The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that the state does not need to present expert testimony in DUI cases where the defendant was under the influence of a prescription drug.The decision in Commonwealth v. Griffith reverses a split Superior Court panel, which decided it was improper of the fact-finder to infer the effects of prescription medications without expert testimony.
Justice Seamus P. McCaffery, who wrote for the court, said in a 12-page opinion that the decision derived “in large part” from a comparison of the requirements to prove DUI when alcohol appears to be involved and the statutory framework prohibiting driving after using drugs.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
