Jurors will hear of Ecstasy use

Kim Smith

Monday, Jan. 22, 2001 | 10:54 a.m.

When the trial gets under way next week, jurors will be privy to blood tests that showed Jessica Williams had the drug Ecstasy in her blood when her van struck and killed six teenagers on Interstate 15 last March, District Judge Mark Gibbons ruled.

Williams, whose trial is scheduled to begin Jan. 29, is charged with drifting off the highway and hitting the six teenagers as they picked up trash as part of a county community work service program. Five of the teens were killed instantly in the March accident, and one girl died within hours.

Killed in the accident were: Scott Garner Jr., Jennifer Booth, Anthony Smith, Alberto Puig, Malena Stoltzfus and Rebeccah Glicken.

Prosecutors believe Williams passed out at the wheel as a result of marijuana and Ecstasy use, but her attorney contends she simply fell asleep.

Police obtained a blood sample from Williams after she told them she had been smoking marijuana, and officers at the scene found a pipe inside the van she was driving.

Prosecutors Gary Booker and Bruce Nelson had the blood retested when Williams' passenger told a grand jury two weeks later that they had also been using Ecstasy.

Defense attorney John Watkins argued last week that a search warrant should have been obtained for both tests.

Gibbons immediately ruled against Watkins on the marijuana sample, saying police didn't need a search warrant because Williams told them she had been using marijuana.

However, Gibbons said he had wanted to research the Ecstasy issue.

According to Friday's written decision, Gibbons based his ruling on a 1997 case in which the Nevada Supreme Court stated that "once a person's blood has been obtained lawfully, he can no longer assert either privacy claims or unreasonable search and seizure arguments with respect to the use of that sample."

Also on Friday, the Nevada Supreme Court refused to reverse Gibbons' decision to proceed with the trial. Watkins had filed a writ of mandamus with the court after Gibbons ruled that the prohibited-substance law under which Williams is being tried is constitutional.

Watkins believes Williams' equal protection rights under the U.S. Constitution are being violated because the law differentiates between those with a prescription for marijuana and those without.

Watkins hoped to have the charges against Williams dismissed, but the Supreme Court said in its ruling that its intervention "is not warranted at this time."