Huffing Case Triggers Review of DUI Laws in Illinois Courtroom
Published on 11/15/2013 -
By John Clark
An Illinois DUI case involving a defendant who inhaled a computer cleaning product before driving has raised novel questions about what constitutes intoxicated driving, according to a recent report from the Chicago Tribune.
And the issues currently being debated in Illinois could have widespread repercussions and courts try to determine what illegal drugs should be banned in drivers’ systems.
Woman Who Inhaled Cleaning Products at Center of DUI Debate
According to sources, the novel case centers on the actions of Carly Rousso, a woman from Highland Park, Illinois, who was charged last year with “huffing” a product used to clean computers before running her car into a 5-year-old girl. The girl tragically died as a result of the felony DUI accident.
And while the story certainly offers a harrowing narrative, Rousso’s DUI defense attorney has raised concerns that extending the definition of intoxication too far could threaten the constitutionality of DUI statutes.
When a state legislature enacts a law, that law must be specific enough to place potential defendants on notice about what behavior, exactly, is illegal. On occasion, when a law is drafted in an excessively vague manner, courts will dismiss the law as unconstitutional.
During a recent court hearing, Rousso’s defense attorney, Douglas Zeit, said the aggravated DUI charges against Rousso were unconstitutional because the statute is “implicitly vague and that “no person of ordinary intelligence could understand the catchall phrase used in the statute.”
Specifically, the statute simply bans “driving under the influence” of intoxicating substances, and the active ingredient in Rousso’s inhalant of choice is difluoroethane, which is not identified as an intoxicating substance under Illinois law.
DUI Attorneys Debate Meaning of Intoxicating Substance
In response to the DUI defense attorney’s argument that the statute is too vague, the prosecuting attorney made a sound response, claiming that it would be impossible to list every possible substance that can cause a high.
Indeed, the number of substances that can dangerously alter a person’s mental state is prohibitively long, and lawmakers would have an impossible time keeping up with the long list of new synthetic drugs that are created every year.
And the defense attorney’s argument does could the fact that the women killed a young girl after losing control of her vehicle on Labor Day 2012.
The prosecuting attorney told the court that the defendant ingested a substance that “impaired her,” and that she “intended to impair herself,” which, he believed, should constitute enough proof that she was responsible for driving under the influence.
Published on 11/22/2013
By John Clark As bullying becomes increasingly dangerous for young people in the United States,... Read more
Published on 11/08/2013
By John Clark Another Atlantic City casino is ... Read more
Published on 11/01/2013
By John Clark The Supreme Court may soon rule on the legality of warrantless government surveil... Read more
Published on 10/25/2013
By John Clark A ruling last week in the United States District Court for the District of Columb... Read more
Published on 10/17/2013
By John Clark A drunk driver in Pennsylvania pleaded guilty this week to causing a ... Read more
Published on 10/10/2013
By John Clark In a move that stirred a national controversy, the Los Angeles Police Department ... Read more
Published on 10/03/2013
By John Clark A California doctor is facing a ... Read more
Published on 09/30/2013
By John Clark As technology evolves, criminal laws tend to lag several years behind. The recent... Read more
Published on 09/18/2013
By John Clark Florida police allegedly beat a woman during a DUI arrest, and her ... Read more
Published on 09/13/2013
By John Clark This week, the Obama Administration announced its intentions to reduce mandatory ... Read more