Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney | Sentencing Entrapment | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office
Are you searching for a Tulsa criminal defense attorney who is a heavy hitter? Call the Cale Law Office at 918-277-4800 to schedule your free initial consultation. Attorney Cale has nearly two decades of legal experience. He focuses his practice on criminal defense.
If you’re looking for one the best Tulsa criminal defense attorneys, you can note that attorney Stephen Cale will work hard for you. You can always look for a way to try to get a charge dismissed. Can’t get the charge dismissed to try to find a way to get it reduced to a less serious charge. However, is not afraid to take a case to jury trial. He has many years of experience being a trial attorney.
The following is a summary of a 2003 Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals case. Jerald Leech, Jr., was convicted at a jury trial of trafficking methamphetamine and sentenced to 20 years in prison. The evidence showed that Leech and the State’s informant, Peterman, had an ongoing relationship. Leech would supply Peterman with money to buy supplies for making methamphetamine. Leech received drugs in payment. He would also sell meth for Peterman.
One day, Peterman gave Leech about an ounce of meth. Half of this was repayment for the most recent money advanced. The other half was for sale on consignment. Police arrested Leech right away. They found drugs in his care and a small amount of meth in his pocket.
On appeal, Leech first asserted that the evidence was not sufficient to support the trafficking conviction because there was no proof that he knowingly possessed twenty or more grams of methamphetamine. The appellate court will review the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale.
The State’s evidence was that the informant and Leech discussed the details of Leech getting the meth before he took possession of it. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals found that this evidence was accepted by the jury and is sufficient under Spuehler.
On appeal, Leech also asserted that the trial judge should have given a lesser included offense instruction covering possession of methamphetamine. A lesser offense instruction should not be given unless the evidence would support a conviction for the lesser offense. The evidence in this case was that Leech knowingly possessed a large amount of meth that would not be just for personal use.
Additionally, Leech asserted that he was entrapped into possessing a large quantity of methamphetamine. As a consequence, he asserted that he could only be convicted of possession of methamphetamine. Possession of methamphetamine is a less serious offense than trafficking the drug, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale.
There are two kinds of entrapment. Sentencing entrapment occurs when the State causes a defendant initially predisposed to commit a lesser crime to commit a more serious one. This is different from “traditional” entrapment situations in which an otherwise innocent person is caused to commit a crime. Traditional entrapment situations may occur when an unwary innocent person is trapped into committing a crime.
A defendant who intended to possess only small amounts of an illegal drug could be entrapped by officers into possessing a larger amount to support a trafficking or intent to distribute charge. In that instance, the defendant would be entitled to a jury instruction on sentencing entrapment. This would allow the jury to determine whether the defendant was guilty of the greater or lesser charge, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale.
Lastly, Leech claimed that his 20-year sentence is excessive. Leech was fifty-eight years old at the time of sentencing and will be denied access to most good time credits. Additionally, informants are more blameworthy than the defendant, the appellate court said. So, it reduced the sentence to 10 years.
Attorney Stephen Cale said that this is a perfect example of when a jury should be instructed on entrapment. It’s also an example of how particular facts can be important in getting a lesser sentence. If you’re looking for an excellent criminal defense attorney, call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800.
There are two types of probation that involve sentencing. First, there is a deferred sentence. Secondly, there is a suspended sentence. In a deferred sentence, the person will be on probation for certain period of time. During that probation, there will be certain rules that the person will have to follow. An example is obeying all laws, doing a drug and asked all assessment and following the recommendations, and paying court costs. At the end of probation, if a person has not violated any of the conditions, then the case will be dismissed. Additionally, a deferred sentence is not legally considered as a conviction.
A suspended sentence works in a similar way. The person still put on probation and will have to follow certain rules and conditions. Contrary to a deferred sentence, a suspended sentence is considered a conviction. Additionally, the case does not get dismissed at the end of the probation time.
If you’ve been charged with a crime, anger the child is not an option, it’s good to try for a deferred sentence. That way the case can be dismissed at the end of the probationary time, and it will not be a conviction. If that cannot be done, then the next best option is a suspended sentence. All not as good as a deferred, it will keep a person out of jail or prison.
There are serious consequences for filing the terms of your deferred or suspended sentence. When a person violates a deferred sentence, the prosecution will file an application to accelerate the sentence. That means that the state wants you to serve the sentence that you got. So for example, if you got a one your deferred sentence and violated the terms of the probation, the state often times wants you to serve that one year. With a good attorney, you can negotiate a deal where the state will withdraw its application to accelerate.