READING, Pa. -- A motorist called 911 after Michelle Griffith nearly drove head-on into a tractor-trailer and a car on Park Road in Ontelaunee Township, Berks County, in 2006.
Ms. Griffith, 29, failed three field sobriety tests, even though she had no alcohol in her system.
Northern Berks Regional Police Patrolman William H. Dillman III arrested Griffith for impaired driving under the influence of legally prescribed medication.
Convicted in Berks County Court in 2007, she appealed the case to Superior Court, which overturned the conviction, saying that prosecutors didn't present expert testimony showing she was too heavily medicated to drive safely.
However, the state Supreme Court, in a Nov. 2 ruling, disagreed with that decision, deciding that prosecutors don't have to hire an expert in all DUI cases involving prescription drugs and that the need for expert testimony should be decided on a case-by-case basis.
The ruling made new law in Pennsylvania and has important implications because an increasing number of DUI arrests involve drivers impaired by drugs prescribed by their doctors.
Berks District Attorney John T. Adams said prosecutors had been forced to dismiss some of these cases because they lacked funds for hiring medical experts, who are mostly used for homicide cases.
Prosecutors said the ruling impacts 25 to 30 cases a year and will save them $25,000 to $35,000 a year in costs for hiring an expert.
"You cannot ignore the warnings on the bottles of Valium not to drive," said Assistant District Attorney Alisa R. Hobart, who argued the case before the Supreme Court. "This case sets a state precedent. This could have been a lot worse. Griffith was driving at 3 p.m. when the schools were getting out. A driver called 911 and notified police."
First Published: November 21, 2011, 5:00 a.m.