You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 9:40 a.m.

Crash leads to arrest of man police say drove after smoking pot

By Cindy Heflin

A man police said drove while under the influence of marijuana was arrested after a crash Thursday in Ann Arbor Township.

Deputies were investigating a two-car crash near Holmes Road and Ford Boulevard about 4 p.m. Thursday when they noticed one of the drivers appeared to be impaired, a Washtenaw County sheriff’s department media summary said. The driver, a 40-year-old Superior Township man, told deputies he had smoked marijuana earlier in the day.

A blood sample taken at the hospital will be sent to the State Police Crime Laboratory for analysis, the summary said.

The crash caused minor injuries to both drivers, the summary said.



Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 4:53 p.m.

When are the police going do draw blood to check for pharmaceuticals that effect reaction time? Tuh!


Mon, Oct 24, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.

right, but wrong though too, as the crux of the issue is impairment. I shout "IMPAIRMENT IS QUANTIFIABLE"! roadside tests are already accepted, and should be given absolute weight over an individuals recent behavior.

Basic Bob

Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 12:59 p.m.

I'm all in favor for legalizing marijuana, not that I would start back up if they did. It's not nearly as devastating to society as overindulgence in alcohol. Driving while impaired should be punishable, regardless of whether it is caused by illegal substances. Impairment could be caused by lack of sleep, prescription drugs (do not operate a vehicle after taking), or obnoxious children in the back seat. Any way, you are responsible once you get behind the wheel. You better be competent to drive.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 12:40 p.m.

All of you folks who say pot doesn't impair driving are kidding yourselves. Reaction times are significantly lowered. I'm for legalization of marijuana, not because I want to smoke it or I think it's good, but because it's time to return to being a free country where people take responsibility for their own lives and the government returns to a sideline support function. If this guy crashed after smoking pot, they should hammer him in court. The rest of you potheads will think twice about smoking and driving. Other than that, why do we care what our neighbors are smoking? It's their behavior after smoking that matters. If they commit a crime, charge them, but if they don't, leave them alone. The question of smoking pot and driving is the toughest point on this question, and hopefully medical science will give us an answer. I still think it's a mistake to use the heavy hand of government on every issue. I am the only one that wonders why the government is regulating the minute details of every day life?


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.

Completely wrong and baseless at all levels.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 1:06 a.m.

Legalizing marijuana is just what we need.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 3:58 p.m.

Thank You. I totally agree.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 8:48 p.m.

Tell me again that Marijunana should be legal, that there is no way it can impair driving. Tell me again the Police are wrong to arrest this person. Am wondering what the blood sample will reveal. Good Job WCSD!


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.

Ok, I will tell you: . . . 'Marijunana should be legal, that there is no way it can impair driving, the Police are wrong to arrest marijuana smokers. And I totally disagree with you. Expand your thinking and catch up with the rest of enlighted society.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 7:23 p.m.

This is a non story. Smoking pot does not impair driving in the least.


Mon, Oct 24, 2011 : 1:11 p.m.

You obviously are doing it wrong.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 1:07 a.m.

That is a bunch of garbage.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 5 p.m.

"There's no legally acceptable way to determine whether, in fact, anyone is under the influence of the principal active ingredient of marijuana" Sometimes you gotta just use common sense. If the guy told police he was smoking pot, he was...wait for it... likely smoking pot.

Georgetown Dad

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 4:13 p.m.

I believe they need do determine if the driver was "One toke over the line"


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 10:51 p.m.

I believe we made Marilyn laugh

Marilyn Wilkie

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 10:17 p.m.

sweet jesus...


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 4:12 p.m.

IF the arrested person has a MM card then impairment will have to be proven in a court of law. The OWID law in this state was just ruled to be unconstitutional due to its blatant and obvious 4th amendment violations. The story does not indicate in any way the circumstances of the accident. Other than alleged impairment as "noticed" by the officer was this driver held to be at fault in the accident by say running a red light or other traffic signal? Once again a poorly written story by an agenda driven editorial staff. This is one of the many reasons I stopped subscribing to this rag years ago. The marketing tactics this rag uses are a joke too. They beg in stores!!!! If they were a real news outlet providing informative news written well then they would not have to beg!!! The purported writer is obviously not overly concerned about basic Journalism.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 3:10 p.m.

The story is impossible. There's no legally acceptable way to determine whether, in fact, anyone is under the influence of the principal active ingredient of marijuana, THC. Blood testing can only reveal whether THC has been ingested at any point in the previous three or four weeks, not whether its intoxicating effects are current. This is different than alcohol testing in that under the per se law, alcohol above the level of 0.08 percent is legally accepted as an intoxicating level.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 3:44 a.m.

Incorrect. THC metabolizes into 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC, a non-psychoactive metabolite after a known duration of time. Thus, if police can show impairment through the use of field sobriety tests and the lab determines whether or not the THC has metabolized and if so, to what degree, it can be scientifically shown that the marijuana was smoked within the last several hours (or less), not weeks.

Tom Joad

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 3:33 p.m.

16 states have enacted a per se marijuana law for drivers, and the Obama Admin. is actively pressing all states to enact similar laws. The per se marijuana laws convict a driver under the influence of marijuana by detecting the metabolites of THC in your system and different states have varying standards of what level constitutes DUI marijuana, some states like Nevada, have zero tolerance to convict. Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the presence of THC metabolites can't be used to convict someone of DUI even though Michigan has a per se marijuana law. It has been conclusively shown by many studies that many traffic fatalities are caused by drivers under the influence of marijuana and in many alcohol related deaths marijuana use was also detected, so how is the state going to demarcate the two? Both have severe effects on judgment, contrary to the pot adovcates who painstakingly believe it's benign. Even this one article proves as much

Tom Joad

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 3:07 p.m.

The proliferation of pot smokers has threatened our very civil liberties. The sheriff near Flint is setting up Drug Check Points on the interstate, stopping vehicles to search your car with drug-sniffing dogs, which is patently unconstitutional. Also, they are relying on large warning signs ahead of the checkpoints to purposely catch drivers who make an illegal u-turn on the freeway to avoid the stop ahead. They have patrol cars stationed on the opposite side of the freeway. Now, citizens who are not engaged in illegal activities have to be inconvenienced and subjected to the power of the state while going about their daily business. Marijuana will never be legal in America, nor should it. It is illegal in practically every country in the world with harsh penalties in many nations. Americans don't want weed legalized, contrary to the propaganda promulgated by the marijuana lobby. The state of Michigan is currently toughening the medical marijuana statute to bring some sanity and reserve to the ad hoc, free-for-all foisted upon the state with illegal dispensaries and shameless profiteers who have spoiled the noble intent of providing relief to desperately ill patients. Medical marijuana should be exceedingly regulated and prescribed for only the gravest diseases. That's what most Michigan voters believed when they voted for the law.


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 3:17 p.m.

@kochmann - why would we ever want to be like India? Or Switzerland or the Netherlands? If it's so great there buy a plane ticket and move there................


Sun, Oct 23, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.

Even cops disagree with you Tom. <a href="" rel='nofollow'></a> &quot;Law Enforcement Against Prohibition is an international organization of criminal justice professionals who bear personal witness to the wasteful futility and harms of our current drug policies. Our experience on the front lines of the "war on drugs" has led us to call for a repeal of prohibition and its replacement with a tight system of legalized regulation, which will effectively cripple the violent cartels and street dealers who control the current illegal market.&quot;

Marilyn Wilkie

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 10:17 p.m.

I respectfully disagree.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 7:24 p.m.

You are wrong, pure and simple.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 2:42 p.m.

Bad, bad, bad. The headline is so confusing and it couldn't be worse. &quot;Crash leads to arrest of man police say drove after smoking pot&quot; No sense. A man doesn't drive a crash. Or do you mean that the police smoked pot, then said that the man drove? Then the first sentence is as messed up as the title. Avoiding redundant phrases &quot;police said&quot;, &quot;the summary said&quot; would make these articles more concise. A better title would be: &quot;Driver arrested after smoking pot and crashing&quot; News producers: Way to go!


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.

@Tom Joad: I'm not condemning him. Second paragraph ends with: &quot;The driver, a 40-year-old Superior Township man, told deputies he had smoked marijuana earlier in the day.&quot; The driver admitted he smoked pot. No need for &quot;allegedly&quot;.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.

Hmmm......made perfect sense to me

Tom Joad

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 2:57 p.m.

allegedly smoked pot...your shortened version condemns the man without a trial.


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 2:19 p.m.

Did he drop his MM card?


Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 1:50 p.m.

Was he driving too slow ?

Marilyn Wilkie

Sat, Oct 22, 2011 : 10:15 p.m.

good one.