274 A.3d 1283
Pa. Super. Ct.2022Background
- Trooper stopped Dabney for speeding (≈93 mph in a 65 mph zone); initial stop was lawful.
- Trooper detected faint then strong odor of raw marijuana; Dabney produced a medical marijuana card.
- Officers searched the vehicle (Commonwealth later conceded and suppressed vehicle-search evidence) and observed suspected marijuana; Dabney exhibited red, dilated eyes.
- Trooper administered SFSTs and ARIDE tests; Trooper observed multiple indicators of impairment.
- Dabney was arrested for suspected DUI, transported for a blood draw that revealed active THC compounds and metabolites, and charged under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d)(1)(i) and (iii) (and related offenses).
- Dabney filed a habeas petition arguing medical marijuana is not a Schedule I controlled substance for § 3802(d)(1) purposes and moved to suppress the blood evidence for lack of probable cause; the suppression court denied both claims and the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether medical marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance for § 3802(d)(1)(i) and (iii) DUI prosecution | Dabney: MMA authorizes medical marijuana and therefore medical marijuana should not be treated as a Schedule I controlled substance for per se DUI prosecution | Commonwealth: Marijuana (including medical marijuana) remains listed as Schedule I under the CSA; MMA does not conflict with Vehicle Code prohibition on driving with any Schedule I substance or its metabolites | Court: Medical marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance for § 3802(d)(1); MMA does not shield lawful medical use from DUI prosecution under that provision |
| Whether trooper lacked reasonable suspicion/probable cause to detain, administer SFSTs, and arrest (suppress blood) | Dabney: After lawful speeding stop the subsequent detention and SFSTs were a new investigative stop unsupported by reasonable suspicion; odor alone was insufficient | Commonwealth: Odor plus observations from the lawful stop and the SFST/ARIDE indicators provided reasonable suspicion and probable cause to arrest | Court: Trooper had reasonable suspicion to re-engage and probable cause to arrest; suppression properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hall, 80 A.3d 1204 (Pa. 2013) (statutory interpretation standard of review; apply plain meaning and Statutory Construction Act)
- Commonwealth v. McCoy, 962 A.2d 1160 (Pa. 2009) (use Statutory Construction Act to ascertain legislative intent)
- Commonwealth v. Waddell, 61 A.3d 196 (Pa. Super. 2012) (marijuana remains listed as Schedule I despite medical use arguments)
- Commonwealth v. Jezzi, 208 A.3d 1105 (Pa. Super. 2019) (MMA creates lawful medical-use scheme but does not reclassify marijuana out of Schedule I)
- Commonwealth v. Barr, 266 A.3d 25 (Pa. 2021) (odor of marijuana alone is not automatically probable cause to search a vehicle; odor is a factor in totality analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Glenn, 233 A.3d 842 (Pa. Super. 2020) (distinguishes Schedule II prescribed-substance/metabolite context from Schedule I per se prohibitions)
- Commonwealth v. Salter, 121 A.3d 987 (Pa. Super. 2015) (SFST performance can furnish probable cause to arrest for DUI)
- Commonwealth v. Etchison, 916 A.2d 1169 (Pa. Super. 2007) (per se DUI under § 3802(d)(1) does not require proof of actual impairment)