Narcotics Possession and Paraphernalia Charges Based on an Inaccurate Sworn Affidavit
I worked for Sonic which closes at 1AM. My manager & I clocked out on Oct. 2nd at 2:35AM. We went to our cars, he stuck around to make sure mine was going to start since I had been having car problems & mine started right up so he left. I sat there for a few minute reading my email's while my car was warming up at 2:40AM a dark colored SUV pulled up behind me with it's bright's on blocking my car in so I was watching them until the spotlight came on & then I knew it was a cop.
As he approached my vehicle I identified myself by full name & as an employee of Sonic mind you I am still in full work attire. He asked me if I knew why he stopped I said no at which time he told me I was a suspicious person sitting in my vehicle so what was I doing there I said my manager & I just clocked out at 2:35 I am sitting here reading my emails while my car warms up a little at which time he replied that it didn't need warmed up because it wasn't that cold out. He asked for my license, registration & my insurance which I provided to him a long with my Intoxalock contract as well as my driver's license reinstatement letter so I was completely legal.
The rest of the story is pretty quick to sum up. His partner saw an eyeglass holder on the front seat of my car which I through in my glove box with everything else anyways long story short there was presumably drugs (meth) & paraphernalia in it so I was taken into custody for possession of narcotics & paraphernalia (pipe) they also confiscated my torch saying it to was paraphernalia. So here goes all the questions I have regarding this case. A few more facts first though. I was present at the scene obviously & no field test on the white powdered substance was done in my presence. My rights were not cited to me until I was under arrest & in handcuffs.
1st. Question: Upon being approached by the officer I identified myself as an employee of Sonic plus I was in full work attire still. Doesn't that squash his "probable cause" to harass me?
2nd Question: In The Synopsis it stated that he (the officer) contacted me at 2:40AM on Oct. 2nd, 2016 but, then in the sworn affidavit (police report) it was stated they (field tested) the white substance & it was positive for (meth) on Oct. 1st, 2016. That's not possible since they didn't obtain it until Oct. 2nd so can they still convict me?
3rd Question: They seized a glass oil burner (pipe), my butane torch & the white substance (meth) but, I got no receipt of confiscation for those items. 3mos later when I was officially charged for knowingly possessing a scheduled 2 narcotic & knowingly possessing an instrument that can be used as a pipe nothing was mentioned for a 2nd count of possessing a torch that can be used to burn the white residue (meth) with. Don't they have to charge you with everything they seized & if not then return it?
Re: Pending Criminal Charges Based on Inaccurate Sworn Affidavit
Quote:
Quoting
MesaL37@yahoo.com
1st. Question: Upon being approached by the officer I identified myself as an employee of Sonic plus I was in full work attire still. Doesn't that squash his "probable cause" to harass me?
2nd Question: In The Synopsis it stated that he (the officer) contacted me at 2:40AM on Oct. 2nd, 2016 but, then in the sworn affidavit (police report) it was stated they (field tested) the white substance & it was positive for (meth) on Oct. 1st, 2016. That's not possible since they didn't obtain it until Oct. 2nd so can they still convict me?
3rd Question: They seized a glass oil burner (pipe), my butane torch & the white substance (meth) but, I got no receipt of confiscation for those items. 3mos later when I was officially charged for knowingly possessing a scheduled 2 narcotic & knowingly possessing an instrument that can be used as a pipe nothing was mentioned for a 2nd count of possessing a torch that can be used to burn the white residue (meth) with. Don't they have to charge you with everything they seized & if not then return it?
1. No. This was not harassment anyway. It was a police officer doing their job.
2. Possibly, as it is a typo/clerical error. Your lawyer may be able to do something with it. You do have a lawyer, right?
3. No, they don't have to charge you with everything.
4. You didn't ask but you need to get off Meth. It leads nowhere good.
Re: Pending Criminal Charges Based on Inaccurate Sworn Affidavit
You didn't indicate what state (unless it is buried in there somewhere rather than being in the first line as the site prompted you).
It's not harassment and since you were not moving, what you have here is called a consensual stop and the officer doesn't need probable cause or even an articulable reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred. He's free to ask you questions based on his own hunches.
You're not getting convicted based on the "sworn affidavit," that's only information needed to bring the charges. In addition, even if there are errors, it's not a "get out of jail free" card. They can be corrected during the process. This information will not be used at trial (it's inamissible actually in most states).
The answer to all parts of your third question is "no." They don't need to give you receipts. They don't need to charge you with every violation they find. They can charge you later on if they feel there is probable cause to do so.
As Mr. Free9 says you need to get serious help with your substance abuse problems and you need a lawyer for your legal problems. In many states, what you've lsited is a felony level charge. Even misdemeanors are nothing to sneeze at.
Re: Narcotics Possession and Paraphernalia Charges Based on an Inaccurate Sworn Affid
Quote:
Quoting
MesaL37@yahoo.com
1st. Question: Upon being approached by the officer I identified myself as an employee of Sonic plus I was in full work attire still. Doesn't that squash his "probable cause" to harass me?
No, it doesn’t “squash” anything. While I believe that this was, in fact, a detention and not a consensual contact, the cop does not need “probable cause” to do so. The burden for an investigative detention is reasonable suspicion. Even if he simply took you at your word that you were an employee (after all, nobody EVER lies to the police, right?), the circumstances were still suspicious. The business was closed, all other employees were gone, it was late at night, yet there you were still lingering. Businesses get burglarized even by employees. Disgruntled employees have been known to vandalize businesses. And, employees have been known to hang around businesses after hours to make drug deals or other illegal transactions (or simply get stoned before driving home – as you were). Even after you identified yourself as an employee, the cop still had reasonable suspicion and plenty of investigating to do.
Quote:
Quoting
MesaL37@yahoo.com
2nd Question: In The Synopsis it stated that he (the officer) contacted me at 2:40AM on Oct. 2nd, 2016 but, then in the sworn affidavit (police report) it was stated they (field tested) the white substance & it was positive for (meth) on Oct. 1st, 2016. That's not possible since they didn't obtain it until Oct. 2nd so can they still convict me?
A typo in the report is not going to get you out of anything. Your attorney might be able to use it when cross examining the cop in court to cast doubt on his credibility, but even that sounds weak.
Quote:
Quoting
MesaL37@yahoo.com
3rd Question: They seized a glass oil burner (pipe), my butane torch & the white substance (meth) but, I got no receipt of confiscation for those items. 3mos later when I was officially charged for knowingly possessing a scheduled 2 narcotic & knowingly possessing an instrument that can be used as a pipe nothing was mentioned for a 2nd count of possessing a torch that can be used to burn the white residue (meth) with. Don't they have to charge you with everything they seized & if not then return it?
Well, both the pipe and torch are paraphernalia and you possessed them both simultaneously. So, the prosecutor decided to only charge you with one count of possessing paraphernalia, counting both items as one act. However, if that really bothers you, I’m sure that, if you ask, the prosecutor will humor you by adding a second count. And, no, even if they do not charge you, there is no requirement that the authorities return the tools you use to commit crimes and have evidentiary value.
Have you ever heard the term “tweaker logic”? You seem to be exhibiting it.