C.A. 2nd;
B270133

The Second Appellate District affirmed a judgment. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding speculative evidence regarding an accident victim's alleged impairment from marijuana use.

Truck driver David Hernandez was hauling a flatbed trailer with a 45,000 pound load of cement when he pulled into a rest area on the opposite side of Pacific Coast Highway to take a nap. When he awoke, it was getting dark. He turned on his lights and drove across the highway into the northbound lane to continue on his route. David Small, who was driving southbound, did not see the unlit flatbed crossing his path until it was too late for him to avoid a collision. He suffered an open fracture of his left shoulder. A urine sample taken at the emergency room tested positive for THC. The test result did not show the concentration of THC in his urine or the extent to which the THC is active or inactive. David told an emergency-room physician that he had occasionally used marijuana but had not consumed it within the prior 36 hours. David sued Hernandez for his injuries. At trial, Hernandez sought to present expert testimony to show that, at the time of the collision, David's ability to drive was impaired by marijuana consumption. David moved in limine to exclude that evidence. Hernandez proffered expert testimony that David's high blood pressure, rapid pulse, rapid respiratory rate, and memory loss following the accident were consistent with marijuana use. David offered an expert declaration that David's urine screening did not show whether the THC in his urine was active or inactive. David also offered his emergency room physician's declaration that David showed no signs of intoxication and, in the physician's opinion, was not impaired in any way. The trial court granted David's motion to exclude Hernandez's expert testimony.