This content was written for Cale Law Office

Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale discusses drug crimes. If you’ve been charged with a crime call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800. You’ll schedule a free initial consultation. At this consultation you’ll get a free defense strategy plan.

In order to be convicted of distributing a controlled dangerous substance, stay would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person knowingly or intentionally distributed a controlled dangerous substance listed in the state statute. The law provides that transporting with the intent to distribute, Celeste and the use of, using the services of a person less than 18 years old to cultivate distribute, or manufacture a controlled dangerous substance is also a crime.

The law does not specify any minimum quantity of a drug that must exist in order to break the law. State is not required to establish that any traceable or specific usable quantity of prohibited narcotic substance was involved. In fact, the quantity of the drug need not be sufficient to produce a stimulating or depression effect on the nervous system, so long as the substances within the statutory outline of drugs that are outlawed.

The language of the statute prohibiting distribution of illegal narcotics does not specifically refer to the sale. Statutory definitions of these transactions is set forth in title 63 show the legislative intent to incorporate the sale of an awful drag it to the kind of conduct will not require an element compensation. For example, distribute is defined as to deliver other than by administering or dispensing a controlled substance. Dispensing uses the term deliver which is also defined in title 63 as the actual, constructive, or tends to transfer from one person to another of an illegal drug, whether or not there is an agency relationship. The word dispenses means to deliver a controlled dangerous substance to the ultimate user or human research subject by or pursuant to the lawful order of a practitioner. This includes prescribing, administering, packaging, labeling or compounding necessary to prepare the substance for such distribution.

The law makes not only dealing and selling a drug illegal, but also sharing with her dividing among persons of the illegal drug. It does not matter whether or not there was any compensation for the drug. Any person who illegally distributes a controlled dangerous substance, or who has a personal or financial stake in the transaction, is within the scope of the law against distributing illegal drugs. Still, it’s better to get the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney.

In order for the state to convict a person of manufacturing and drug, it would have to show you a reasonable doubt that the person knowingly or intentionally manufactured the illegal drug. A person could also be charged with possession of a precursor substance with intent to manufacture. This means that a person knowingly or intentionally possessed a precursor substance that is listed in title 63 with the intent to use the substance to manufacture an illegal drug. A jury may but is not required, to regard proof that the defendant knowingly and intentionally possessed a certain precursor as sufficient evidence that the defendant intended to use the precursor to manufacturing illegal drug.

Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale also says that there is the crime of endeavoring to manufacture a drug. Under these circumstances, a person knowingly or intentionally offers, solicits, attempts, endeavors, or conspires to manufacture the illegal drug.

If the amount of illegal drug is a certain amount as specified in title 63, then the crime can be elevated to aggravated manufacturing the drug. Someone could also be charged with possession with intent to manufacture or distribute. In order to convict a person of that crime, the state would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person knowingly and intentionally possessed a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture or distribute it. The thrust of the possession offense is twofold. One is the knowing and intentional possession component. Secondly, there is the specific tent element. These elements are distinct and independent. Neither can be proved by presumption.

The parameters of the element of possession have been refined by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals through a series of decisions. In one case the court said that guilty knowledge and control cannot be presumed. In other words, the defendant did not have the burden of establishing lack of knowledge or control. The court went on to say that there must be some kind of connection or circumstance in addition to the possession of marijuana which demonstrates that the defendant’s knowledge of its presence and his control of it. Without this additional independent factor, the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction.

In 1974, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals outlined the parameters of the requirement of possession. First, actual physical custody of a controlled substance is not required. Stay will meet its burden of proof by demonstrating constructive possession of them illegal drug.

Secondly, possession does not need to be exclusive. A person may be deemed to be joint possession of the drug which is in the physical custody of a person, if the to willfully and knowingly share the right to control truck. However, mere proximity to the drug is not sufficient to establish control. That means that evidence in addition to the defendant’s presence at a place where tribes are or used must be induced to demonstrate knowledge and control.

Since the mens rea aspect of knowing possession is rarely susceptible to direct proof, the defendant’s knowledge and advice of control may be established by circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial proof may allow for inference of knowledge control is sufficient to permit the case to go to the jury. Drug charges can be beaten. But you may need the best Tulsa criminal defense attorney to make that happen.

Although the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has declared that mere presence, without additional in the factors, is not sufficient to raise an inference of knowledge control, these independent factors may be derived from various sources. For example, the defendant’s incriminating statements or conduct, or prior police investigation may be such factor. However, the threshold test of independent factors remains unfilled where the only fifth factor induced in addition to the defendant’s physical proximity to the narcotic substance is the fact that the drug was located in an extremely confined area such as the interior of a car.

If you’re facing a drug charge, call Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney Stephen Cale at 918-277-4800.