This content was written for Cale Law Office
Being charged with a crime is serious business. Call Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale at 918-277-4800 to schedule your free initial consultation. He’ll also provide you with a free defense strategy plan custom-made for your case that you can take with you absolutely free.
The defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. The court sentenced him to five years in prison. Trial detective testified that he had been involved with law enforcement for about eighteen years. He participated in about seventy-five grades dealing with drugs. It also them the defendant form fifteen years or more. The detective identified having court.
In August the search warrant was obtained and directed towards the defendant in a residence where he lived. The detective serve the warrant another officers stated that he had been by the residents a number of times I stink out which it lasted about two months. During the search, about four pounds of marijuana and $2000 worth of money, checks, and money orders were found. Additionally, authorities found plastic bags, scales, cigarette papers, and a jar of marijuana seeds. Further, authorities found a hairdryer which had a substance that later tested to be marijuana.
A newspaper reporter participate in the search at the request of the detective. He took photographs of marijuana and money sees of the residents. Police Sgt. accompanied persons carrying out the search warrant. During the search he fell on appear to be numerous lids of marijuana and a dresser in the bedroom. The defendant was taken into custody in search, and a little marijuana was found on the defendant in his pants.
A district attorney’s investigator testified that he delivered evidence found in the residence to the of the defendant to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation to be tested by chemist. The chemist testified that he ran three separate tests of substance found during the search. All of them tested positive for containing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). He also testified that THC is found in all species of cannabis. Additionally, he said that the small fragments found in the hairdryer tested positive for marijuana.
The defendant testified on his own behalf and stated that he used marijuana and picked up the habit in Vietnam. He said that the scales were used by his wife. He also testified that the hairdryer was never used and try marijuana. The marijuana was for his personal use and for acquaintances of his from his military service. The reason the money was in the house was because he was a part-time mechanic kept money separately from his G.I. money going to school. He did however admit that he had a bank account.
On cross-examination, the defendant stated that some of his friends came by to smoke, but they were his military friends. It didn’t find drug paraphernalia, a marijuana cigarette, and a ball used as a smoking device further stated that the market value of the lid is ten dollars. He further stated that a person can get between fifteen and twenty bags from a pound of marijuana.
The defendant called character witnesses who testified as to his good character and standing in the community. The defendant first argued on appeal the evidence was not sufficient. Secondly, he argued trial court erred in refusing to give requested instructions. In a similar vein he argued that since chemist testing the marijuana cannot positively state whether was cannabis and cannabis sativa L, cannabis indica, or cannabis ruderalis, the state failed to meet its burden of proof and his demurrer should have been sustained.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals had previously decided the issue, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. In that case the appellate court said that the term cannabis suttee the L used in the law to defy marijuana includes all forms, varieties, and species of the plant genus cannabis. Therefore, once the state proof of the substance in question is a prescribed portion of the cannabis plant and further proves that the substance test positive for tetrahydrocanabinol (THC) that has met its burden of proof.
The appellate court next considered the meaning of the word distribute. The court examined the plain meaning a dictionary. It found that the term means to divide among several or many. It is synonymous with dispensing, dividing, dealing, or doling. It pound from the ordinary and accepted meaning of the word distribute that a distributor is not just one who deals or sales, but one who divides or shares with or without compensation. Deliver can mean the actual, constructive, or attempt to transfer from one person to another with a controlled dangerous substance. Get the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney for marijuana charges.
The defendant testified in his own behalf and admitted to the possession of marijuana. He also meant that he shared with friends on various occasions. However, he argued that the detective is not an expert. He said that the detective injected a evidentiary harpoon when he testified that he was told of the street value of marijuana has been ten dollars a lead by an informant who had bought marijuana from the defendant. However, the appellate court said that these errors were cured the defendant freely and voluntarily testified in his own behalf. It’s a well recognized principle that when a defendant voluntarily testified in his own behalf, and his evidence as well as other competent evidence clearly shows that he is guilty, a conviction will not be set aside for errors in the omission of evidence. Further, when defendant admits facts that exclude every theory of innocence in which amount to a confession of guilt, and competent evidence introduced by the state will be deemed harmless, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale.
The defendant’s guilt in this case was overwhelming in light of his confession and other evidence. Lastly, the defendant argued that the trial court erred in failing to disqualify himself from imposing a sentence on the ground that in out that it’s his policy not to grant suspended sentences to anyone subject to marijuana statutes. The judge still has a fixed turnouts public policy against considering a deferred or suspended sentence upon the first violation, he should stand aside and disqualify himself. If, on the other hand, can lay aside his former position and take into consideration the presentence report, the evidence offered on trial, and conscientiously consider the alternatives, many may proceed to hear any motion filed in accordance with law. If a motion is filed in the trial court cannot conscientiously lay aside his previous convictions regarding suspended or deferred senses, he should disqualify himself and certifies disqualification.