Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog

Administrative Law: Suspension of Driver’s License Based Upon THC in Blood

Posted by Ted A. Schmidt | Oct 03, 2024 | 0 Comments

Kirsten v. Arizona Dept. of Transp., No. 1 CA-CV 24-0092 (App. Div. I, October 1, 2024) (J. Jacobs) https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2024/No.%201%20CA-CV%2024-0092%20KIRSTEN%20v%20ADOTMVD.pdf

ABSENCE PROOF OF IMPAIRMENT, A.R.S. § 36-2852(A)(1) PROHIBITS SUSPENSION OF DRIVER'S LICENSE BASED UPON BLOOD TEST ESTABLISHING THC CONTENT

Aaron Kirsten's driver's license was suspended by the Department of Transportation [ADOT] when a blood test following a traffic stop for speeding revealed the presence of Tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] in Kirsten's blood. The investigating officer testified to bloodshot, watery eyes, slurred speech and unsteady feet and that Kirsten refused a field sobriety test. While Kirsten's blood alcohol content [BAC] of 0.083 was over the presumption of alcohol intoxication, after arrest for driving under the influence A.R.S. § 28-1381, he consented to a blood draw which demonstrated only 0.063 BAC, below the presumption. ADOT suspended his license for 90 days based upon the THC blood content that turned up in the same blood draw. A.R.S. § 28-1385(M)(1) & (M)(3)(b). Kirsten appealed. An administrative law judge and ultimately the Coconino County Superior Court sustained the suspension finding A.R.S. § 28-1385(M) allows ADOT to suspend a license based upon any amount of THC turning up in a blood draw even in the absence of proof of impairment and despite A.R.S. § 36-2852.  The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated and remanded.

As a result of passage of Proposition 207,  A.R.S. § 36-2852(A) was enacted providing that “'notwithstanding any other law,' which includes A.R.S. § 28-1385(M), the State cannot ‘abrogat[e] or limit[] any right or privilege conferred or protected by the laws of this state' .  .  .  . [and]  A.R.S. § 36-2851(3) [provides] that the State may “impos[e] penalties for driving . . . while impaired to even the slightest degree by marijuana.”  Hence, ADOT cannot suspend a driver's license based solely upon the existence of THC in the blood. Impairment must also be proven. 

ADOT waived the alternative argument that Kirsten's license should be suspended based upon the fact there was other evidence of impairment, by not raising it until appeal. 

About the Author

Ted A. Schmidt

Ted's early career as a trial attorney began on the other side of the fence, in the offices of a major insurance defense firm. It was there that Ted acquired the experience, the skills and the special insight into defense strategy that have served him so well in the field of personal injury law. Notable among his successful verdicts was the landmark Sparks vs. Republic National Life Insurance Company case, a $4.5 million award to Ted's client. To this day, it is the defining case for insurance bad faith, and yet it is only one of several other multi-million dollar jury judgments won by Ted during his career. He is certified by the State Bar of Arizona as a specialist in "wrongful death and bodily injury litigation".

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Our team works together - for you!

Our award-winning lawyers are backed by a talented, caring team of legal professionals, paralegals, bilingual assistants, notaries, and others - all dedicated to you, your case, and the compensation you deserve.

No fees and no costs until we win.

As such we always have your case and your best interest in mind. When you win, we win too by providing the best legal care possible.

Thorough investigation and preparation.

We tirelessly and thoughtfully prepare every case we represent as though it was going to trial. This lets insurance companies know that we are a force to be reckoned with. As such, we settle successfully 98% of the time.