Criminal Defense Attorney Tulsa | Beating Meth Case | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office

When looking for the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has, there’s a number you need to call. Call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800. Schedule your free initial consultation with the Cale law office. Attorney Stephen Cale has been practicing for nearly 20 years. He has a long history of experience, but he also has the right kind of experience. That’s because he focuses his practice on criminal defense.

The deputy with the Tulsa County Sheriff’s office discovered a small amount of methamphetamine, ammunition, the farm with a face serial number in the defendant’s truck during the course of an inventory search. The prosecution charged the defendant with a two count charge with fill the position firearm and possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number. Following personnel defendant’s motion to suppress, the jury convicted the defendant both counts. On appeal, the defendant claims the District Court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found in the search of his vehicle.

Defendant also appeals a sentence, claiming violates the sixth amendment rights. The appellate court reviewed by the discourse denial the motion to suppress and sensing determination. Here’s a summary the case. If you’ve been charged with any kind of drug crime, you need the best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has. Call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800. Get the right kind of attorney for your situation.

During a routine traffic control, the deputy clock defendant struck doing 61 to 45 mile per hour zone. The deputy testified at the suppression hearing that in addition to his rater reading, his observation of the vehicle and conclude that the defendant was traveling at a rate between 60 and 70 miles per hour. During the traffic stop, the defendant was able to produce driver’s license or proof of insurance. Is a defense to the birth and social security number, backspace one to search the database, the deputy discovered to ministers license was suspended. The deputy arrest the defendant for driving with suspended license.

Proceeded to permit policy, the deputy about the defendant’s truck expected inventory search. During the course of the inventory search of the deputy located the black bag containing a small amount of methamphetamine, ammunition in a firearm of the defense serial number. Face with the farm charges, the defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence found in the inventory search of the vehicle. The discourse refer the matter to the magistrate judge who issued a written report. He denied the defendant’s motion to suppress.

The best criminal defense attorney Tulsa has will try to get evidence thrown out. Attorney Stephen Cale will file a motion to suppress based on the police overstepping their bounds or not proper search. This is a way to get evidence thrown out. What is likely of evidence is thrown out, the case will be dismissed. This is just one way attorney Stephen Cale fights hard for his clients. Call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800 to schedule your free initial consultation.

A traffic stop is valid in the fourth amendment of the stop is based on observed traffic violation where the police officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a traffic or criminal violation has occurred or is occurring. So question is whether this particular officer had original suspicion that a particular motors violated any one of the multitude of applicable traffic and equipment violation so the jurisdiction. The appellate court said that had no doubt that the state was satisfied in this case. Regardless of monitoring the deputy receded operating a radar gun, he was able to conclude, just by observing the vehicle, the defendant was speeding and is committing a traffic violation. This can’t observations the only requirement from Mallon stop in the fourth amendment.

Additionally, the defendant offered no the testimony at the suppressing hearing concerning how often rater calibrations required. He also did not over evidence that the greater crime was malfunctioning. Therefore, the stop of the defense vehicle comply with the fourth amendment. As a consequence, disc court probably denied his motion to suppress.

Defendant also challenge the sentence claiming that the District Court points his base offense level contravene Supreme Court’s holding. The defendant sentence may be enhanced that the defendant uses a process is any firearm or ammunition in connection with another felony offense. The District Court applied a enhancement, for the defendants possessing a firearm in connection with an charge felony. Thanks relevant to sensing still need only be prove by preponderance of evidence. Some was guidelines are considered, they will be advisory. The availability of the gun in close proximity to the methamphetamine was sufficient evidence connection between the farm possession of drugs.

The defense of a certificate of the pill ability to challenge the denial of his motion. In this case, the defendant was convicted by a jury of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. The jury also convicted him of possession of a firearm in the furtherance of the drug trafficking crime charge arose out of the traffic stop of the defense vehicle by an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper. The trooper stopped the defendant for violating the states length statute. The statute prohibits vehicle for truth. The search of the fence vehicle revealed marijuana, drug the head, and ammunition.

For trial, the best Tulsa has to offer filed a motion to suppress. Review for trooper electrification for traffic stop. According to the trooper told reversal the car to review mere. The trooper was part of the right hand side of the record on eastbound interstate I-44 a second vehicle was traveling directly behind the defendant have heard was traveling in the right he spelled lead slightly in front of the faster than defendant. The true press man that the tell vehicles hauling the defendant at a distance are problem one has seconds. In this close proximity, and the trooper believed that the defendant was states Leslie statute.

According to the trooper, the defendant had an opportunity to be the right lane during this time it failed to do so. Upon stopping defendant, the trooper detective the thing under of marijuana. The trooper request the drug sniffing dog. The trial indicated the owner narcotics. So the trooper searched the vehicle.