## Facts

- Clifton Davis drove a 2001 Isuzu Rodeo on the Baltimore–Washington Parkway on July 27, 2002, around 8:00 p.m.
- A motorist alerted a U.S. Park Police officer that a vehicle was being driven erratically; the officer then heard a crash and observed Davis’s vehicle strike construction barrels closing an exit ramp.
- The officer pursued Davis and observed repeated swerving onto the shoulder and back into the travel lane at highway speed; the officer activated emergency lights and siren.
- After the stop, officers described Davis as severely impaired (including disorientation, confusion, and poor responsiveness) and requiring assistance.
- A blood test showed no alcohol and no other drugs, but did show an uncertain/indeterminate amount of marijuana-related evidence; no marijuana or paraphernalia was found in the vehicle, and the government presented no expert testimony tying the test result to driving impairment.
- Davis was charged with federal regulatory offenses (including DUI under 36 C.F.R. § 4.23(a)(1)) and Maryland traffic and licensing offenses incorporated by 36 C.F.R. § 4.2.

## Issues

1. Whether the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Davis was under the influence of a drug “to a degree that render[ed]” him incapable of safe operation under 36 C.F.R. § 4.23(a)(1).
2. Whether circumstantial evidence of erratic driving and apparent impairment, combined with an indeterminate marijuana-related blood result, established that a drug caused the impairment required by § 4.23(a)(1).
3. Whether the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the charged traffic and licensing offenses (including reckless driving, following too closely, fleeing/eluding, and driving while suspended/revoked).

## Decision

- The court found Davis not guilty of DUI under 36 C.F.R. § 4.23(a)(1).
- The court concluded the government failed to prove that any observed impairment was caused by marijuana (or any drug) to the extent required by the regulation.
- The court found Davis guilty of multiple traffic and licensing offenses based on officer observations of his driving conduct and proof of his license status, including reckless driving, following too closely, fleeing to elude police, failure to stay in one lane, and driving on a suspended and revoked license.

## Legal Principles

- A conviction under 36 C.F.R. § 4.23(a)(1) requires proof that alcohol and/or drugs impaired the defendant to a degree rendering the operator incapable of safe operation.
- Evidence that a drug is present in the body, without proof linking that drug to the defendant’s impairment at the time of driving, is insufficient to establish the “under the influence” element beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Where toxicology is indeterminate and the government offers no expert or quantitative evidence connecting the result to impairment, the factfinder may not infer drug-caused incapacity solely from erratic driving and physical symptoms.
- Traffic and licensing offenses may be proven through direct officer testimony of observed driving behavior and documentary evidence of license suspension/revocation, without establishing the physiological cause of unsafe driving.

## Conclusion

After a bench trial, the court acquitted Davis of the federal drug-based DUI charge because the government did not prove that marijuana caused the required level of driving incapacity, but it convicted him of several traffic and licensing offenses supported by the officers’ observations and license records.


United States v. Davis, 261 F. Supp. 2d 343 (D. Md. 2003)