Driving under the influence: Tetrahydrocannabinol standard.

Existing law prohibits a person who has 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood from driving a vehicle. Existing law also prohibits a person, while having 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood, from driving a vehicle and concurrently doing any act forbidden by law, or neglecting any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, when the act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver. Existing law establishes a rebuttable presumption for each of those offenses that the person had 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within 3 hours after the driving. This bill would make it an offense for a person who has 5 ng/ml or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle. The bill would also make it an offense for a person, while having 5 ng/ml or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood, to drive a vehicle and concurrently do any act forbidden by law, or neglect any duty imposed by law in driving the vehicle, when the act or neglect proximately causes bodily injury to a person other than the driver. The bill would establish a rebuttable presumption for each of those offenses that the person had 5 ng/ml or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood at the time of driving the vehicle if the person had 5 ng/ml or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in his or her blood at the time of the performance of a chemical test within 2 hours of the driving. The bill would also require corroborating evidence, as specified, in addition to a level of 5 ng/ml or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the driver's blood, for a conviction for either of those offenses. The bill would make additional technical, nonsubstantive changes. By changing the definitions of existing crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.