Saturday, March 21, 2009

Judge disses drunken driving tipsters

Saturday, March 21, 2009
Troy cops told they can't stop car based only on 911 call.
Mike Martindale / The Detroit News
TROY -- In a very rare move, the city of Troy is appealing a district judge's decision to dismiss a drunken driving case last month because it was based on observations of another motorist, rather than the officer who finally stopped the suspected driver.
Troy police stopped the car, a Chevrolet Lumina, in a subdivision off Rochester Road about 1:30 a.m. Nov. 11 after a motorist used a cell phone to report the Lumina had been weaving. According to court records, a 38-year-old Sterling Heights driver was arrested for operating a vehicle while intoxicated. He recorded a 0.10 blood alcohol level on a breathalyzer test -- higher than the 0.08 in which a motorist is deemed too intoxicated to drive in Michigan.
But Troy District Judge William E. Bolle dismissed the case during his first court appearance on Feb. 24.
"...You can't just assume that a cell phone caller is reliable, many times they are," Bolle said, according to a court transcript. "I've had occasions where they were not. I've had occasions where they're a spiteful person that's called the police and made allegations that in fact were not really true."
A transcript of the dispatch tape records the caller's description of the weaving driver.
"I have a car in front of me driving erratically ... oh my God," the caller said.
"Yeah, you got to send somebody out here for sure. He's all over the road."
The caller provided the Lumina's license plate numbers, along with his own name and phone number, during the two-minute call, in which he followed the car.
In court, the driver's attorney, Kirsten Neilsen Hartig, said the police did not see the motorist driving erratically and only pulled him over in front of his home, according to court documents.
Troy city attorney Lori Grigg Bluhm said filing an appeal of the judge's decision was a "very, very rare" action for her office to take, but felt the dismissal must be overturned.
"We've worked with the judge for years, and it pains us to do this," Bluhm said. "We believe the officer's stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, regardless of whether she personally observed erratic driving."
Said Hartig on Friday night: "I am very disappointed. I thought the judge ruled appropriately on this matter and the Police Department never confirmed this person's identity. My client never weaved, never drove improperly and even used turn signals."
In dismissing the case, Bolle told attorneys his decision was based on "competing interests," including "the right of a driver to be free from an illegal stop."
A Mothers Against Drunk Driving representative described the dismissal as "absurd."
"What are we supposed to do, wait for people to be killed before you arrest a drunk driver?" said Richard Rondeau, executive director of the Macomb-Oakland chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
"I've made more than a half-dozen calls to police like that myself about drunk drivers.
"What does this say to citizens? To ignore what we see? It doesn't make any sense. Police were provided with good information by a reliable source. I don't care if the officer saw him hit a curb or not. I just want that drunk off the road."
Bolle noted the officer observed the Lumina "for at least a mile" and didn't notice any bad driving.
"I don't think there was enough evidence for her to make a stop. ... I don't think you can proceed to a prosecution given what she knew," he wrote.
"...You can't just assume that a cell phone caller is reliable, many times they are," Bolle said, according to a court transcript. "I've had occasions where they were not. I've had occasions where they're a spiteful person that's called the police and made allegations that in fact were not really true."
A transcript of the dispatch tape records the caller's description of the weaving driver.
"I have a car in front of me driving erratically ... oh my God," the caller said.
"Yeah, you got to send somebody out here for sure. He's all over the road."
The caller provided the Lumina's license plate numbers, along with his own name and phone number, during the two-minute call, in which he followed the car.
In court, the driver's attorney, Kirsten Neilsen Hartig, said the police did not see the motorist driving erratically and only pulled him over in front of his home, according to court documents.
Troy city attorney Lori Grigg Bluhm said filing an appeal of the judge's decision was a "very, very rare" action for her office to take, but felt the dismissal must be overturned.
"We've worked with the judge for years, and it pains us to do this," Bluhm said. "We believe the officer's stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, regardless of whether she personally observed erratic driving."
Said Hartig on Friday night: "I am very disappointed. I thought the judge ruled appropriately on this matter and the Police Department never confirmed this person's identity. My client never weaved, never drove improperly and even used turn signals."
In dismissing the case, Bolle told attorneys his decision was based on "competing interests," including "the right of a driver to be free from an illegal stop."
A Mothers Against Drunk Driving representative described the dismissal as "absurd."
"What are we supposed to do, wait for people to be killed before you arrest a drunk driver?" said Richard Rondeau, executive director of the Macomb-Oakland chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
"I've made more than a half-dozen calls to police like that myself about drunk drivers.
"What does this say to citizens? To ignore what we see? It doesn't make any sense. Police were provided with good information by a reliable source. I don't care if the officer saw him hit a curb or not. I just want that drunk off the road."
Bolle noted the officer observed the Lumina "for at least a mile" and didn't notice any bad driving.
"I don't think there was enough evidence for her to make a stop. ... I don't think you can proceed to a prosecution given what she knew," he wrote.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

147 cases in police lab mess called 'tip of iceberg'

BY AMBER HUNT and BEN SCHMITT FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS
Detroit Fee Press
March 15, 2009 01:13 AM
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy says her office has identified 147 cases of convicted and imprisoned people that will require the retesting of evidence as part of the investigation into the now-closed Detroit police crime lab -- unveiling the first of potentially thousands of cases that are at risk of unraveling because of mishandled evidence."This is the tip of the iceberg," Worthy told the Free Press on Thursday, noting that in addition to the 147 cases identified by her office, defense attorneys have notified her office of 30 others that they believe relied on mishandled evidence.Those cases, and thousands of others, are taxing the Michigan State Police's capacity, which could translate into guilty people walking the streets, innocent people stuck behind bars and law-enforcement agencies hamstrung in fighting crime. Added to the caseload is the budgetary constraints under which the Prosecutor's Office and State Police must function."I really feel baffled at how many people might be in jail because of botched evidence, or how many people aren't in jail because of botched evidence," said LaDarrell Howard, 40, of Harrison Township, who was acquitted on a second-degree murder charge last spring after Detroit police wrongly included a bullet from an unrelated suicide with evidence in Howard's case.Defense attorney David Steingold, who tries murder cases in Wayne County, calls the crime lab problems scary."To a defense lawyer, the scientific evidence in court is the hardest evidence to contest in court, whether it's a blood test in a drunk driving case or a ballistic test in a murder case," he said. "You are at the mercy of a piece of paper."'This is a big public safety issue'Michael Thomas, director of the State Police's forensic science division, said he expects the state's labs to handle at least 20,000 Detroit cases this year.That's on top of the 10,000 cases a year the State Police lab handles of its own and about 650 other police departments, which makes for a six- to eight-month backlog.Added to the crush, at the State Police's crime lab in Sterling Heights -- which handles most of Detroit's cases -- some 3,000 firearms cases have piled up since April and await testing, Thomas said.Sgt. Stephen Nowicki, a specialist with the Sterling Heights lab, said that before the Detroit lab closed, his personal backlog was between 10 and 20 cases. Now, it's 100 cases and climbing.
About 600 cases have been shipped to some of the six other State Police labs across the state -- 100 apiece to labs in Grayling and Bridgeport last week alone -- in hopes of staying afloat, said Sarah Hough, a forensic technician at the Sterling Heights lab."This is a big public safety issue," Thomas said. "We may have evidence that would identify a rapist, but because I can't get to it, it's just sitting there."How many victims are exposed during that eight-month period while I don't have time to analyze that evidence?"How the problem startedThe case that broke the scandal and overwhelmed the labs involved Jarrhod Williams, 21, who withdrew two no-contest pleas last year stemming from a May 2007 double slaying in Detroit after faulty firearms evidence surfaced.Williams initially confessed and went to trial a year ago in the shooting deaths of Detroiters DeAngelo Savage, 33, and Tommy Haney, 38, when prosecutors offered to let him plead no contest to second-degree murder and serve 12 years in prison. But he insisted that his confession was coerced and that he was not responsible for the killings.A Detroit police report indicated all 42 spent shell casings at the scene came from the same gun. But Williams' attorney Marvin Barnett was skeptical of the evidence and hired former State Police firearms examiner David Balash to look things over. Balash discovered that the casings came from at least two weapons. State Police conducted its own tests and confirmed Balash's results.As a result, a new trial was granted in October. Worthy and former Detroit Police Chief Ella Bully-Cummings ordered an audit of Detroit's crime lab. The audit found, among other findings, an error rate of 10% in 200 firearms cases it reviewed.After the audit, Detroit Mayor Ken Cockrel Jr. and Police Chief James Barren shut down the lab.Still, even with the bungled crime lab results, Williams' mother, Valarie Washington, remains skeptical."I hope the truth will come out," she said. "But my family doesn't trust the system. We believed in Mr. Barnett and all he's done, but the state has a way of always winning."Williams' new trial is expected to begin March 30.
Only one of manyAnother homicide case in question -- that against Edward Hill, who was sentenced to at least 50 years in prison about two years ago -- is being sent back to a circuit court judge, who could order a new trial.Hill's lawyer, Gerald M. Lorence, said a ballistics expert falsely testified that a bullet found in the victim came from a handgun seized from the home of one of Hill's relatives.Lorence said Hill's family is ecstatic that he may get a new trial. "It's true that someone was shot, but no one saw my client shoot anyone. Witnesses testified that he walked out of the store with a black gun, but the video shows it's a silver gun. I said, 'Wait a minute.' "Lab woes a nationwide problemThe Detroit lab wasn't the only one in the country with problems, according to the independent National Research Council. A review by West Virginia State Police found more than 100 convictions were in doubt because an employee had repeatedly falsified evidence. At least 10 people had convictions overturned.In Oregon, a man won a $2-million settlement after fingerprints mistakenly linked him to the 2004 train bombings in Madrid, Spain. Fingerprint evidence also was tossed out of a death penalty case in Maryland by a judge who declared it untested and unverifiable.Help on the way, but a ways offAmong the 20,000 cases are some that need DNA analysis. Of those, about 20% might be contracted out to independent labs, though there are only three such licensed labs in the country.And with Worthy's latest announcement that dozens of homicide cases need swift re-evaluation, Thomas said the state's labs are going to slip even further behind. Meanwhile, Worthy said her office is understaffed and doing the work "on a part-time basis on the county's dime."Worthy said her office has submitted a budget to Cockrel's office, which conservatively calls for $871,000 per year to take on such tasks.Worthy said more than 10% of the money budgeted for the investigation has already been spent.Meanwhile, Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano is asking all departments to cut their spending by 20%.Last month, the state approved $5 million for the hiring of 45 forensic scientists to add to the State Police's current staff of 36 across seven labs.
That will help, Thomas said, but not for two years -- the average time it takes to train each scientist."We're working in an environment where the acceptable failure rate is zero," he said. "You can't make a mistake, so obviously, we have very rigorous training programs."To help with the backlog, Michigan State Police will continue to ship DNA testing to nationally accredited third-party labs, but those labs aren't able to help with the thousands of cases that involve other types of forensic testing, such as the firearms analysis that landed Detroit in trouble.The Detroit audit found that access to the firearms unit was unrestricted and evidence could have been contaminated because it was allowed to overflow into office and work areas.Washington, the mother of Williams, said the crime lab problems are terrifying."It makes you wonder how many other people might be going through the same thing and it makes you wonder how many times the police lied or got it wrong," she said. "I want my son home and I also hope that this is going to help some other people."

SMILE YOU'RE ON COP-CAR CAMERA

Chicago Tribune
Steve Chapman
March 15, 2009
One night last summer Raymond Bell was pulled over by a Chicago cop and arrested for driving under the influence. Officer Joe D. Parker, a 23-year veteran, reported that upon getting out of his car, Bell was stinking of alcohol, lurching and unable to walk a straight line or stand on one foot. An officer with his stellar record would normally prevail against a DUI suspect. But in this case, Bell had something on his side: a video camera mounted on the dashboard of Parker's squad car that told a radically different story. Far from revealing a staggering drunk, reported the Chicago Sun-Times, the video "showed Bell appearing to be perfectly balanced," passing the sobriety tests that Parker administered—and being refused when he asked to take a Breathalyzer. Prosecutors watched the video and promptly dismissed the case. They are now considering charges against Parker.That episode raises the question: Nine years into the 21st Century, why isn't every squad car in America equipped with a dashboard video camera? Why do we persist in relying on the slippery, self-interested, incomplete and unverified accounts of opposing participants when we have the means to see the truth with our own eyes?
In this instance, the innocent man was lucky to be stopped by a cop driving a video-armed vehicle. The odds are against it, since only 11 percent of the Chicago Police Department's cars have cameras for recording traffic stops. Though the department is planning to use federal stimulus money to double that number and the mayor has said he wants cameras installed in the remaining vehicles "as quickly as possible," no one is radiating a sense of haste. Why not? The department says the main obstacle is money. Equipping another 300 cars, as the city plans, will require $2.1 million. So making them standard on the rest would cost about $13 million.But that shouldn't be an insurmountable obstacle. The Illinois State Police, with a fleet of nearly 1,100 vehicles, have managed to install cameras in more than 900. Spending $13 million looks extravagant only until you compare it to the cost of losing lawsuits over police misconduct. From 2005 through the middle of 2008, says the Chicago Reader, the city paid out $155 million in police cases. Dashboard cameras don't have to prevent many million-dollar judgments to be a bargain. The cops—at least the good ones, who are presumably the majority—have as much reason to want these recordings as the accused. The best defense against a phony charge of police brutality is a video showing exactly what the officer said and did. A suspect who is visibly inebriated or violent will have a hard time refuting the camera's testimony in court. Yet Chicago has dragged its feet, and it's not alone. After the 1991 Rodney King beating, a commission recommended that the Los Angeles Police Department mount cameras in its squad cars. It installed some but soon got rid of them. A federal monitor proposed the idea again in 2005, but the police chief, The Los Angeles Times reported, "said he saw it as a long-term project." Last year—17 years later—the LAPD finally decided to equip some vehicles. Contrast that with Mayor Richard Daley's enthusiasm for other types of video. Chicago now has some 2,250 surveillance cameras to detect criminal conduct in public places. By 2016, Daley promised last month, Chicago will have one on every corner.The city has also installed red-light cameras at some 132 intersections, with another 330 planned. So what exactly is different about those cameras? Well, they are trained on the citizenry, not on the police. What's sauce for the goose seems to be regarded as a dubious liquid substance when proposed for the gander. The city is less eager to capture video evidence if it may expose wrongdoing by its own law enforcement agents.But the rest of us might want to keep unsleeping electronic eyes on the people with guns and badges. A city with a good police department can gain a lot from squad-car video cameras. A city with a bad one can gain even more. Steve Chapman is a member of the Tribune editorial board and blogs at chicagotribune.com/chapman. E-mail: schapman@tribune.com.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Top DUI Deputy Fired after Investigation; may have wrongly jailed many

TAMPA - Daniel Brock won high praise for jailing impaired motorists. Mothers Against Drunk Driving honored him. So did his bosses.
But one of Hillsborough County's most aggressive DUI deputies may have wrongly sent dozens of people to jail, the Sheriff's Office acknowledged Thursday.
The agency fired Brock on May 24.
In one year, Brock arrested 58 people whose blood-alcohol content was below 0.08, the level at which state law presumes a driver is impaired, an internal affairs audit showed.
"I don't prescribe to the theory that somehow you have to be 0.08 to be drunk or impaired, " Brock, 38, told investigators.
A driver may be charged with DUI if the blood-alcohol level is between 0.05 and 0.08 percent, but there must be other evidence of impairment, such as a swerving vehicle.
In 43 of those 58 cases, motorists demonstrated no visible impairment behind the wheel, according to an internal affairs report made public Thursday. In 41 arrests, Brock also failed to make a case with urine samples, the report states.
Repeatedly, investigators found Brock reported failures in field sobriety tests when his patrol car video camera documented the opposite. He wrote, for instance, that a driver on Oct. 25, 2005, lost balance while turning. The video of the encounter showed that wasn't the case. The driver blew a 0.01 in the breath test but was arrested anyway.
He said drivers incorrectly recited the alphabet, used arms for balance and slurred speech - when the video showed correct alphabets, perfect balance and clear speech.
Brock told investigators he believed the drivers were all impaired.
"My goal is to go there, process the person and be gone, out to the next one, " he said.
Records show he pulled people over on DUI stops 17 times while his cruiser was occupied with other prisoners. That's against procedure.
He routinely filed arrest reports days, even weeks, after making an arrest. He told internal affairs Detective Bruce Crumpler that he always reported the results of field sobriety tests based on memory.
Wouldn't that leave room for errors, Crumpler asked?
"Well, there's room for error, " Brock told Crumpler. "I've never had a problem."
His paperwork became the subject of scorn at the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office, where prosecutors said the deputy tarnished his reputation by filing inaccurate arrest reports that lacked important details.
"He doesn't have a very good reputation for being a very good DUI officer that we care to work with, " prosecutor Jennifer Gabbard told Crumpler. "It's almost like whatever you can do to make it look like you're arresting people."
From October 2005 to October 2006, Brock made 313 arrests for driving under the influence.
He failed to activate his cruiser's audio and video equipment in 40 percent of his stops, instead relying on his "wrought memory" to recall important arrest details, the audit showed.
Within the Sheriff's Office, Deputy Brock previously had been praised for his "outstanding professional service" and was consistently recommended for raises. His superiors rated his performance "satisfactory" and called him a credit to the office.
He was lauded as a dedicated deputy who spoke to high school students about the perils of impaired driving.
"We always felt he was a good officer, " said Becky Gage, 55, the victim advocate for Hillsborough's MADD chapter. "As long as officers are within the scope of the law, then we support their efforts to remove impaired drivers."
But there were a few bumps in the road.
He was suspended and sent to driving school in 2000 after a string of what the Sheriff's Office deemed avoidable traffic accidents.
In 2006, he was named in a federal lawsuit alleging that he physically attacked the mother of a teenage boy he arrested in 2002. The Hillsborough County woman said Brock forced himself into her home, pushed her into a corner and sprayed her with pepper spray. The lawsuit is unresolved.
During the recent internal affairs investigation, Brock denied trying to boost numbers for personal recognition.
It was unclear Thursday whether Brock intends to appeal his firing.
He told investigators that given the chance, he would conduct his DUI stops the same way.
Said Brock: "I mean, perfect world, we need more deputies and fewer people."

Top DUI Cop Refuse Breath Test

PEKIN, Ill. - An off-duty central Illinois police officer honored two years ago for cracking down on drunken driving has been charged in an alcohol-related crash that injured 10 people.Greg Heiken, 37, a 13-year veteran of the El Paso police department, was charged Tuesday with driving under the influence of alcohol, aggravated DUI and failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident.Heiken, honored by the Illinois Department of Transportation's traffic safety division in 2004 for making the most DUI arrests in Woodford County
Rear-ended an SUV, triggering a chain-reaction crash.
Two people had to be extricated; no life-threatening injuries.
Refused Breathalyzer, so authorities drew his blood.
Faces up to three years in prison on felony aggravated DUI.

Top DUI cop charged in crash that hurt 10

PEKIN, Ill. - An off-duty central Illinois police officer honored two years ago for cracking down on drunken driving has been charged in an alcohol-related crash that injured 10 people.Greg Heiken, 37, a 13-year veteran of the El Paso police department, was charged Tuesday with driving under the influence of alcohol, aggravated DUI and failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident.Heiken, honored by the Illinois Department of Transportation's traffic safety division in 2004 for making the most DUI arrests in Woodford County
Rear-ended an SUV, triggering a chain-reaction crash.
Two people had to be extricated; no life-threatening injuries.
Refused Breathalyzer, so authorities drew his blood.
Faces up to three years in prison on felony aggravated DUI.

Top DUI cop charged in crash that hurt 10

PEKIN, Ill. - An off-duty central Illinois police officer honored two years ago for cracking down on drunken driving has been charged in an alcohol-related crash that injured 10 people.Greg Heiken, 37, a 13-year veteran of the El Paso police department, was charged Tuesday with driving under the influence of alcohol, aggravated DUI and failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident.Heiken, honored by the Illinois Department of Transportation's traffic safety division in 2004 for making the most DUI arrests in Woodford County
Rear-ended an SUV, triggering a chain-reaction crash.
Two people had to be extricated; no life-threatening injuries.
Refused Breathalyzer, so authorities drew his blood.
Faces up to three years in prison on felony aggravated DUI.

Going to Canada? Better Check Your Past

Visitors with minor criminal records turned back at border
C.W. NEVIUS
Friday, February 23, 2007
There was a time not long ago when a trip across the border from the United States to Canada was accomplished with a wink and a wave of a driver's license. Those days are over.
Take the case of 55-year-old Lake Tahoe resident Greg Felsch. Stopped at the border in Vancouver this month at the start of a planned five-day ski trip, he was sent back to the United States because of a DUI conviction seven years ago. Not that he had any idea what was going on when he was told at customs: "Your next stop is immigration.''
Felsch was ushered into a room. "There must have been 75 people in line," he says. "We were there for three hours. One woman was in tears. A guy was sent back for having a medical marijuana card. I felt like a felon with an ankle bracelet.''
Or ask the well-to-do East Bay couple who flew to British Columbia this month for an eight-day ski vacation at the famed Whistler Chateau, where rooms run to $500 a night. They'd made the trip many times, but were surprised at the border to be told that the husband would have to report to "secondary'' immigration.
There, in a room he estimates was filled with 60 other concerned travelers, he was told he was "a person who was inadmissible to Canada.'' The problem? A conviction for marijuana possession.
In 1975.
Welcome to the new world of border security. Unsuspecting Americans are turning up at the Canadian border expecting clear sailing, only to find that their past -- sometimes their distant past -- is suddenly an issue.
While Canada officially has barred travelers convicted of criminal offenses for years, attorneys say post-9/11 information-gathering, combined with a sweeping agreement between Canada and the United States to share data, has resulted in a spike in phone calls from concerned travelers.
They are shocked to hear that the sins of their youth might keep them out of Canada. But what they don't know is that this is just the beginning. Soon other nations will be able to look into your past when you want to travel there.
"It's completely ridiculous,'' said Chris Cannon, an attorney representing the East Bay couple, who asked that their names not be used because they don't want their kids to know about the pot rap. "It's a disaster. I mean, who didn't smoke pot in the '70s?''
We're about to find out. And don't think you are in the clear if you never inhaled. Ever get nabbed for a DUI? How about shoplifting? Turn around. You aren't getting in.
"From the time that you turn 18, everything is in the system,'' says Lucy Perillo, whose Canada Border Crossing Service in Winnipeg, Manitoba, helps Americans get into the country.
Canadian attorney David Lesperance, an expert on customs and immigration, says he had a client who was involved in a fraternity prank 20 years ago. He was on a scavenger hunt, and the assignment was to steal something from a Piggly Wiggly supermarket. He got caught, paid a small fine and was ordered to sweep the police station parking lot.
He thought it was all forgotten. And it was, until he tried to cross the border.
The official word from the Canadian Border Services Agency is that this is nothing more than business as usual. Spokesman Derek Mellon gets a little huffy when asked why the border has become so strict.
"I think it is important to understand that you are entering another country,'' Mellon says. "You are not crossing the street.''
OK, but something changed here, didn't it?
"People say, 'I've been going to Canada for 20 years and never had a problem,' '' Lesperance says. "It's classic. I say, 'Well, you've been getting away with it for 20 years.' ''
A prior record has always made it difficult to cross the border. What you probably didn't know was that, as the Canadian Consulate's Web site says, "Driving while under the influence of alcohol is regarded as an extremely serious offense in Canada.''
So it isn't as if rules have stiffened. But what has changed is the way the information is gathered. In the wake of 9/11, Canada and the United States formed a partnership that has dramatically increased what Lesperance calls "the data mining'' system at the border.
The Smart Border Action Plan, as it is known, combines Canadian intelligence with extensive U.S. Homeland Security information. The partnership began in 2002, but it wasn't until recently that the system was refined.
"They can call up anything that your state trooper in Iowa can,'' Lesperance says. "As Canadians and Americans have begun cooperating, all those indiscretions from the '60s are going to come back and haunt us.''
Now, there's a scary thought. But the irony of the East Bay couple's situation is inescapable. Since their rowdy days in the '70s, they have created and sold a publishing company, purchased extensive real estate holdings and own a $3 million getaway home in Lake Tahoe.
"We've done pretty well since those days,'' she says. "But what I wonder is how many other people might be affected.''
The Canadian Border Services Agency says its statistics don't show an increase in the number of travelers turned back. But Cannon says that's because the "data mining'' has just begun to pick up momentum.
"It is too new to say,'' he says. "Put it this way. I am one lawyer in San Francisco, and I've had four of these cases in the last two years, two since January. And remember, a lot of people don't want to talk about it (because of embarrassment).''
Asked if there were more cases, attorney Lesperance was emphatic.
"Oh, yeah,'' he says. "Just the number of calls I get has gone up. If we factor in the greater ability to discover these cases, it is just mathematically logical that we are going to see more.''
The lesson, the attorneys say, is that if you must travel to Canada, you should apply for "a Minister's Approval of Rehabilitation" to wipe the record clear.
Oh, and by the way, if you don't need to travel to Canada, don't think you won't need to clear your record. Lesperance says it is just a matter of time before agreements are signed with governments in destinations like Japan, Indonesia and Europe.
"This,'' Lesperance says, "is just the edge of the wedge.''
Who would have thought a single, crazy night in college would follow you around the world?
Rules for getting
into Canada For more information on offenses that prohibit entry to Canada, go to the Canadian Consulate's Web site

Actual Innocence Is Irrelevant

Drugged Driving: Michigan Supreme Court Upholds State DUID Law -- Now You Don't Even Have to Be High to Get Busted
If you smoke a joint Friday night and drive to work bright-eyed and bushy-tailed Monday morning in Michigan, you can be arrested, charged, and convicted as a drugged driver because inactive chemical traces of THC, or metabolites, remain in your bloodstream. The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that motorists can be convicted of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUID) even if they are not under the influence of drugs. According to the Supreme Court opinion in the consolidated cases Derror v. Michigan and Kurts v. Michigan authored by Justice Maura Corrigan, actual innocence of driving while impaired is "irrelevant."
In both cases, authorities charged the defendants under the Michigan DUID law based on the presence of cannabis metabolites, an inert byproduct of the body's breakdown of THC, in their blood. The presence of metabolites does not indicate impairment or being "under the influence"; it only indicates that someone ingested THC at some time in the past, as the state Supreme Court acknowledged in its ruling. Both trial courts held that the metabolite was not "marijuana" and thus not a controlled substance under state law, a position upheld on appeal.
But a majority on the Supreme Court disagreed. Neither the DUID nor the controlled substances law "requires that a substance have pharmacological properties to constitute a schedule I controlled substance," the majority held. Neither does the DUID law "require that a defendant be impaired while driving. Rather, it punishes for the operation of a motor vehicle with any amount of schedule I controlled substance in the body."
Then, breathtakingly, Justice Corrigan wrote, "It is irrelevant that a person who is no longer 'under the influence' of marijuana could be prosecuted under the statute. If the Legislature had intended to prosecute only people who were under the influence while driving, it could have written the statute accordingly."
Now, any Michigan driver who has smoked marijuana in the last few days or, in the case of heavier smokers, up to three or four weeks, is subject to a DUID arrest based on the presence of inert leftover metabolites that do not actually indicate impairment. In a harsh dissent, Justice Michael Cavanaugh warned the court it would criminalize a huge class of people.
"Today's holding now makes criminals out of numerous Michigan citizens who, before today, were considered law-abiding, productive members of our community," he wrote. "Now, if a person has ever actively or passively ingested marijuana and drives, he is [unknowingly] breaking the law, because if any amount of [cannabis metabolites] can be detected -- no matter when [the marijuana] was previously ingested -- he is committing a crime. The majority's interpretation, which has no rational relationship to the Legislature's genuine concerns about operating a motor vehicle while impaired, violates the United States Constitution and the Michigan Constitution."
The ruling could have an impact beyond Michigan. Twelve other states have enacted laws making it a criminal offense to drive under the influence of drugs. They use standards similar to those upheld this week -- the presence of trace levels of drugs or metabolites -- to assume impairment. Unlike drunk driving laws, which assume a certain blood alcohol level after which one is considered impaired, the DUID laws assume that the presence of any metabolite or trace proves impairment.