Minor Caught with Drugs at School

My question involves juvenile law in the State of: arizona,phoenix. I am 15 and my back pack was searched at school because someone snitched me out they found a butterfly knife,boxcutter,scale,pipe,rolling papers,2 lighters,matches, eye drops,a metal pen cap i use to kill roaches and about 6grams in a candle jar some weed was baged up in the jar (an eighth which is 3.5 grams). This guy i know who snitched me out was my friends brother somehow he had my friends weed and gram baggies and when he got caught he said he was holding it for me. I am being charged with possetion of a wepon and possetion of marijuana with the intent to sell on public school property. They told me a court date will be mailed to me in a few months its been about 4 days but i want to know if they will charge me as an adult or get juvie or probation.

You're in a world of hurt here, not only because you're facing criminal charges but you could very likely be expelled from school.

You can be charged as an adult in AZ at the age of 15. Whether the DA chooses to prosecute as a juvenile or an adult is based on several factors. The fact that you were in possession of a weapon, drugs and drug paraphernalia on school property doesn't help your case and may result in sentencing enhancements.

If you haven't told your parents yet I suggest you fess up and go talk to a criminal defense lawyer.

Who searched your backpack? Were the police present when it was searched? Were your parents present when it was searched? Is that not a violation of due process for school employees to intimidate a 15 year old student into opening his private property based on what some other kid says?

a lawyer could probably make an argument for chain of evidence being broken due to not having a cop do the search, unless a cop was at the school,, many schools have that now, probably the same for any statements that are made to anyone but a cop. that might help in the criminal aspect, but not for your school issues

What's your prior judicial record? Per Maricopa County, for non-violent offenses,

Quote:

---

Quoting Arizona Delinquency

---

A youth, who is at least 14 years of age, and who has been convicted in the Juvenile Court of two prior felonies and then is arrested for another felony MAY be tried in the adult criminal court if the County Attorney believes it is necessary to protect the public. ARS § 13-501.

If the County Attorney wants to try any other juvenile in adult criminal court, a motion to transfer must be filed. A Juvenile Court judge must then make two determinations: (1) whether there is probable cause to proceed; and if so, (2) whether the juvenile should be transferred to the adult court to protect the community after a consideration of the seriousness of the alleged offense and the manner it was caused, whether a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument was used, whether it was a crime against property or person; whether anyone was injured as a result of the juvenile's actions, whether the juvenile was acting with or furtherance of a gang, the juvenile's sophistication and maturity, the juvenile's physical, mental and emotional condition, the juvenile's previous Juvenile Court history, if any, whether the juvenile had previously been committed to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections and the prospects for adequate protection of the public and the likelihood of reasonable rehabilitation by the use of services and facilities of the Court. Rule 14, Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Is that not a violation of due process for school employees to intimidate a 15 year old student into opening his private property based on what some other kid says?

---

No, it is not.

Quote:

---

Quoting New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 83 L.Ed.2d 720, 105 S.Ct. 733 (1985)

---

[T]he legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. Determining the reasonableness of any search involves a twofold inquiry: first, one must consider "whether the . . . action was justified at its inception," Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S., at 20; second, one must determine whether the search as actually conducted "was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place," ibid. Under ordinary circumstances, a search of a student by a teacher or other school official will be "justified at its inception" when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. Such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.

---

A report from another student that a student possesses contraband will generally support a search of their bags and outer clothing. See, e.g., Safford Unified School Dist. No. 1 v. Redding, 129 S. Ct. 2633 (2009).

Quote:

---

Quoting tonynewman

---

a lawyer could probably make an argument for chain of evidence being broken due to not having a cop do the search

---

Tony, as is too often the case, you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

Quote:

---

Quoting tonynewman

---

....probably the same for any statements that are made to anyone but a cop.

---

Chain of custody is not ever an issue with self-incriminating statements but, leaving that aside, you are wrong again.

can you explain? if a teacher searches, finds drugs,, calls the police and hands the drugs over, there is no argument for this,, being a teacher is not a law enforcement officer ?

just the same, could I call the police on you, hand them drugs and say I found it on your person. you know what im saying.

the teacher is not with the police dept. I could be wrong,, but I think its a valid point

Tony, if you need incredibly basic legal concepts explained to you, start your own thread.

I got myself into a situation way back when in grade school. This was way before any of the mass school shootings, etc. A friend of mine and I bought these little orange guns that shot plastic discs. In any case, I made a bad decision and decided to shove as many of those plastic discs into a pay phone. I don't know, I was a dumb kid. I wasn't trying to break the pay phone, but was trying to see if these discs would let you make a call (they were the same size as a quarter). Anyway, I got caught by a lunch room proctor. He knew the discs were shot out of a gun, and proceeded to interrogate me about where the gun was. I said I didn't have it (which was technically true, as I didn't have it on my person). So the proctor took me to the principal, who also questioned me. I explained I was just goofing around, meant no harm, etc. So the principal got the janitor to cut the lock off my locker and they found the plastic gun in there. I was suspended for a week due to "having a weapon on school property". The police were called and I was questioned. After being questioned, my parents were called to pick me up. Long story short, the school (and the local police) determined not to pursue any formal charges. In my case, the local JP specifically said the school handled the "investigation" incorrectly and that my parents should have been notified and present before any questioning and before my locker was broken into. Maybe an exception was made in my specific case, but the point I am trying to make is that some of the arguments tony made were why the JP didn't pursue it (in her own words). FWIW.

Quote:

---

Quoting PADriver13

---

Who searched your backpack? Were the police present when it was searched? Were your parents present when it was searched? Is that not a violation of due process for school employees to intimidate a 15 year old student into opening his private property based on what some other kid says?

---

Schools have long been granted a great deal of leeway to conduct searches for reasons of school safety with merely a burden of reasonable suspicion as opposed to probable cause.

EDIT: I see that Mr. K. already made that point ... so ... time to head off to bed.

I didn't say they could not search,,i know they can search,, but I was implying that evidence found by a teacher/principal might not hold up in a court of law, due to the teacher not being a law enforcement officer. therefore the chain of evidence started with the teacher, not the student.