Irondequoit Police Use SoToxa for Roadside Drug Testing; Lawyer intervenes

Irondequoit, NY (WHAM) – The Irondequoit Police Department is the first law enforcement agency in Monroe County to use “SoToxa,” a mobile device designed to detect cannabis and other drugs on the side of the road.

Officer Evan Bruckel, a certified drug recognition specialist and one of two officers at the IPD, said that with the legalization of cannabis, he has seen an increase in the number of people affected not only by marijuana, but also by other drugs and a mixture of cannabis and became fit to drive after drinking alcohol.

The device takes a small sample of saliva; Officers just have to collect it, run it through their SoToxa device and wait about five minutes.

“It’s not a panacea,” Bruckel said. “This isn't a device where we just stick it in someone's mouth when we stop them and say, 'He's positive for cannabis, we're going to arrest him.' It’s the totality of the circumstances.”

Any time it is used by a roadside officer, the officer must call a certified drug recognition expert (DRE). According to Bruckel, there are only about 400 certified DRE officers in New York State.

“It’s a very rigorous training,” Bruckel said of the DRE program. “To be honest, a lot of people say it’s one of the most difficult training an officer can go through.”

The DRE will administer a more stringent field sobriety test and, per department policy, will not be informed that the arresting officer used SoToxa to avoid impropriety.

“They question the arresting officer,” Bruckel explained. “They check the subject’s pulse rate or blood pressure, they check the pupil size in different lighting conditions and can make a statement.”

For local defense attorney Joe Damelio, introducing SoToxa to Monroe County is a double-sided coin.

“I think it’s good faith,” Damelio said. “However, it may not meet the requirements in the application.”

A 2021 study involving the Michigan State Police found 16 false positives and 56 false negatives for cannabis in 597 SoToxa tests compared to blood test results.

“There is no penalty for refusing to undergo this test,” Damelio said. “So why subject yourself to this when you know there’s a chance of a false alarm?”

Both Damelio and Bruckel noted that Sotoxa's findings were not admissible in court.