Sleep driving under the influence of Ambien (or the generic medication of Zolpidem) presents unusual factual and legal problems in Oregon.
Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII) in Oregon is unlawful if the intoxicant is alcohol, controlled substances, or a combination of the two. When a driver is suspected or accused of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, the charge is frequently abbreviated “DUID.” However, driving under the influence of over-the-counter drugs such as cold or allergy medications, for example, does not constitute DUII or DUID– although in some cases it may constitute Reckless Driving.
Over the last several years, many cases have come to light of people engaging in odd behavior while taking Ambien/Zolpidem. There have been frequent reports of sleep walking and even performing more complex activities usually performed during a state of full consciousness. Also referred to as somnambulism or noctambulism, sleep walking becomes a serious problem when it becomes sleep driving. Although often dismissed by people unfamiliar with the behavior as a “made up” defense, sleep driving is actually very real.
The Oregon Supreme Court held in State v. Newman, 353 Or 632 (2013) that whether a driver voluntary engaged in the behavior of driving is an issue for the fact-finder in a trial. The Newman case started in Multnomah County Circuit Court and, as the trial approached, Multnomah County Circuit Judge Marshall Amiton refused to allow the Defense to present evidence that the defendant had a history of sleep walking. The judge’s ruling was based on the theory that DUII/DUID in Oregon is a strict liability crime which does not require a mental state or intent. For example, it would not be a defense in a DUII/DUID trial for a defendant to claim that they didn’t know they were intoxicated or drunk, that they thought they were okay to drive. Newman does not appear to stand for the proposition that the Government must now prove more than what the DUII/DUID statute previously required, however the case does make clear that the Defense has the right to present evidence as to whether or not the Defendant was conscious or that the Defendant’s behavior was voluntary.
To be clear, Newman does not settle the issue of whether it’s legal to drive while taking, after taking, or while under the influence of Ambien/Zolpidem. Based on the sheer number of reports that have come out over the last several years of people engaging in unconscious and sometimes dangerous behavior after taking Ambien/Zolpidem, there’s an argument to be made that someone choosing to take Ambien/Zolpidem is aware or should be aware of the dangers of taking the drug and should take precautions to prevent involuntary, unconscious, or sleep driving.
As with many DUII/DUID defenses, a driver facing a charge of driving under the influence of Ambien/Zolpidem should speak with an experienced DUI attorney about how the law applies to their set of facts. This type of case in particular is complex, and the law has been changing nationwide over the last few years.