The Drug Recognition Expert Program in Canada

1. The Drug Recognition Expert Program in Canada

2. History • The Drug Recognition Expert program originated in California in the late 1970’s. • The program was introduced to Canada in 1995 in British Columbia. • The first ‘National’ course, co-sponsored by the Solicitor General of Canada and the RCMP was held at the Ontario Police College in January of 2003. • There are currently 43 states, the District of Columbia and Canada in the DRE program.

3. Drug Recognition Expert Course • Classroom portion is 80 hrs in duration • Pass mark on examinations is 80% • Field certification requires a minimum of 12 evaluations with minimum of 6 being “hands on”. • Final knowledge exam prior to submitting CV and progress log.

4. Ongoing Certification • Required every two years. • Minimum of 6 evaluations with 1 supervised by an instructor • Minimum of 8 hours of alcohol/drug impairment training. • Submission of a current curriculum vitae and rolling log. • Instructors must instruct 1 course per year to remain an instructor

5. Standardized Field Sobriety Tests • SFST’s are conducted roadside to raise suspicion to probable grounds. • They are done in a systematic and standardized manner. • The SFST test battery takes 5-10 minutes to complete. • 2188 peace officers have received training in SFST’s • 110 SFST instructors are current

6. DRE Twelve Step Process • Breath alcohol test • Interview of arresting officer • Preliminary examination • Eye Examination • Divided attention tests • Examination of vital signs

7. 12 Step Process • Darkroom examinations • Examination of muscle tone • Examination for injection sites • Suspect’s statements • Opinion of the evaluator • Toxicology sample

8. Seven Drug Categories • CNS Depressants • Inhalants • Dissociative Anesthetics • Cannabis • CNS Stimulants • Hallucinogens • Narcotic Analgesics * Poly drug use is very common

9. Standardized Field Sobriety Tests Trained Personnel in Canada 1400 715 22 59 43 Other: non- police agencies such as CBSA, Corrections, Coroners Service, etc. 6 41 20 1 1 8 2 (2188) (110) (10)

10. Standardized Field Sobriety Tests Police Officers (Trained) by Province/Territory 1567 239 140 37 50 14 16 45 26 30 2 2 22

11. Drug Recognition Experts by Province/Territory 102 49 16 9 6 6 10 5 1 1 0 0 0

12. Drug Recognition Experts in Canada 61 41 46 32 27 22 NOTE: Of the 116 police officers who have received DRE training utilizing CDS funding, 86 (74%) have come from Non-RCMP agencies) 7 3 2 4 5 3 2 2 1 (95) (100) (54) (10)

13. DRE Legislation • Former Bill-C32 re-introduced 2004.11.01 as Bill C-16. • minor changes to previous bill. • sent for committee hearings 2004.11.01 • hearings concluded 2005.10.25 • committee amendments made 2005.11.03.

14. died on order table December 2005 • Ministries of Justice & Public Planning and Emergency Preparedness optimistic that legislation will bypass committee hearings upon re-introduction in next Parliament session.

15. Proposed Legislation • Standardized Field Sobriety Tests will be authorized by a demand. • Where reasonable and probable grounds exist that the driver is impaired by drugs, a demand will be made for an examination by a Drug Recognition Expert. • If the evaluation shows sufficient indicia of drug impairment, a demand for a body fluid sample will be made to refute or confirm the evaluation findings • Failing to comply will be an offence

16. Reasonable and probable grounds required Right to Counsel: Yes Time: 30 – 50 minutes Technician: Breath Technician Sample: Breath, Blood Reasonable and probable grounds required Right to Counsel: Yes Time: 40 – 60 minutes Technician: Drug Recognition Expert Sample: Blood, Oral, Urine Alcohol Impaired vs. Drug Impaired

17. DRE Training Needs Assessment Purpose • To assess nation-wide Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) and DRE training needs. • To develop an efficient and equitable training plan through a multi-agency integrated “Train - the - Trainer” approach.

18. Methodology • Police services were sent 2 questionnaires: • 1 for the Chief of police • 1 for the OIC of Traffic (or equivalent) • Police Colleges/Forensic Laboratories: • A separate questionnaire will be sent to all Police Colleges and Forensic Laboratories across the country.

19. Respondents • Questionnaires were mailed out to all police services across the country including municipal, provincial and RCMP. • Contact information was based on the CPIC National Directory. • Results are being evaluated.

20. Research Criteria • In the context of program implementation, a minimum response rate of 50% to 60% would be considered “good” to ensure the significance of the data. • Implications of a low response rate: • This could result in questionable conclusions for the assessment of training needs in that particular province.

21. Forensic Laboratory Ramifications • Increased case load proportional to the number of DRE’s trained • This is phased in over the year as DRE’s go through the certification process • Increased fiscal pressures due to increased case load.

22. Laboratory Needs Assessment • What person hour resources are required? • What equipment is required? • What training is required? • What lead time is required?

23. Funding Canada’s Renewed Drug Strategy ($910,000 over 5 years beginning in 2003) RCMP re-profiled CDS funds ($4.1 million over 5 years beginning in 2003) 2006/2007 $1.049 million 2007/2008 $1.8 million $7.0 million over 3 years tied to new legislation

24. RCMP DRE coordinator will pay instructor expenses, re-imbursement of instructor salary dollars (hourly rate of RCMP senior Cst) • Instructor compensation includes certification/re-certification training • Courses will be held where most cost effective for the candidates. • Candidates agency responsible for expenses incurred by their candidate.

25. A Memorandum of Understanding is being prepared for all participating agencies that will detail the responsibilities of the RCMP and their policing partners in the DRE and SFST programs.

26. Selection Criteria • a desire to investigate impaired drivers. • candidates should have a desire to become an instructor. • traffic or patrol officers Experience has shown that: • candidates should be aware that the training courses are not 8 hour days. • candidates need to be aware of the re-certification requirements.

27. Roadside Testing Devices • Began looking at oral fluid devices in September of 1999 (49 samples) with samples sent to RCMP Forensic Lab. • Since then have used Securatec Drug Wipe, Branan Oratec, Cozart Rapiscan oral fluid testing devices for training purposes only.

28. Oral Fluid Testing Devices • ROSITA (Roadside Testing Assessment) project. • 6 European countries (Belgium, France, Finland, Germany, Norway & Spain) and 5 US states (Florida, Indiana, Utah, Washington State & Wisconsin) are participating. • Roadside fluid sample being compared to drugs found by ELISA and chromatographic methods.

29. Australia • 12 month study evaluation of roadside oral fluid testing. • legislation came into force Dec 2004 allowing the police to randomly intercept drivers and screening them for cannabis and methamphetamine. • 1 sample taken for screening with the second sent to a lab for analysis • 1st six months, 7,207 drivers were screened with 145 testing positive.

30. Results of Roadside Devices • testing devices only look for specific drugs. • due to the amount of oral fluid required some drugs inhibit a suitable sample. • they showed recent consumption. • they were reasonably accurate when a sufficient sample was obtained.

31. Challenges • Legislation • Jurisdictional issues • Long term funding • Training capacity • Certification • Re-certification

32. Successes • DRE related charges laid BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, NS, NL, PE where convictions were registered • majority guilty pleas • 18 DRE’s declared expert in Canada • no cases appealed at any level.