A problem for legal Nevada patients is the state's drugged driving law, see: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-484.html#NRS484Sec379e

It appears that a patient who drives could be charged with DUID and found guilty per se with urinary metabolites of thc greater than 15 nanograms per ml, a minute amount which would be found in most any mmj patient even after weeks of abstinence.

When you look at the law authorizing the use of medical marijuana you appear to find that patients are not exempt from the per se limits, see http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-453A.html#NRS453ASec200

I know that patients have been charged, but I don't know if the cases ever went to trial. The penalties are severe if found guilty.

It seems like such a case would be open and shut for prosecutors, looking at the laws. The only possible weakness I can see in the Nevada per se law is the definition of a prohibited substance, see: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-484.html#NRS484Sec1245
It appears that a "valid prescription" is a defense. Nevada cardholding patients don't have a prescription since federal law doesn't allow a script for a schedule I controlled substance, but they do have some kind of official permission to use. I'm no lawyer and I wouldn't want to be a test case! If it's illegal for a patient to drive, why does the DMV not confiscate a patient's license to drive as it does with the commercial license?

Well if this is how nevada sees it as far as LEGAL PRESCRIBED DRUGS APPROVED BY THE FD,A A(ASSHOLES) Then I`d say prolly 99.9% of drivers are under the influence at all times...So now I ponder the question...Whats diff about fda approved and mmj?

If it's illegal for a patient to drive, why does the DMV not confiscate a patient's license to drive as it does with the commercial license?

Its not illegal for a patient to drive. If you were charged with DUI, you would have to take it to trial since there is no precedent setting case.

I do know of one patient who was taken to jail after being pulled over, officer said he was smoking and driving. He fought it until they offered him a reduced charge, some kind of traffic infraction cost him 200 and a night in jail and bail.

PW

I posted earlier about my concern that cardholding patients are not protected from being found guilty of per se DUID according to Nevada law, if they have marijuana metabolites in their system above 15 ng per ml, a minute amount, which would be found in a regular user weeks or even months after cessation of the drug. An article in the Nevada Law Journal supports my concern, see 7 Nev. L.J. 570, DWI and Drugs: A Look at Per Se Laws for Marijuana, Charles R. Cordova, Jr.

The above journal could be found in any law library, or a public library could obtain a copy for a patron usually free of charge. Among the cases the article discusses are two especially interesting ones for patients. In one case, an individual was charged under the statute I cited in my first posting. This individual was not a patient. In a jury trial the individual was found innocent of impaired driving but guilty of per se DUID, since marijuana metabolites were present above the legal limits. This case resulted from a traffic accident with multiple fatalities. The sentence was 18 to 48 years in prison and the individual remains incarcerated, despite several appeals to the state supreme court.

In another case of interest an individual was involved in a traffic accident with multiple fatalities, three of which were children. The circumstances were similar to the above, both drivers apparently fell asleep resulting in the horrific accidents. In this second case the driver had high levels of the drug Xanax, but since the individual had a prescription the DA declined to prosecute, due to the difficulty of proving actual impairment, even though there seemed to be sufficient evidence. After a considerable public outcry misdemeanor charges were filed and the driver was sentenced to eight months of house arrest and one year of probation.

In my understanding of the article the author feels that Nevada medical marijuana patients are at considerable risk from the DUID law, since they do not have a valid prescription, which offers considerable protection from prosecution. It is true that the law could be challenged, perhaps successfully, but in general per se laws have been validated in most jurisdictions that have them against most any challenge including legal use of medical marijuana. Recently the Michigan Supreme Court, in a divided decision, upheld that state’s per se law in a case involving legal medical marijuana patients. And the Nevada Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of the driver in the case cited above.

I think a proposed change in the Nevada DUID law to exclude marijuana metabolites should be high on the list of anything presented to the next legislature. At least one state has done that very thing.

See the article in the LV Sun, "Marijuana petition flawed"
By Dana Gentry · January 7, 2010

It seems like the NV DUID law is the elephant in the living room, so to speak, for legal NV medical marijuana patients. It's not just the very serious charge of DUID, which in itself has ruined lives, but if someone is injured in an accident one could be facing felony charges and serious prison time, even though the accident is not his/her fault.

Don't take my word for it, but see the following:

7 Nev. L.J. 570, DWI and Drugs: A Look at Per Se Laws for Marijuana, Charles R. Cordova, Jr. Spring 2007

The above journal could be found in any law library, or a public library could obtain a copy for a patron usually free of charge.

The same thing Happened in Eureka Nevada Around 5-6 years ago. A man and 2 woman were driving on the Highway just east of Eureka NV. When the truck "Malfunctioned" Causing it to Roll Several times.The driver A man, Was Un injuried One of the Female Passengers Died From Her Injuries At the seen. The Other woman lived.

Needless To say the Male driver Had THC in his system. He was not high But it was In his system. He was charged and Convicted of Vehicular Homicide and DUID.

Now days He is still in Prison!!! I will find the origonal NHP report on this.

You can and will go to prison. no matter what kind of drug.

strange. And it kinds of picks on MMj Patients as Even a wiff is still detectable 28 days Later?????? and that point Whatever Nanogram thing is a joke. I bet after 24 hours of not taking mmj. I would still be over the so called Legal limit in the bloodstream!!!! as I use up to 21 grams a day some times...

Peace also i do not drive very often exspecially now LOL

I received my renewal packet for the MJ card today from Carson City. Included is a WARNING page that seems to be new this year. I checked my packet from last year and didn't find this page. Anyway the page states that cardholders are not exempt from the DUID law discussed earlier in this thread. The new page actually cites the 10 ng per ml of urine for mj metabolites threshold. This means that patients who use mj daily or even weekly would be guilty per se of DUID for weeks or months after use. Per se means that a patient would have no defense against a charge, assuming his/her mj metabolites were above the minute amount of 10ng/ml.

What are the penalties? Very severe, and should the hapless patient be involved in an accident with injuries, even though the accident was not judged the patient's fault, he/she would be facing serious prison time. The per se law is worded in such a way that the prosecutor has almost no latitude in softening the punishment spelled out in the law.

Given all of this, I'm wondering about the wisdom of renewing my card. It seems like it could be more of a liability than a help. Assuming you are driving, would you want to tell a police officer that you have a card? Or would you want the officer to query Carson City to see if you have a card? I believe this is an officer's right. It seems to me that if you are a known mj patient and are caught driving, you might find yourself on the way to a drug test. It might be better to just have a valid physician's recommendation that mj might help you, using the state approved form. In theory this would have the legal power of the card, and make a person a less obvious target.

Are there any solutions for patients to the perverse DUID law, outside of not driving? I don't really see any. A patient could turn to the legal synthetic dronabinol and use it in place of mj. Of course a patient would need a script and realize that he/she is going to test positive for mj and its metabolites. And such a patient would have to be careful about driving with high blood levels of THC, but this patient could not be found guilty per se of DUID.

It all boils down to personal responsibility. If you feel that it is worth the risk to drive while using prescription medication then do it. I only drive when it is absolutely necessary. Ironically it usually when I am going to my doctor's appts. *LOL* Other than that I work it out with my DH to drive. I did that before I even got my MMJ card. And when I signed that paperwork and sent it off to the state for approval I made the decision to stop driving almost completely. Not because I feel so impaired all of the time but there is a risk that if I get pulled over and depending on my mood, that the cop could find out that I had a MMJ card and decide to slap me with a DUI simply because I have it in my system for up to 30 days and they know that. I have a husband who can drive for me when I need it. Some ppl do not have that luxury so they might decide against getting the card. You also have to realize that just because you are required by law to pull over and give them your driver's license that it does not include giving them your life story. You are not required to show them your card. They cannot call down to the health department and check up on you (unless you tell them to) so why tell them at all unless it is brought up by them seeing MJ in your car or smelling it on your person. I would only tell them as a last resort and know that even then it's not going to help you if they have a stick up their ass and want to haul you downtown. The best defense is not to give out any info until you are standing in front of that judge. Period.

It would be the same with any prescription drug. Just like when I took Morphine and got pulled over for whatever reason, I did not hand the cop my license and my bottle of Morphine. He did not even ask and if he had of, I do not know that I would have said anything different than, "What business is that of your's?" HIPPA laws do apply to police officers as well. If you do not hand them your card when you get pulled over the likelihood of them knowing anything (unless you wreak of MJ) is next to nothing.

But again, it depends on your personal feelings and responsibility. If you feel that you are better off not driving then do not drive. If you feel that you can drive just fine and it should not be an issue then do so, just know that there could be heavy consequences for driving while you hold that card or any prescription medicine.

There is a big difference in DUID involving prescription drugs and per se DUID. In the former the state must prove actual impairment, something that is difficult to do, see 7 Nev. L.J. 570, DWI and Drugs: A Look at Per Se Laws for Marijuana, Charles R. Cordova, Jr.

My understanding of the article finds that a prescription offers considerable protection against prosecution under the DUID laws, while under the per se law all the state has to show is that a person's MJ metabolites are above a certain minute amount, end of case. There is no defense.

I believe I have heard that the DMV has a large say in this issue; and if so they're probably laying low and waiting for the courts to settle the issue after some future possible traffic accident. Just like Pierre said. They're waiting on a good trial case to make policy.
Seems like since the DMV is the agency issuing our card that there is something they could do; but there aren't any government agencies that are going to grant us rights and stick their necks out. Nothing in it for them.
I would say just drive real carefully and don't get hit by a school bus because they'll say it was your fault and make you a poster boy for driving under the influence.
More reefer madness.

NRS 484C.110
 to drive or be in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway or on premises to which the public has access. The fact that any person charged with a violation of this subsection is or has been entitled to use that drug under the laws of this State is not a defense against any charge of violating this subsection.
3. It is unlawful for any person to drive or be in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway or on premises to which the public has access with an amount of a prohibited substance in his or her blood or urine that is equal to or greater than:

Urine
Nanograms
per milliliter

(g) Marijuana 10
(h) Marijuana metabolite 15

My medical mj license is in the mail to Carson City. I have no intention of renewing it as long as the above law applies to medical mj users, since it makes them criminals if they drive. The sanctions are severe.

DUID has been my concern for years. I still drive but I know I'm taking a chance. This needs to be addressed. Thanks for posting this great info!