Articles Posted in Drug Crimes

Medical marijuana is now legal in one form or another in twenty states and the District of Columbia. Florida, however, is not one of those states. In some of these states, medical marijuana has been legal for more than a decade. In those states, civilization has not, in fact, deteriorated into anarchy. But like what seems to increasingly include most of the civilized world, Florida is slowly but surely making its way towards consideration of marijuana as a viable medicine and not the evil plant involved in the most expensive, ineffective and counterproductive policy in the history of mankind, also known as the war on drugs.

This month, the Florida Division of Election has certified enough signatures to get a medical marijuana bill on the ballot for November of 2014. The language of the law still must be determined. If the measure can get at least 60% of the votes, a law legalizing medical marijuana law would be in effect in Florida. If not, Florida taxpayers would continue to finance the arrests, prosecution, incarceration and criminal processing of large numbers of marijuana defendants at an incredibly expensive, repetitive and wasteful rate.

A recent poll found that 65% of people in Florida favor legalizing medical marijuana, although you can not tell how accurate such a poll is especially before the proposed law has even been written.

Not long ago, Florida passed a law that required people applying for certain welfare benefits to take a drug test regardless of whether there was any evidence they used drugs. Whether this was about politics or the governor’s wife having an interest in the company that secured the lucrative contract to do the testing, it did not seem to be in compliance with the constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Constitution provides that the government cannot search a person, and requiring a urine sample constitutes a search, without specific evidence that the person has committed a crime. This applies to both rich and poor people. Applying for welfare is not sufficient evidence that someone has committed a crime, even use or possession of drugs.

The law passed and apparently, due to the very low percentage of welfare applicants who failed the drug tests, the program cost more than it saved. However, as expected, an additional cost was the automatic lawsuit against the government that followed the law’s passage. Recently, a federal judge decided that the law is unconstitutional. The judge simply and predictably found that the government cannot drug test people without a valid search warrant and/or specific evidence that the person is involved in criminal activity.

Although no one paying attention would believe this law was ever about saving taxpayer money, quite the opposite, the governor has indicated an intention to appeal the decision.

In most drug cases, particularly cases where the police arrest someone for manufacturing or growing marijuana, the case starts out with the police getting a tip that the suspect is growing marijuana in his home or on his property. The police conduct surveillance, check the trash, check electricity bills for a spike in activity due to the increased lighting and ventilation, and other investigative techniques to try and determine if the information is reliable. The police also often just walk up to the door, knock and see if the resident will answer questions or consent to a search.

In a marijuana case near Jacksonville, Florida, a person who was on bond missed court so his bondsman went to look for him. The bondsman went to the last known address of the person and another suspect answered the door. The bondsman asked if he could search the house to look for the person. The suspect agreed, and the bondsman found a marijuana grow operation inside. The suspect was fairly open about his marijuana cultivation with the bondsman. A bondsman is not a police officer, and does not work for the state. His job is normally to find people who are on bond who have missed court so they can be surrendered to the jail or otherwise made to come to court. A bondsman would not necessarily care about someone else committing a crime.

However, this bondsman decided to cal the police and tell them about the marijuana grow operation he saw. The police came to the house and searched it without valid consent. The police were apparently also in the process of obtaining a search warrant based on the evidence provided by the bondsman that was confirmed by the first police officer to respond, but they searched the house before the search warrant was signed.

In Florida, if the police want to come on to a person’s property to search it for drugs or other evidence of criminal activity, they normally need a valid search warrant signed by a judge. Alternatively, they can usually go up the residence, knock on the door and ask for consent from the homeowner or someone authorized to give consent. However, a person with drugs in his/her house or who otherwise would prefer not to have the government rummaging through their personal belongings might refuse to give such consent.

Whether the police have sufficient evidence to obtain a valid search warrant depends on the circumstances of each case. In a recent marijuana case near Jacksonville, Florida, the police, as is often the case when these kinds of cases start, received an anonymous tip that the defendant was growing marijuana on his property. The police went to his house, but they could not see anything because the defendant had a tall fence surrounding his property that was lined with fabric preventing anyone from seeing through the fence. The police then flew a helicopter over the property, but they did not see any marijuana. They did notice two sheds in the back yard. Next, the police looked through the trash bags that the defendant set out on the street. The trash bags revealed burnt marijuana blunts and large marijuana stems. The police took this information along with the fact that the defendant had prior drug convictions to a judge to get a search warrant for the property. They obtained a search warrant, searched the property and found that the defendant was growing marijuana in the sheds in his back yard. He was arrested on various cultivation and trafficking in marijuana charges.

The criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to suppress the evidence of the marijuana. When applying for the search warrant, the police failed to inform the judge that they flew over the property and did not see any indication of marijuana cultivation or possession. The criminal defense attorney argued that the search warrant was invalid because the police misled the issuing judge when they failed to disclose this information. If the police omit certain facts to mislead a judge in issuing a search warrant and the omitted facts negate the probable cause the police seemingly have without the omitted facts, then the evidence the police find as a result of the search warrant is inadmissible.

In a marijuana and drug paraphernalia case near Jacksonville, Florida, the defendant was driving when a police officer decided to run his tag on the officer’s computer. The computer showed that the defendant’s tag was registered to a different vehicle. As a result, the police officer stopped the defendant and found marijuana and drug paraphernalia in his vehicle. The defendant was arrested. It later turned out that the DMV had incorrect information and there was nothing wrong with the defendant’s tag.

The criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to suppress the drug evidence found in the vehicle. In Florida, if the initial stop of a defendant is not valid, the general rule is that any evidence found as a result of that illegal initial stop cannot be used against the defendant in a criminal case. In this case, the criminal defense attorney argued that because the defendant’s tag was valid and he was not violating any traffic laws, the police officer did not have a legal basis to stop him. Therefore, the drugs and drug paraphernalia the police officer found as a result of the illegal stop should be suppressed. The state, on the other hand, argued that the police officer was merely using the information he had and did not know it was inaccurate so the stop was valid.

The case has not been finally decided yet. There is a case that suggests the stop could be valid if the incorrect information came from an agency that is not considered a “law enforcement agency.” In other words, since the incorrect information came from the DMV, which may not be considered a “law enforcement agency” under the Fourth Amendment, the defendant may not be able to claim he was unreasonably stopped by law enforcement. However, a later case seems to suggest that the DMV is considered a “law enforcement agency”, and therefore the Fourth Amendment could be used to invalidate this unreasonable stop. In that case, the criminal defense lawyer’s motion to suppress would prevail to throw out the evidence of the drugs and drug paraphernalia.

Drug trafficking cases in Florida are very serious felony cases that come with significant penalties. These crimes typically have mandatory minimum prison sentences which means that if a person is convicted of drug trafficking, he/she will have to serve a minimum number of years in prison depending on the severity of the case unless the criminal defense lawyer can work out a different resolution. Some people might think that the crime of drug trafficking only applies to serious drug dealers who transport large quantities of drugs. That is not necessarily the case. Many drug trafficking cases involve drug users who happen to possess a quantity of drugs over the weight limit. In Florida, it does not take a large quantity of most drugs to reach the trafficking category since Florida drug laws are so harsh.

In many cases, the police seize multiple packages of a drug. For instance, if the police find a person with several different bags of suspected cocaine, can the police aggregate those bags together to reach the trafficking threshold? Does the state have to test each bag to make sure each bag contains cocaine?

In a recent cocaine trafficking case in Jacksonville, Florida, the Jacksonville police executed a search warrant at the defendant’s house and found nine separate bags of cocaine inside. The nine bags were later sent to the crime lab where drug identification tests are normally conducted by the state. The state combined the nine bags into one bag, the chemist tested the substance from that one bag and weighed it. The chemical test was positive for cocaine, and the weight of the combined bags was greater than 200 grams which makes it a serious felony cocaine trafficking case.

In Florida, there are two types of possession of drugs cases. There are actual possession cases where the defendant is actually holding or carrying the drugs, and there are constructive possession cases where the defendant is not actually holding the drugs but knows they are there and has some ability to control the drugs. Most constructive possession cases occur when the police find drugs in a vehicle or residence that either belongs to the defendant or in which the defendant is located. In those cases, the state needs to present evidence that establishes a legitimate connection between the defendant and the drugs. The strength of these cases is highly dependent on the particular facts. The more evidence the state has that the drugs belonged to the defendant (although the state does not have to prove ownership), the stronger the state’s drug case is.

In a possession of cocaine and marijuana case south of Jacksonville, Florida, the police located the marijuana and cocaine in an apartment. The defendant was arrested going to the apartment because the defendant had a key to the apartment. However, the defendant was arrested before he could enter the apartment. There was no other evidence that the defendant lived in the apartment or had any other connection to the drugs inside.

The court ultimately threw out this case. The criminal defense lawyer noted that a person can have the key to an apartment without living there or having any knowledge of what is inside at the time, i.e. a friend, neighbor, relative, landlord. Therefore, having a key to a residence is not sufficient to attribute drugs in the residence to that person. The state needed to prove much more of a connection between the defendant and the drugs. For instance, if the state could prove the defendant lived in the apartment and the drugs were found in the defendant’s room, perhaps through personal items, electric bills, etc, then the state would have more of a constructive possession case. However, without such evidence, the state’s possession case was thrown out.

Normally, for a police officer to stop or detain a person in Florida, the officer needs consent from the person or specific evidence that the person is involved in criminal activity. However, there are exceptions to the search and seizure laws, and one of them involves a situation where it appears to the police officer that a person’s welfare may be in danger. This often occurs when a person is asleep in the driver’s seat of a vehicle. The police officer will normally anticipate a DUI arrest in this situation, but he/she can use the welfare check exception as a reason to further investigate when the presence of alcohol and/or drugs are initially not apparent. In these cases, if the police officer reasonably believes the person may be at risk or need medical attention, the police officer can take steps to assist the person or investigate further to determine if there is in fact some kind of health risk or medical emergency. And if the police officer discovers a crime while doing this welfare check, then the officer can investigate that crime and make an arrest.

In a case near Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer was patrolling a mall parking lot and saw a vehicle parked behind one of the businesses where customers do not normally park. The officer approached the vehicle and noticed the defendant squatted down in the vehicle. The vehicle was running. The police officer knocked on the window and told the defendant to roll the window down. When the defendant complied, the police officer saw a bag of marijuana in the vehicle and arrested the defendant for possession of marijuana.

The criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to suppress arguing that the police officer did not have the legal authority to order the defendant to roll down his window so he could see into the vehicle. The criminal defense attorney argued that the police officer had no evidence that the defendant was involved in any criminal activity when he ordered the defendant to roll down his window. However, the court disagreed. The court found that the police officer had a legitimate reason to have the defendant roll down the window to make sure there was no medical problem. Since the police officer discovered the marijuana as soon as the window was rolled down, according to the police officer, he was within his rights to investigate the marijuana and make the arrest for possession of marijuana.

In drug cases in Florida, the police are not allowed to stop a person and investigate him/her for drugs or other illegal activity without probable cause to believe the person is committing a crime. The police can always approach a person and ask to talk to him/her and/or search him/her, but that person also has a right to refuse the police. Many times, a drug arrest is the result of a vehicle traffic stop where a police officer observes a person violate a traffic law, conducts a traffic stop and either gets consent to search the vehicle and finds drugs or allegedly develops probable cause and searches the vehicle, perhaps after smelling the odor of marijuana and having a drug dog alert to the vehicle.

Stopping pedestrians is more rare because the police do not normally have a traffic violation that can be used to initiate the encounter with the suspect. However, it can still happen that way. In a possession of cocaine case south of Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer observed the defendant walking down the middle of a street. He was not in danger and he was not bothering anyone but it is against the law for a pedestrian to walk in the middle of the street. This became a valid basis to stop the defendant. After the stop, the defendant agreed to let the police officer pat him down. Upon doing so, a pill bottle fell from his pants, they found crack cocaine inside and he was arrested for possession of cocaine.

The criminal defense lawyer tried to suppress the evidence of the drugs, but between the pedestrian violation, the consent to the pat down and the pill bottle falling to the ground, the state was able to proceed with the possession of crack cocaine charge. Had the defendant stayed on the sidewalk or refused consent to pat him down, it is unlikely he would have been arrested.

When most people think of drug trafficking charges in Florida, they think of people selling large quantities of marijuana, cocaine or other illegal drugs in traditional drug deals. However, with prescription drugs being the focus of police more and more, drug trafficking cases can involve many different scenarios. First, drug trafficking does not just mean selling or moving a large amount of drugs. Drug trafficking can also include merely possessing drugs over a certain threshold weight. Also, particularly with pill cases, a person really does not need to possess a great deal of pills to be at risk for a drug trafficking charge.

Medical doctors have also been the subject of drug trafficking investigations. In a recent drug trafficking case near Jacksonville, Florida, a medical doctor was charged with multiple counts of drug trafficking for providing Oxycodone to patients without a proper medical evaluation. The law allows a doctor to prescribe and dispense controlled substances such as painkillers like Hydrocodone in the normal course of his/her professional medical practice. However, if the state believes that a doctor is prescribing or dispensing controlled substance pills in an improper manner, such as without a proper medical evaluation or to people who do not need them or to known addicts in excess, the state may bring criminal charges against the doctor. We have seen this happen quite often in certain pain clinic cases in the Jacksonville and South Georgia areas.

In those cases, the state can charge a properly licensed medical doctor with trafficking in drugs or other drug-related crimes. The doctor can defend him/herself by arguing that the drugs were prescribed in the normal course of his/her medical practice. These cases can be difficult for the state to prove. After all, it is the educated and experienced doctor who normally decides issues related to a proper evaluation, diagnosis and treatment plan, not a police officer or prosecutor. On the other hand, drug trafficking charges in Florida come with severe penalties so there is a lot at stake (a felony conviction, loss of a medical license and prison time), and such cases must be defended appropriately

Contact Information