State v. Whalen, 991 N.E.2d 738

Whalen was stopped for an improper left turn; odor of burnt marihuana observed and inebriated speech noted; field sobriety tests administered; urine sample showed marihuana metabolite and BAC of .023; Whalen admitted smoking marihuana and there was 100 grams in glove box; charged with driving under influence and prohibited metabolite levels under R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(j)(viii) and related offenses; motions to suppress/dismiss argued the metabolite statute was vague/overbroad; expert testimony explained THC metabolism and metabolites; Whalen pleaded no contest to the metabolite-offense and was convicted; sentence included jail time, fine, probation, and license suspension; appeal challenged constitutionality and confrontation issues; court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(j)(viii)(II) is void for vagueness/overbreadth	Whalen argues statute is vague and overbroad	Whalen argues metabolite-based rule lacks impairment link	Statute not void; valid per se offense; no standing on overbreadth; applied to Whalen.
Whether Whalen has standing to challenge subsection (I)	Whalen lacks standing to challenge (I)	Not applicable; only (II) at issue here	Whalen lacks standing to challenge (I); focus on (II).
Whether trial court erred in limiting cross-examination of expert about impairment	Cross-exam should address impairment from metabolite levels	Offense is per se; impairment not required for (II)	No error; cross-examination limited as irrelevant to per se offense.

Tanner v. State, 15 Ohio St.3d 1 (Ohio 1984) (upholding per se OVI statute; driving is a privilege; no fundamental right to drive while drunk)
Village of Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoff. Estates, Inc., 455 U.S. 489 (U.S. 1982) (vagueness standard; fair notice concerns overgovernment actions)
State v. Dario, 106 Ohio App.3d 232 (1st Dist. 1995) (as-applied challenges require presently existing facts; standing to contest)