Contesting a Maine Marijuana OUI After Passing Most Field Tests

Attorney Answer

Passing most of the field sobriety tests does not mean you were not impaired under Maine law, and having a valid prescription for your anxiety medication is not a defense. Those are the two beliefs most likely to cost you this case.

Under 29-A M.R.S. § 2411(1-A)(A), it is a crime to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants, or with an alcohol level of 0.08 or more. "Under the influence of intoxicants" is defined at 29-A M.R.S. § 2401(13) as being under the influence of alcohol, a drug other than alcohol, a combination of drugs, or a combination of alcohol and drugs. "Drugs" is defined at § 2401(4) to include scheduled drugs and any natural or artificial chemical substance that, when taken into the human body, can impair the ability of the person to safely operate a motor vehicle. That definition is written around the effect of a substance, not around whether you had a right to take it — and § 2411(5) makes the violation a strict liability crime, so the State does not have to prove you knew or intended to be impaired.

The combination is the risk in your case. Marijuana plus a prescription anxiety medication is a combination of drugs, and telling the officer about the medication supplied him with information he could act on.

That brings up the case you should know about, because it cuts against you. In State of Maine v. Amanda Bennett-Roberson, 2019 ME 49, the Law Court dealt with a drug-impairment OUI involving prescription medication and a challenge to extending a stop into field sobriety tests. The trial court had suppressed the evidence; the State appealed and won. The Law Court vacated the suppression order, holding that the motion court erred by confining its analysis to what the trooper knew up to the moment the original reason for the stop dissipated. Even after the reason for the stop evaporates, a valid seizure has already occurred, a license and registration check is a minimal further intrusion, and where an officer discovers additional evidence of possible wrongdoing he may expand his inquiry based on that new information. The new information there included slurred speech, a droopy facial appearance, no license in hand, and an admission of having taken unidentified prescription medication, observed by a certified drug recognition expert. Whether ordering the driver out for field sobriety tests was justified had to be judged on that fuller record.

Read that against your own facts. The statement that you take anxiety medication is precisely the kind of information that can justify extending a stop into field testing. So do not build your case on the theory that the officer had nothing to go on.

You should also know that 29-A M.R.S. § 2525 makes a certified drug recognition expert's impairment assessment admissible as evidence of OUI, along with a confirmed positive blood or urine drug or metabolite result, and provides that a failure to comply with the section does not by itself exclude the results unless they are shown to be unreliable. That is the exact ground you want to contest on, and it tells you the standard: pointing out that a test was administered imperfectly is not enough — the results have to be shown to be unreliable.

What may genuinely help you is narrower and more useful than "I wasn't high": you passed most of the tests, which is documented; the finger test is one component of a battery, not a verdict; a positive marijuana result reflects presence, which is not the same as impairment at the moment you were driving; and your prescribed medication has documented dosing you can establish.

Two separate cases. If a blood or urine test was taken, your license is likely the subject of an administrative proceeding run by the Secretary of State, entirely apart from the criminal charge. It has a different decision-maker and a different standard of proof, and the two can come out differently on the same stop. Winning in criminal court does not automatically restore your license, and losing the license case does not decide the criminal one.

Separately, the presence of your daughter in the car is a fact the prosecution will emphasize, and it can have consequences beyond the driving case. Raise it with your lawyer early rather than being surprised by it.

What you can do

1. Find every piece of paper you were given at the roadside and the station. If any of it concerns your license or a hearing, act on that first — that clock is shorter than your court date. 2. Stop discussing the case, your marijuana use and your medication with police. You have already made statements; do not add to them. 3. Write out today what you took and when: the marijuana, every prescription, dosages, times, prescriber, and what you ate and slept. 4. Have the cruiser video, body-camera footage, the officer's report, the drug recognition expert evaluation form and any laboratory report requested in writing as soon as possible. 5. Get records showing your medications are prescribed and that you were taking them as directed — useful context even though a prescription is not a defense. 6. Give the video and the drug recognition expert packet to a lawyer before your first court date. Under § 2525 the challenge has to attack reliability, which requires the underlying documentation.

⏱ Time limits apply. If a chemical test was taken, the window to request the administrative license hearing is short — often a matter of days from the notice — and it runs separately from the criminal case, expiring while you are still waiting for a court date. The exact deadline is on the notice you were given, so find that document today.