State of Maine v. Bradley R. Atkins, 129 A.3d 952

On Jan. 21, 2014, Atkins was stopped after driving with a taillight out and running a red light; officer observed abnormal behavior (laughing, avoiding eye contact, slow movements).
Atkins admitted to smoking multiple "dabs" of concentrated THC and told the officer he was "too stoned" to drive to Portland.
Atkins performed field sobriety tests; officer observed impairment on two of three tests and noted bloodshot, glassy, droopy eyes and fumbling with his wallet.
Atkins was arrested and charged with OUI (enhanced for a prior OUI within ten years); he waived a jury trial and moved in limine to exclude testimony about narcotic impairment by non–drug-recognition experts.
Trial court admitted the arresting officer’s testimony (but limited a DRE’s testimony to stating the expert did not examine Atkins) and convicted Atkins; sentence imposed and Atkins appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of prior uncounseled OUI conviction	State: prior conviction admissible to enhance sentence	Atkins: prior plea invalid for lack of counsel waiver; collateral attack warranted	Court: prior conviction admissible; no right to appointed counsel because no incarceration exposure in prior case; collateral attack barred
Admissibility of arresting officer’s testimony about drug impairment	State: officer’s observations relevant and admissible lay testimony	Atkins: only a certified drug recognition expert may testify as to impairment by drugs other than alcohol	Court: statutes create a DRE certification scheme but do not bar lay or non-DRE officers from testifying about observed impairment; defects go to weight, not admissibility
Sufficiency of evidence without DRE exam	State: observed symptoms, admissions, and FSTs suffice to prove impairment beyond reasonable doubt	Atkins: conviction unsupported because no DRE examined him	Court: evidence (admission of THC use, statements, physical signs, FST results, driving conduct) was sufficient to prove impairment beyond reasonable doubt

State v. Soucy, 36 A.3d 910 (Me. 2012) (symptoms of intoxication can suffice to prove OUI)
State v. Worster, 611 A.2d 979 (Me. 1992) (definition of "under the influence")
State v. Johnson, 38 A.3d 1270 (Me. 2012) (limitations on collateral attacks on prior convictions)
State v. Cook, 706 A.2d 603 (Me. 1998) (no right to appointed counsel where incarceration not a possible sentence)
State v. McCurdy, 795 A.2d 84 (Me. 2002) (testimony of symptoms of intoxication supports OUI finding)