Marijuana Possession: No License Suspension

Court Agrees With Our Argument:  No License Suspension in a Marijuana Case

On July 1st of this year the law changed regarding mandatory license suspension for people charged with their first possession of marijuana charge.  A person charged under Virginia Code §18.2-251 had required license suspension in all cases.  The change only applies to people charged with their first offense, but does not apply to juveniles, repeat offenders, or if the person is charged while operating a vehicle.  Additionally, if a person wants to take advantage of the non-mandatory license suspension they are required to go through the first-offender program.  That program requires community service as well as drug counseling among other conditions.

The change to the law aligned Virginia with the majority of the nation, and was seen as a common sense measure by many.  There were various news articles announcing the law had changed, and Virginia was no longer suspending licenses of people charged with their first offense possession of marijuana.

However, the change in the law was contingent upon certain conditions.  The enactment clause provides that the bill would not come into effect unless VDOT receives assurance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) that there will not be a loss of any federal funds as a result of the implementation of the bill.  States are required by 23 U.S.C. § 159(a) to suspend a person’s driver’s license following conviction of a drug offense or risk losing federal highway funding allocated to Virginia under 23 U.S.C. § 104(b).  The requirement in by 23 U.S.C. § 159(a) is called the Solomon–Lautenberg amendment. The Solomon–Lautenberg amendment, is an amendment to the federal highway bill passed in 1991, it requires U.S. states to impose a mandatory six-month driver’s license suspension for drug offenses, including those unrelated to driving or face loss of federal highway funds.

We had heard reports from other attorneys around the state, and no Court had been willing to not require the license suspension.  Our attorney along with Senator Ryan McDougle, of the McDougle Law Firm, Pc, prepared arguments for the court to consider.  These arguments included:

1. Virginia would not lose federal funding if the Court did not suspend the driver’s license of a person charged with first offense marijuana under the first-offender program. The federal law only requires suspension following a conviction, and a deferral occurs in lieu of a conviction.
2. We were also able to obtain a copy of a letter from the FHWA that Virginia would not lose funding if the Commonwealth complied with 23 U.S.C. § 159 by submitting an annual certification from the Governor of Virginia. The law requires a letter from the Virginia Governor for each year to certify either
   1. The State has enacted and is enforcing a drug offender’s driver’s license suspension law that conforms to 23 U.S.C. § 159(a)(3)(A); or
   2. The Governor is opposed to the enactment or enforcement of a law that conforms to 23 U.S.C. § 159(a)(3)(A), and the State legislature has adopted a resolution expressing its opposition to such a law.
3. We were also able to get a copy of the annual certification from the Virginia Governor’s office.  The certification was sent prior to the change in Virginia law, but is valid throughout the remainder of the year.

During the case it was apparent the judge handling the matter had taken the time to research the matter.  After all of the arguments were made the judge agreed with our interpretation of the law.  A lot of hard work was put into this by all of the attorneys involved.  If you are charged with possession of marijuana

“Case results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. Case results do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case.”

To contact us, please complete this form and we’ll respond as soon as we are able.