People v. Gocmen

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly granted defendant’s motion to rescind his statutory summary suspension of his driver’s license, where defendant was charged with driving under influence of drugs. Appellate Court, in affirming trial court, found that defendant’s statement to arresting officer that he was diabetic, as well as officer’s concession that he had no training or experience in DUI drugs, was enough to establish prima facie case supporting rescission, especially where trial court had denied govt.’s motion for directed finding in hearing on said motion. As such, Appellate Court found that: (1) officer would not have been able to form reliable opinion as to cause of defendant’s semi-conscious state at scene of arrest; and (2) govt. had failed to rebut instant prima facie case. In its petition for leave to appeal, govt. argued that other evidence at arrest scene, including presence of syringe, track marks on defendant’s arm and can that field-tested for presence of cocaine created indicia of defendant’s drug use. (Dissent filed.)