Blood test 2

[anaylor01]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Missouri
So I posted a few weeks ago. Here is what I received from my public defender.

Drug confirmation by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry:
diazepam
nordiazepam
oxazepam
temazepam

The blood collection tube, sample and method of analysis are compliant with the requirements of 19 CSR25-30.070 or 19 CSR 25-30.080, as applicable.

I, the undersigned, performed the analyses described in this report.
Xxx DHSS type 1 Permit # Expires 09/14/2019, assisted in the analyses.

This report contains opinions, interpretations and/or conclusions of the undersigned. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and accurate summation of the results of analyses conducted.

I asked him for the detailed report. Here is what he replied with.
Spoke to your prosecutor yesterday. The state says there is not a more detailed report. They say in terms of DWI that does not involve alcohol, the lab only tests for the presence of substances and not the actual amounts. With alcohol testing the lab reports produce an exact BAC reading, but that's not the case with non-alcohol blood testing.

So you can be charged with a DUI if you took your prescription drugs 2 days before? That is what those last two drugs are is my anti depressants I hadn't taken in two days.

 

[Just Blue]

Due to the incredibly rude and foul-mouthed posts you made on your other thread I doubt the volunteers will want to assist you.

 

[CdwJava]

I will reply only to add that in many jurisdictions out here they get the same reports for drug DUIs (as I mentioned in your other thread). In many jurisdictions, only if the DA specifically requests a more detailed report will the lab test for specific concentrations and/or other drugs. It may be much the same where you are.

If they do not test for specific levels, then you are left with only the cutoff levels ... which, by the way, can be sufficiently high enough to meet whatever standard MO sets for being under the influence of those substances. The cutoff level is NOT simply "anything above zero".

Your attorney can probably provide you with info on how he might be able to mount a defense.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Link to prior thread: forum.freeadvice.com/drunk-driving-dui-dwi-27/blood-test-645845.html

My personal observation: your attitude towards the police officer and when previously asking for advice was not a useful one.

Just because you had a prescription doesn't mean that you can take the medications willy nilly. You have to take them carefully, as prescribed. If this is exactly what you have been doing, then a trip back to your health care provided is necessary, as your medications are in need of adjustment.

It sounds like the report just indicates you have levels measuring above some particular amount.

The officer pulled you over and had you take these blood tests for some reason. It is likely that there was something about the way you were driving and behaving that made him suspect that you were under the influence of something, and the blood test is just to confirm this.

 

[TheGeekess]

I love how folks call benzodiazipines "antidepressants", I guess to make it sound better to themselves.

Oxazepam is a short-to-intermediate-acting benzodiazepine. Oxazepam is used for the treatment of anxiety and insomnia and in the control of symptoms of alcohol withdrawal.

Temazepam is an intermediate-acting 3-hydroxy hypnotic of the benzodiazepine class of psychoactive drugs. It is the 3-hydroxy analogue of diazepam, and one of diazepam's primary active metabolites. In the US, temazepam is approved for the short-term treatment of insomnia.

Pull the other one, it has bells on.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Missouri
So I posted a few weeks ago. Here is what I received from my public defender.

Drug confirmation by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry:
diazepam
nordiazepam
oxazepam
temazepam

The blood collection tube, sample and method of analysis are compliant with the requirements of 19 CSR25-30.070 or 19 CSR 25-30.080, as applicable.

I, the undersigned, performed the analyses described in this report.
Xxx DHSS type 1 Permit # Expires 09/14/2019, assisted in the analyses.

This report contains opinions, interpretations and/or conclusions of the undersigned. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and accurate summation of the results of analyses conducted.

I asked him for the detailed report. Here is what he replied with.
Spoke to your prosecutor yesterday. The state says there is not a more detailed report. They say in terms of DWI that does not involve alcohol, the lab only tests for the presence of substances and not the actual amounts. With alcohol testing the lab reports produce an exact BAC reading, but that's not the case with non-alcohol blood testing.

So you can be charged with a DUI if you took your prescription drugs 2 days before? That is what those last two drugs are is my anti depressants I hadn't taken in two days.

Yes.

Your public defender will question all results. I recommend you rely on your attorney for advice and direction.

 

[ajkroy]

If someone was prescribed Percocet or Oxycontin and they took them as directed, they absolutely could be impaired while driving.

Next time, call an Uber.

 

[quincy]

If someone was prescribed Percocet or Oxycontin and they took them as directed, they absolutely could be impaired while driving.

Next time, call an Uber.

And, in some cases, NOT taking the medications prescribed, or as prescribed, can impair one's driving.

 

[not2cleverRed]

If someone was prescribed Percocet or Oxycontin and they took them as directed, they absolutely could be impaired while driving.

Next time, call an Uber.

And, in some cases, NOT taking the medications prescribed, or as prescribed, can impair one's driving.

The issue as I see it is:

1) Did OP have a prescription for the drugs. (Because not having a prescription opens one to some other charges than DUI.)
2) Was OP's driving impaired by the drugs indicated in the testing.

The police officer pulled over OP for some reason. I would assume it had something to do with the way OP was driving. OP believes the police's "narrative is complete lies", but does not elaborate on what the police narrative is. Generally, people driving erratically don't realize that they're driving erratically, for example.

OP became belligerent - OP calls it "yelling". Judging by OP's behavior here, there were insults and obscenities involved. A rational person in this situation tries to keep calm so that they don't give the officer a reason to feel threatened. The officer (I think rightfully) assumed that there was something wrong with OP. Hence the testing.

Taking drugs as prescribed is not a defense against DUI, but could help to limit the drug-related charges to just the DUI.

OP's behavior in this forum, and OP's behavior with the police, as described by OP, is not rational. I believe OP needs to be reevaluated by the doctor(s), and the medications adjusted.

If OP acts in court as s/he did in the previous thread, OP will have more than a DUI to worry about.

 

[quincy]

Here again is the link to the prior thread: https://forum.freeadvice.com/drunk-driving-dui-dwi-27/blood-test-645845.html

anaylor01 has said a few times that the medications taken are prescribed.

I agree with you that having a doctor's examination to adjust medications or doses (if necessary) is a good idea prior to court. A partial defense is always better than no defense, if any defense can be found in the prescribed drugs (and this seems "iffy").

 

[Natas666]

....This report contains opinions, interpretations and/or conclusions of the undersigned. I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and accurate summation of the results of analyses conducted. ....

I asked him for the detailed report. Here is what he replied with.
Spoke to your prosecutor yesterday. The state says there is not a more detailed report. They say in terms of DWI that does not involve alcohol, the lab only tests for the presence of substances and not the actual amounts. With alcohol testing the lab reports produce an exact BAC reading, but that's not the case with non-alcohol blood testing. ...

Consider hiring an expert to testify that the results of the tests used only show that residues that may produce a true or false positive may have existed in the blood sample tested, and the tests done do not show any evidence of intoxication.

*Note* I didn't read the other thread.

 

[quincy]

Consider highering an expert to testify that the results of the tests used only show that residues that may produce a true or false positive may have existed in the blood sample tested, and the tests done do not show any evidence of intoxication.

*Note* I didn't read the other thread.

The attorney representing anaylor will examine the evidence. If expert testimony is required, the public defender will make that known to the court.

The other thread has important additional information.

(the word is "hiring")

 

[Just Blue]

The attorney representing anaylor will examine the evidence. If expert testimony is required, the public defender will make that known to the court.

The other thread has important additional information.

(the word is "hiring")

Well...Considering the topic...perhaps "highering" is appropo.

 

[Just Blue]

Consider hiring an expert to testify that the results of the tests used only show that residues that may produce a true or false positive may have existed in the blood sample tested, and the tests done do not show any evidence of intoxication.

*Note* I didn't read the other thread.

Perhaps you should read the PxHx of OP before posting...

 

[Natas666]

The other thread has important additional information.

(the word is "hiring")

Thanks. If I have any more spare time, I'll read it.