Properly and Effectively Adjudicating Drugged Drivers: The Development of Online Curricula

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety · 2018 · AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This research brief addresses the growing challenge of adjudicating drugged driving cases, a field where judicial training has historically been inconsistent, costly, and geographically limited. As law enforcement and prosecutors increasingly bring these cases to court, judges require a deeper understanding of psychopharmacology, toxicology, and evidence-based sentencing to ensure public safety and procedural fairness. To expand access to this specialized training, the National Judicial College (NJC), with funding from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, developed a six-week online blended learning curriculum for judges. Additionally, the National District Attorneys Association (NDAA) tailored similar content into an online video series for prosecutors. The development of the judges’ curriculum followed a rigorous, multi-step process. First, a committee of experts—including judges, attorneys, and addiction specialists—identified key training needs through literature reviews, stakeholder interviews, and surveys. The committee prioritized themes such as drug effects on the brain, testing technologies, legal standards for impairment, and judicial ethics. Based on these findings, NJC faculty developed six modules covering how drugs affect the brain, drug testing and technology, prosecution and defense arguments, the role of the judge, recidivism and sentencing, and judicial ethics. The course utilized a “flipped classroom” model, combining one hour of self-paced readings and quizzes with one hour of live faculty-led webcasts per week. The curriculum was iteratively reviewed and refined through a pilot program involving judges from 12 jurisdictions, which led to enhancements such as clarifying motor skill effects, distinguishing drug from alcohol evidence, and adding scenarios on implicit bias. The judges’ course launched in October 2017, and its evaluation results indicated high success rates. Participants reported that the online portion took approximately one hour to complete. Evaluations showed that 91% of respondents found the content volume and expectations appropriate, while 100% agreed that the technology was accessible and the activities were well-aligned with learning objectives. Judges noted that key takeaways included understanding the differences between drug and alcohol impairment and evaluating evidence. They also indicated plans to incorporate course material into their practices, such as implementing staggered sentencing and applying ethical gatekeeping functions. Concurrently, the NDAA produced a series of ten short videos for prosecutors, focusing on expert testimony admissibility, toxicology, courtroom issues, and refusals, designed for use in roll call training or downtime. The significance of this work lies in its provision of scalable, evidence-based training for legal professionals handling complex drugged driving cases. By addressing the technical difficulties and evidence-heavy nature of these matters, the curricula aim to improve adjudication quality and sentencing effectiveness. The high enrollment of 82 judges in the pilot program suggests a strong demand for such resources. Future steps include making the judges’ course available as a self-paced online resource, updating the content with new research, and conducting impact evaluations to assess behavioral changes. The NDAA plans to expand its video series to include content for experienced practitioners and commercial vehicle supervisors, further disseminating best practices across the traffic safety community.

Key finding

Post-course evaluations indicated the judges' program met its objectives: 91% of respondents agreed the content load and expectations were appropriate, and 100% agreed the technology was accessible and activities were useful and aligned with learning objectives.

Methodology

mixed_methods

Sample size: 82 judges enrolled (Oct–Dec 2017 course); 12 jurisdictions in July 2017 pilot

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_aaa_foundation on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• illicit drugs