全球智库信息集成服务系统

Participants stressed that detecting drug-induced impairment is critically important

• Several useful tools exist that gather adequate evidence to identify DUID. These tools include specialized officer training, standardized field sobriety tests, roadside chemical testing, and subsequent toxicological screening. However, each of the available tools might be insufficient on its own to prove impairment and each comes with benefits and drawbacks.

Law enforcement officers need tools to enhance their ability to collect evidence to detect drug-related impairment

• Specifically, officers need rigorous research to establish standardized, DUID-specific observational field tests that more law enforcement officers can be trained to use; protocols that can result in more-timely blood draws; considerations of whether electronic warrants can make the evidence-gathering stage of a case more efficient; and the proportion of law enforcement that should have advanced training in detecting drug-related impairment.

Forensic toxicologists need research to identify gaps in resources

• Forensic toxicologists need research that can (1) help identify the gaps in resources, standards, or capability that might be preventing them from delivering adequate, reliable, and timely results in some jurisdictions and (2) describe the impact on justice and due process of not investing sufficient resources into toxicology testing.

Prosecutors need research that identifies successful means to address the complexity of DUID cases

• There is a need to identify best practices for successfully prosecuting cases in the event that a suspect refuses to consent to observational or chemical tests. Prosecutors need mechanisms to increase DUID-specific training for themselves and court preparation for law enforcement and forensic toxicologists. Research also is needed to better understand the resulting risks and benefits to DUID cases of recent changes to implied consent laws.

Although alcohol-related impaired driving continues to be the primary cause of fatal automobile accidents in the United States, drug-impaired driving has emerged as a growing threat to public safety. Identifying and prosecuting cases of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) requires the engagement of three important actors within the criminal justice system: law enforcement, forensic toxicologists, and prosecutors. Each of these actors plays a crucial role in gathering, interpreting, or presenting evidence of drug-impaired driving to build a successful case. Meticulous observational and chemical evidence collection and skilled, simple interpretation of this evidence is particularly important in a DUID case because such cases can be more complex and difficult to prove than alcohol-related impaired driving cases. Although blood alcohol concentration levels have been established and accepted as reliable and valid evidence of alcohol-impaired driving, no equivalent technique yet exists that correlates an amount of a drug in the body with the degree of drug-related impairment. To examine this issue, RTI International and the RAND Corporation convened a two-day workshop. The participants discussed the challenges, opportunities, and complexities faced by law enforcement, forensic toxicologists, and prosecutors in their roles collecting, interpreting, and presenting evidence in cases of driving under the influence of drugs. Using these discussions, the panel members identified and ranked needs for law enforcement, forensic toxicologists, and prosecutors to successfully identify and prosecute DUID cases. This report provides the prioritized list of needs and accompanying context from the discussion that resulted from this effort.