Mike from Lancaster was facing a drug driving charge recently when he came to Momentum Solicitors after being charged with driving while over the specified limit for cannabis. A blood sample taken during the investigation was said to contain 2.4mg of THC, placing him well above the legal threshold and exposing him to the very real risk of a criminal conviction, a lengthy driving disqualification, a financial penalty and long-lasting implications for his employment.
From the outset, our team recognised several issues that required careful examination. As part of the police procedure, multiple blood samples had been taken, yet only one appeared to form the basis of the CPS case. This immediately raised questions about consistency, handling and whether the most reliable sample had in fact been analysed. It is not uncommon in drug-driving matters for the defence to scrutinise the chain of custody, laboratory processes and the validity of the final toxicology reading, and Mike’s case was no exception.
Drug Driving Charge – Case Dropped
As we prepared for trial, a significant disclosure problem emerged. The Crown Prosecution Service failed to provide the forensic toxicology report until 10 days before the hearing, leaving an unreasonably short window to conduct any independent evaluation or commission expert analysis. Drug-driving prosecutions rely heavily on precise scientific evidence, and late disclosure places the defence at a clear disadvantage. We raised this as a serious concern, as it undermined Mike’s ability to have a fair and properly prepared defence.
A further issue arose regarding the healthcare professional who collected the blood sample. Their attendance at court is often essential to confirm correct procedure, consent, storage and continuity. Despite being formally required, the healthcare professional failed to attend the trial without explanation. This absence was highly significant. Without their evidence, the prosecution could not properly establish that the blood procedure had been carried out lawfully and in accordance with the strict requirements set out in drug-driving legislation and police codes of practice.
On the day of trial, after hearing our submissions, the court accepted that the combination of late disclosure, evidential gaps and the absence of a key witness meant the case simply could not proceed fairly. The prosecution had not met the standard required to continue. As a direct consequence, the CPS dropped the case, and Mike was fully acquitted of all charges.
The Importance of Procedural Fairness
To ensure he was not left financially disadvantaged after defending himself against a case that should not have proceeded, we applied for a Defence Costs Order. The court granted this application, allowing Mike to recover his legal costs in full. This outcome was not only a significant relief for him personally, but also a clear reminder of the importance of procedural fairness and robust defence representation in drug-driving matters.
Why Choose Momentum Solicitors
At Momentum Solicitors, we understand the stress, uncertainty and potential life-changing impact a motoring allegation can bring. Whether you are facing a drug-driving charge, a technical evidential issue, or concerns around procedure, our specialist team is here to help. We offer a free initial assessment and no-obligation advice, giving you clarity about your options and the best route forward.
If you’re facing a motoring allegation, get in touch with Momentum Solicitors today – expert help is only a phone call or message away.
