Articles Tagged with “criminal defense”

Today marks the 56th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Hamilton v. Alabama[1]. Hamilton[2] stands for the simple proposition that the 14th amendment due process clause incorporates your sixth amendment right to counsel against the states, meaning you must be allowed to have a lawyer at your arraignment.

u-s-supreme-court-2-1210504-1-300x225
The Case

The case behind the Hamilton decision is stunning for the nature of the crime at the center of the case. In the mid 1950’s Mr. Hamilton was arrested and charged with Burglary with intent to Ravish which at the time was a capital offense. Mr. Hamilton, being indigent was unable to afford an attorney. This case occurred before the landmark case of Gideon v. Wainwright[3][4] which guaranteed indigent people the right to counsel. As such, Mr. Hamilton was not given an attorney, and at his arraignment Mr. Hamilton plead not guilty.

In April of 2010, Mr. Cornell had his home raided by police where 1/16th of an ounce of marijuana had been found – not enough to roll a joint. None of the potential jurors called for the case where willing to consider convicting someone for possessing a very small amount of marijuana.[1]

iStock_000012403418XSmall-3-300x199
November 16th 2010, Touray Cornell from Montana, breathed a sigh of relief and smiled as Judge “Dusty” Deschamps convened his court to report that out of all the potential jurors who had been called, not one would be willing to convict Mr. Cornell. Dumbfounded by the jurors’ decision, the District Attorney quickly spoke to Mr. Cornell’s defense counsel and an immediate plea deal was made. Mr. Cornell walked out free without admitting guilt and without probation.

Mr. Cornell witnessed the power of Jury Nullification, a show of citizen’s power through the legal system have a long and storied history in America. it is the power of Jury nullification and Mr. Cornell saw a version of that power first hand.

In Europe, cacao has become a substance of choice for raves instead of using illicit drugs.[1] The chocolate is generally consumed in either an infused drink with agave and cinnamon, swallowed through a pill, or snorted through the nose.divine-chocolate-300x195

The most popular place for partying with cacao is at Lucid, a monthly gathering in Berlin, “where music, dance, community and natural high vibes roam wild and free.”[2]  The Chocolate Line, a Belgian company, popularized the inhaling of cacao powder when its founder, Dominique Persoone, introduced his chocolate shooter at a 2007 Rolling Stone party. [3] Persoone recommends that the powder be combined with mint or ginger to open and “tinkle” the nose, and that the powder must be cut to prevent caking and burning. Persoone has sold over 25,000 of his snorting devices.[4]

Demand isn’t for Hershey’s bars or cocoa baking powder, but for raw, virgin cacao which is pure and potent and not processed with milk and sugar. Even before the Europeans came to the New World, cacao was consumed and revered by the ancient civilizations. In the Aztec Empire, the seeds were used a form of currency.[5]

dreamstime_xs_22155154-300x220
The phrase “Mass Incarceration” has become synonymous with a failed criminal justice system, but millions of people were incarcerated years before we acknowledged mass criminalization.[1]  The data show that the prison population had bloated before policymakers and the public recognized it was out of control.

In the 1970s, the U.S. decided that prison was the answer to combating crime, however, studies show that the high incarceration rate didn’t reduce serious crimes. Between 1993 and 2001, the prison population increased by 66%, but serious crime only reduced by 2-5%. During the same period, the U.S. spent $53 billion to support imprisonment policies – a high price of using many tax dollars for a low reduction in crime.[2]

Although the U.S. was incarcerating at exorbitant rates, credit goes to author, Michelle Alexander, for publishing prison facts in her 2010 book The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Shocking statistics included in The New Jim Crow increased its popularity as readers shared the discoveries on social media encouraging advocates to pressure policymakers for prison reform.

iStock_000010324123_ExtraSmall-206x300On August 25th, 2016, the DEA administer, Chuck Rosenberg, released a document announcing the agency would temporarily be placing Mitragyna speciose, commonly called Kratom, and its two primary chemicals, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, on the Schedule I list of the 1970 Controlled Substance Act as of September 30th, 2016.[1] The DEA announced its decision after citing health and safety concerns relating to the opioid-like drug. The decision of the DEA comes two months after a report was released by the CDC citing an upswing in poison control calls with 660 reports relating to the plant between 2010 and 2015.

What is Kratom?

Mitragyna speciose otherwise known as Kratom is a deciduous and evergreen tree in the coffee family native to southeast Asia, Thailand, and Malaysia[2]. Kratom contains opioid like compounds mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine which act upon opioid receptors much like morphine.

It is said that everything is bigger in Texas, unfortunately, that isn’t always a good thing. In just under a decade, Texas has taken $540.7 million dollars’ worth of assets from its citizens.[1] Texas is one of the more aggressive states when it comes to the practice of civil asset forfeiture, earning an average yearly income of $41.6 million from the practice. [2]

iStock_000002161278XSmall-300x174
Legal Taking of Property?

Civil Asset Forfeiture is the practice by which property can be confiscated from people without ever charging them with a criminal offense. Civil asset forfeiture is an actual civil suit brought against the confiscated item leading to bizarre sounding cases such as State of Texas v. One 2004 Chevrolet Silverado, and State of Texas v. .39 acres.

Louisiana passed two medical marijuana laws in 2016 signed by Governor Bell Edwards (D-Louisiana). These two laws were SB 271[1] and SB 180[2] both authored by Sen. Fred Mills (R- District 22). These two bills established Louisiana as the 25th state to establish a comprehensive medical marijuana program. Louisiana’s history with medical marijuana, however, provides insights into the struggle to reform a medical program once a state has passed it.

First in the Nation

While it is mostly a footnote in history now, Louisiana was actually the first state in the nation to pass a medical marijuana program back in 1978. Passed only eight years after President Nixon signed the Controlled Substances Act, Louisiana’s original medical marijuana program, authored by Sen. Tony Guarisco (D-Morgan City) and signed by Governor Edwin Edwards (D-Louisiana) allowed patients suffering from glaucoma and cancer to use medical marijuana.

iStock_000009135835_ExtraSmallOn May 16th, 2016, the Texas GOP signaled a profound change of stance with regard to marijuana laws in Texas. Thanks to the dedicated work of many activists within the Republican Party, the State GOP adopted two resolutions with profound implications for the future of marijuana law in the Lone Star State.

Hemp

The first resolution is the most straightforward, and the least controversial step in marijuana law reform. The plank was adopted with 71% of those in favor. The resolution reads as such:

End Prohibition - Legalize Marijuana
With 2017 fast approaching and prospective state representatives competing for votes, a Texas sized problem remains unaddressed in the Texas medical marijuana program. In 2015, The Texas legislature passed Senate Bill 339 authored by Sen. Kevin Eltife (R-Tyler) and Stephanie Klick (R-Fort Worth).[1]

SB 339, otherwise known as the Texas Compassionate Use Act, was a start on the road to marijuana reform for Texas. The bill was the first formal recognition from Texas that marijuana has medical use. The bill was inspired by Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s “weed” documentary series highlighting the efficacy of high CBD marijuana strains for treating epilepsy in children. With the combined efforts of medical activists and strong pressure from the Epilepsy Foundation, the bill passed in the waning days of the 2015 session and was signed by Governor Abbott.

Overview of The Compassionate Use Act

iStock_000000350401XSmall.jpgThe government intercepts the phone calls of suspect criminals through the use of a wiretap. Wiretaps are search warrants that allow a law enforcement agency to eavesdrop on phone calls or internet communications (E.g. cell, land line, Skype calls). Law enforcement agencies can only eavesdrop after they obtain a court order from a judge authorizing them to listen in on certain conversations. In order to obtain a court order, the officer must file an application with the court requesting authorization from the court to conduct a wiretap. The application is an essential part of the process and is subject to strict compliance with 18 U.S.C.A. § 2518.

The first requirement is that the investigative or law enforcement officer making the application be identified along with the officer who authorized the application. This requirement is important for a couple of reasons. First, there are strict disclosure laws that prohibit liberal sharing of wiretaps. Officers cannot freely discuss wiretaps with whomever they want, even if they are talking to other officers. The disclosure must be permitted by statute. Second, it identifies the law enforcement agency that is conducting the wiretap. Particular agencies can conduct wiretaps for certain reasons. Certain agencies investigate certain crimes; not all crimes are subject to wiretap surveillance either. A law enforcement agency must be investigating a crime that is enumerated under 18 U.S.C.A. § 2703, and the crime must be one that the agency investigates.

Continue reading