SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Page TE. Proc. Int. Counc. Alcohol Drugs Traffic Safety Conf. 2002; 2002: 311-317.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, The author(s) and the Council, Publisher International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Approximately 5,000 Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) officers serve in the United States and British Columbia, Canada. Law enforcement agencies in Australia, England and Germany have also adopted variations of DRE procedures. The primary function of a DRE is to evaluate drivers for impairment due to drugs other than alcohol. If the DRE evaluation is positive for drugs, the DRE will identify the category (s) of drug (s), based on shared patterns of effects, causing the impairment. The DRE evaluation typically occurs following an impaired driving arrest by a non-DRE officer who suspects drug impairment. Drug impairment is typically suspected when the impairment is not consistent with the driver's alcohol level as determined by a chemical test. The involvement of a DRE officer depends upon the ability of an arresting officer to quickly identify cues that suggest drug impairment. Generally, the driving under the influence investigation involves three phases: (1) Illegal or erratic driving actions that alert the officer to the possibility of alcohol and/or drug impairment; (2) Face to face encounter with the driver during which the officer may discover indicia, including physiological signs, of drug impairment; and (3) Administration of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) battery, concluding with the decision to arrest or release the driver. The decision to administer the SFST battery is largely based upon evidence of impairment recognized during the phase two encounter. This paper summarizes Phase 2 cues that are taught in SFST and DRE courses, and compares these cues with those documented in a sample of actual DUI-DRE investigations. It will discuss the results and implications of this comparison for the DRE curricula, as well as for the training of the non-DRE traffic enforcement officer. In addition, this paper will provide an overview and update of the DRE program, procedures, training, and court decisions.

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print