Prosecuting Driving-Under-the-Influence-of-Drugs Cases

A man being pulled over by the police at night

Identifying challenges and successful strategies in prosecuting Driving-Under-the-Influence-of-Drugs (DUID) offenses

Client

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Dates

September 2019 – September 2024

Challenge

Prosecutors have difficulty in obtaining convictions in DUID cases.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) wanted to identify and examine the challenges with prosecuting DUID cases and describe some of the strategies prosecutors have used to overcome those challenges. The goal was to increase prosecutors’ ability to develop strong DUID cases, which would lead to more successful prosecution of DUID offenses.

A report from this effort would then be helpful to prosecutors, drug recognition experts (DREs), toxicologists, traffic law enforcement officers, judges, State Highway Safety Office personnel, and other highway safety and public health officials.

Solution

NORC interviewed prosecutors to identify issues, challenges, and solutions in prosecuting DUID cases.

We modified our approach in response to COVID-19 restrictions and other delays. This included collecting court records and reviewing them for information on prosecutorial challenges and successes. We also interviewed nine expert prosecutors to identify the most salient and valuable information.

Some court records were also collected and reviewed for information on prosecutorial challenges and successes. These court records ended up not being as useful as the records of documented decisions by judges and did not provide details to determine the challenges faced by prosecutors.

Result

Prosecutors agreed upon five strategies to overcome barriers in prosecuting DUID.

Of the nine expert prosecutors interviewed, a consensus on key strategies emerged:

Evidence of impairment is the most compelling strategy. Witnesses must be able to articulate impairment beginning with driving behavior, reasonable suspicion for the stop, probable cause for the arrest, and the request for a blood test.
Pre-trial conferences to review evidentiary testimony should be held with the investigating officers, the DRE, the toxicologist, and any other key witnesses who can articulate evidence of impairment.
Jury selection must focus on the evidence of impairment by addressing areas subject to defense attacks (particularly the use of prescription drugs or cannabis) to educate the jury on the facts and the law and uncover any bias or misconceptions about impaired driving from these drugs.
Training for judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement personnel on the research and rigor of standardized field sobriety testing (SFST) and DRE procedures and drug pharmacology for prescription drugs and cannabis should be made available and enhanced.
- In addition, prosecutors and law enforcement officers should receive joint training, and prosecutors should be provided with continuing legal education (CLE) credit for SFST, DRE, and Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE) training.
Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutors, DREs, and toxicologists should be consulted during case preparation before trial and use their expertise and resources to analyze cases better, overcome defense arguments, and respond to judicial reluctance to accept complex DUID evidence.