENTS

Drug Impaired Driving

T2007 Seattle, Washington

DRUGS OF ABUSE CLASSIFICATION AND EFFECTS

HEALTH RISKS AND EFFECTS OF DRUG USAGE AND PENALTIES UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW

DRIVING HIGH. San Diego County Marijuana Prevention Initiative

Field Evaluation of a Behavioral Test Battery for DWI

DUI CLIENT INTERVIEW SHEET

ISSUES IN DUI DRUG CASES. c) Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary defines the noun 'drug' as follows:

Drug Evaluation and Classification Training. The Drug Recognition Expert School"

Drug addiction. These factors increase the likelihood of your having an addiction to a legal or an illegal drug:

CCMTA CCATM. Drugs and Driving Framework. Brian Jonah. Senior Researcher. Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators

Kilgore College. Drug and Alcohol Prevention Program Annual Notification

Traffic Safety Facts Research Note

Pennsylvania DUI Handbook

International Association of Chiefs of Police

South Carolina Drug Statutes South Carolina Code of Laws: Title 44 Health Code

California Healing Arts College

DRUG-IMPAIRED DRIVING. Additional Support Needed for Public Awareness Initiatives

Outline. Drug and Alcohol Counseling 1 Module 1 Basics of Abuse & Addiction

MOSAIC DES MOINES Alcohol/Drug Free Workplace Policy

DUI in Southern Ohio MATT 2006

GHB Laws- Possession, Possession for Sale and DUI of GHB

Drug Recognition in Los Angeles Police

Drugged Driving Research: A White Paper. Prepared for the National Institute on Drug Abuse 6001 Executive Boulevard Bethesda, MD

Alcoholism, Drug Addiction, and the Road to Recovery

Policies and Procedures VI-4, p.1 Reviewed/Revised January 2014 SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION

Chapter 813. Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants 2013 EDITION. Title 59 Page 307 (2013 Edition)

GENERAL ORDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I. BACKGROUND

The Government propose to take a zero tolerance approach to the following 8 controlled drugs which are known to impair driving:

1. Youth Drug Use More than 40% of Maryland high school seniors used an illicit drug in the past year.

POLICY F 10R. Burlington School District F 10R: SUBSTANCE ABUSE STUDENTS. Former Policy JFCI I. DRUG AND ALCOHOL. A. Philosophy

Drug & Alcohol Policy August 2015

Drug-Free Workplace. Policy Statement. Reason for the Policy. Policy V

LEE S SUMMIT, MISSOURI POLICE DEPARTMENT

CIGI Direct Insurance Services, Inc. QUICK QUOTE CORONARY ANGIOPLASTY/CORONARY BYPASS

Drug- and Alcohol-Related Intoxication Deaths in Maryland, 2014

Student Policy - Alcohol and Illegal Drugs

Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Information

OU MEDICAL CENTER Human Resource Policy and Procedure Manual. Subject: Drug and Alcohol

Patterns and Trends in Drug Abuse in Los Angeles County, California: 2013

punishment increased 1 degree. If force used, degree felony (3)(A) other opium and opiates Delivery of Penalty 1 Substance 180days-2yrs; <$10,000

How Police Enforce DUI Laws: A Survey of Police DUI Detection and Enforcement Techniques

Drug Abuse & Alcoholism

Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Information

Drug Abuse Trends in the Seattle/King County Area: 2013

Standardized Field Sobriety Tests Is Current Training Enough?

Drug Impaired Driving: An Emerging Trend

13. Substance Misuse

CITY OF ESSEXVILLE SUBSTANCE ABUSE POLICY

Enforcement of Zero Tolerance Laws in the United States

Criminal Investigation CRJ141. Matthew McCarty

NEW YORK DRUG POSSESSION AND SALE CRIMES

Listed below are some of the reasons given by users to describe why they take drug(s): An escape from problems, either at home, school or work.

DUI STOP WHAT TO EXPECT

Pharmacology and Physiology (C105) Understanding Pharmacology and Physiology. The History of Drugs. The Neurobiology of Addiction.

RECOGNITION AND MANAGEMENT OF WORKPLACE SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Why do employers drug test? How is drug testing conducted and how accurate is it?

Appropriate Use of UDT to Improve Patient Care

514.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE

Drug and Alcohol Prevention Program and the Drug-Free Workplace and Campus Program Revised: September 1, 2015

Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Agency March, 2012

Driving under the influence of alcohol or

LAKE COUNTY SCHOOLS RECEIPT OF DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY

Prescription drug abuse trends. Minnesota s Prescription Monitoring Program. Minnesota Rural Health Conference June 25, 2013 Duluth

Jim Hedlund, Highway Safety North Erin Holmes, Responsibility.org. GHSA Webinar October 7th, :00 3:00 pm EDT

D.O.T. (DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION) DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY

OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF, County of Santa Barbara

SUPERVISOR'S MANUAL FOR DRUG & ALCOHOL TESTING

Transcription:

The Drug Recognition Expert Police Officer: A Response to Drug-Impaired Driving Page, T.E. Los Angeles Police Department P.O. Box 50332, Pasadena, California 91115-0332 USA Keywords: Drugs, DRE, Drug Recognition Expert, Driving, DUI, DWI, police, LAPD Abstract: Law enforcement agencies in thirty-four United States and British Columbia, Canada, rely on Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) officers to apprehend the drug-impaired driver. DREs utilize a systematic and standardized twelve-step procedure to reach three determinations: (1) that the driver is impaired; (2) that the driver is impaired by drugs, rather than suffering from a medical condition that requires intervention; and (3) the category of drug (s) that is causing the impairment. The admissibility of DRE opinion testimony, usually in conjunction with corroborative toxicological analysis, has been upheld in many courts throughout the U.S. The seven DRE drug categories are not based on shared chemical structures, legality, or use if any in treatment of illness or disease. Rather, the categories are based on shared patterns of signs and symptoms. The categories used by DREs are: Central Nervous System (CNS) Depressants, Inhalants, Phencyclidine, Cannabis, CNS Stimulants, Hallucinogens, and Narcotic Analgesics. The prevalence of poly-drug use complicates the DRE determinations. This paper will provide an overview of the DRE procedures, DRE drug categories, and the DRE training program. Body: The Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Program and procedures were initially developed in the late 1970's by traffic enforcement officers of the Los Angeles Police Department. This program trains selected officers to utilize a step-by-step evaluation procedure, enabling the DRE officer to determine if an individual is under the influence of drugs, and then to determine the type of drug causing the observable impairment. The procedure enables the DRE to rule in (or out) many medical conditions, such as illness or injury, that may be contributing to the impairment. Although the primary focus of the DRE program is driving under the influence (DUI) enforcement, the procedures have been applied to many other areas where identification of the drug-impaired individual is important.

The accuracy of the procedure used by DREs was initially validated in two controlled studies. A 1984 research study at Johns Hopkins University showed that Los Angeles DREs were able to accurately distinguish between the drug-impaired and non-drug-impaired individual. A subsequent Field Validation Study (173 case study) sponsored by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 1985 evaluated the accuracy of the DRE procedures in actual arrest situations. Again, the DREs were very successful in identifying both the drugimpaired individual and the class(es) of drug(s) causing the impairment. Subsequent studies of the DRE protocol and program in other jurisdictions, particularly Arizona, supported the conclusions of these initial studies. The success of these studies has precipitated the dissemination of DRE techniques to law enforcement officers in 34 states, the District of Columbia, and British Columbia, Canada. As of November, 1999, nearly 5,000 officers maintain DRE certification. Since 1989, DRE training and certification have been regulated by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). NHTSA continues to support the DRE program, which is now formally titled the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program. The DRE procedures have been subject to numerous defense motions challenging the admissibility of DRE testimony. Thus far, courts in California, New York, Arizona, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Oregon, Washington, Nebraska and Florida have upheld the admissibility of DRE evidence. As an example of DRE's acceptance in court, the Los Angeles City Attorneys Office has estimated that 95% of those charged with driving under the influence of drugs are convicted in LA courts. Although a DRE may initiate an arrest for DUI-drugs, the usual case is for a different officer, the arresting officer, to request the expertise and assistance of the DRE after making a DUI arrest. Simply, the arrestee may appear more impaired than the alcohol level alone would account for. Some agencies mandate a drug influence evaluation by a DRE whenever an individual is arrested for DUI and produces a BAC below the statutory per se level. A DRE is responsible for making three determinations: (1) the arrestee's impairment is not consistent with the BAC; (2) the individual is under the influence of drugs, and not suffering from a medical condition that requires immediate attention; and (3) the individual is under the influence of a specific category (or categories) of drugs. 2 In order to reach an opinion that the individual is under the influence of a specific category (or categories) of drugs, DREs utilize a 12 step standardized process. Step One: BAC This step often precedes the involvement of the DRE. If the arresting officer has determined that the BAC is consistent with both the type and degree of impairment, no DRE is called.

Step Two: Interview of the Arresting Officer Based on the results in Step One, the arresting officer requests the assistance of a DRE. The DRE will discuss the circumstances of the arrest with the arresting officer. Step Three: Preliminary Examination The purpose of this step is to determine if there is sufficient reason to suspect drug influence. The DRE makes observations of the arrestee's condition, inquires of the arrestee as to any health problems, and conducts a pupil size and eye tracking examination. In addition, the DRE takes the first of three pulses in this step. Step Four: Eye examination During this step, the DRE conducts three separate eye movement examinations. They are: horizontal gaze nystagmus, vertical gaze nystagmus, and an eye convergence examination. Step Five: Divided Attention Testing The DRE administers the following divided attention tests in the following order: modified Romberg Balance Test, a Walk and Turn Test, the One-Leg Stand Test, and a Finger-to-Nose Test. Step Six: Vital Signs Examination The DRE takes three vital signs: blood pressure, body temperature and pulse. This is the second of three pulses, the first having been taken in the preliminary examination. Step Seven: Darkroom Examination The DRE uses a pupillometer to estimate the arrestee's pupil sizes in four different light levels: room light, near total darkness, indirect artificial light, and direct light. The DRE also examines the individual's nasal and oral cavities for evidence of drug use. Step Eight: Muscle Tone The arrestee's muscle tone is evaluated throughout the examination, through observations of the arrestee's movements. During this step the DRE gently moves the arrestee's arms to determine muscle tone. Step Nine: Injection Sites Examinations During this step, the DRE examines the individual for injection sites. Although the drug user may inject anywhere on the body, the more frequently used areas are the arms, neck, and ankles. A third pulse is also taken. Step Ten: Statements, Interview In accordance with the arrestee s constitutional rights, the DRE questions the person about the use of specific drugs. The DRE may ask the arrestee about any warnings given to the arrestee by a prescribing physician or pharmacist regarding operating a motor vehicle while taking the drug.

Step Eleven: Opinion The DRE now forms an opinion as to drug influence, and the category(s) of drug(s) causing the impairment. As written, a typical DRE opinion is: "In my opinion, the arrestee is under the influence of a Central Nervous System Stimulant, and cannot safely operate a vehicle." Step Twelve: Toxicology: Specimen and Subsequent Analysis During this step, the DRE obtains a urine and/or blood specimen from the suspect, which is then analyzed for the presence of certain drugs by a toxicological laboratory. Typically, a week or more will elapse until the laboratory reports their results. The decision to prosecute the individual will usually be delayed until these results have been obtained. In court, the consistency between the DRE's opinion and the laboratory analysis is critical in demonstrating the accuracy of the DRE. DRE Drug Categorization: Based on Patterns of Signs and Symptoms Drug Recognition Experts classify the drugs of abuse into seven categories. This categorization system is based on the premise that each drug within a category produces a pattern of effects, known as signs and symptoms. Practically, this means that although there are numerous drugs within each of the seven categories, the overall pattern of effects within the category at hand is the same. The effects can and do vary from drug to drug, primarily in terms of intensity and duration of action. The seven DRE drug categories are: CNS Depressants (including alcohol), Inhalants, Phencyclidine, Cannabis, CNS Stimulants, Hallucinogens, and Narcotic Analgesics. Central Nervous System Depressants In addition to alcohol, this category includes barbiturates, non-barbiturates that have barbituratelike effects, anti-anxiety tranquilizers, anti-psychotic tranquilizers, certain anti-depressants, and certain pharmaceutical combinations that contain more than one type of CNS Depressant. The benzodiazepines, chloral hydrate, GHB, methaqualone (Mandrax), lithium, phenobarbital, the sedating antihistamines, and many other substances are included in this category. Inhalants Three sub-categories comprise the inhalants: volatile solvents, aerosols, and anesthetic gases. Included are solvents, such as paint thinner, gasoline, toluene, turpentine, and paint. Nitrous oxide ("laughing gas"), Freon, ether, and many other substances are also included. Phencyclidine (PCP) This drug is usually known as PCP, which represents its longer chemical name of phenylcyclohexyl piperidine. It is also commonly called phencyclidine. PCP is appropriately termed a dissociative anesthetic. The drug ketamine, which has uses in veterinary medicine, in pediatric surgery, and in other areas, is included in this category, as are chemical analogs of PCP. Cannabis This category includes marijuana, hash, hash oil, and the synthetic drug dronabinol.

Central Nervous System Stimulants This category includes cocaine in all its various forms, amphetamine, methamphetamine, ephedrine, Ritalin, certain diet pills, and other related substances. Hallucinogens LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote, bufotenine, morning glory seeds, jimson weed, nutmeg and the psychedelic amphetamines are some of the drugs in this category. The psychedelic amphetamines include MDMA, or methylenedioxy methamphetamine, which is known in the vernacular as "Ecstasy," and many other related preparations. Narcotic Analgesics This final category includes the opiates, such as morphine, codeine, percodan, heroin, meperidine, methadone, fentanyl, and numerous others. Poly-drug Use Poly-drug use is a frequently encountered complicating factor in a DRE evaluation. The polydrug user may exhibit unpredictable mixtures of signs and symptoms. DREs apply four concepts to interpret poly-drug signs and symptoms: additive, antagonistic, overlapping, and null. The DRE Training Course: An Overview In order to attend DRE training, the candidate is typically nominated in writing by the officer's commanding officer. The criteria for selection include a demonstrated aptitude and interest in DUI enforcement and/or narcotics enforcement. Candidates must also have demonstrated an ability to conduct thorough crime scene investigations, and to testify clearly and convincingly in court. DRE training and eventual certification consists of the following components: 1) Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) training (two to three day course) 2) DRE preliminary training (two day course) 3) DRE School (seven days) 4) DRE School Classroom Examination 5) Minimum number of evaluations (minimum of twelve) 6) Minimum number of drug categories observed (minimum of three) 7) Toxicological corroboration (minimum rate of 75%) 8) "Rolling" log reviewed 9) Resume reviewed 10) Certification knowledge examination 11) Endorsement by an instructor 12) Endorsement by a second instructor 13) Certification issued by the International Association of Chiefs of Police. DRUG SIGN AND SYMPTOM MATRIX CNS DEPRESSANTS INHALANTS PCP CANNABIS CNS STIMULANTS HALLUCINOGENS NARCOTIC ANALGESICS

HORIZONTAL GAZE NYSTAGMUS CNS DEPRESSANTS INHALANTS PCP CANNABIS CNS STIMULANTS NOT HALLUCINOGENS NARCOTIC ANALGESICS NOT NOT NOT VERTICAL NYSTAGMUS POSSIBLY POSSIBLY USUALLY NOT NOT NOT NOT LACK OF CONVERGENCE NOT NOT NOT PUPIL SIZE WITHIN THE RANGE RANGE OR DILATED WITHIN THE RANGE DILATED BUT MAY BE DILATED DILATED CONSTRICTED REACTION TO LIGHT SLOWED SLOWED SLOWED LITTLE OR NO VISIBLE REACTION PULSE RATE BELOW BELOW BLOOD PRESSURE BELOW DEPENDS ON SUBSTANCE BELOW BODY TEMPERATURE References: WITHIN THE RANGE, BELOW, OR WITHIN THE RANGE BELOW Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Validation Study, Final Report to Governor's Office of Highway Safety, State of Arizona, June 4, 1994. Eugene V. Adler, Arizona Department of Public Safety and Marcelline Burns, Southern California Research Institute. Evaluation of the Impact of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program on Enforcement and Adjudication, December, 1992. D.F. Preusser, R.G. Ulmer and C.W. Preusser. Report no. DOT HSA 808 058. Field Evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department Drug Detection Procedure. February, 1986, DOT HS 807 012, A NHTSA Technical Report, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Richard P. Compton. (Commonly referred to as the 173 Case Study). Identifying Types of Drug Intoxication: Laboratory Evaluation of a Subject Examination Procedure, May 1984 Final Report. George E. Bigelow, Ph.D. et al. Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences. Funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation's NHTSA and the National Institute of Drug Abuse. (Commonly called the Johns Hopkins Study), NHTSA, Pub. No. DOT HS 806 753 (1985). A Study of Working Partnerships: A Report to Congress on the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, April 1, 1996