Let's just all sum it up.
This kid needs to ask his parents for a lawyer. He has a lot at stake. He faces some serious charges and also expulsion from school. These charges are serious enough that they may result in adult criminal charges.....
Let's just all sum it up.
This kid needs to ask his parents for a lawyer. He has a lot at stake. He faces some serious charges and also expulsion from school. These charges are serious enough that they may result in adult criminal charges.....
Something you don't understand.
1. The Public Defender is not "free" - there is a fee.
2. The Public Defender being appointed to your case depends on your parents income....not that they don't want to pay for a lawyer.
Another thing you are missing: You are facing SERIOUS charges. Weapons. Drug Possession. Drug Dealing. All on school property. The amount of stuff you had, the knowledge you had...you are not a novice. You have been doing this for a while.
There is a chance of you being charged in adult court...which means adult time.
These are serious charges, you want to hope that you would be charged as a juvi. Sometimes a public defender is given to you at a reduce rate,other times it's free. I used a public Defender and it was free of charge,I also know others who got a free public defender. It does depend on your parents income,different places have different policies.
Isn't carrying a weapon on school grounds a federal offense, if they decide to make it one ?
Unlikely. Had he had an actual gun on school property, perhaps. It wasn't illegal for him to have the pocket knife. Just illegal to have it where it had it. No?
Edit - I am not trying to diminish the seriousness of the charges facing the OP. As everyone else has said, he ABSOLUTELY NEEDS a lawyer for this.
PADriver13, this is what i was thinking about. Being expelled from school is one thing, but what the OP is facing is much more serious.
"Congress therefore amended the Gun Free Schools Act by making it a part of No Child Left Behind, which required schools to adopt a "zero tolerance" policy towards weapons in schools in order to get federal funding. This means that any school who receives funding from Title IV of No Child Left Behind must expel any student that brings a weapon to campus - See more at: http://education.findlaw.com/school-safety/school-searches-and-weapons.html#sthash.5SExoFbH.dpuf"
Don't get me started on "Gun Free Zones". That's a bunch of feel-good liberal symantics. "Gun Free Zones" didn't help prevent Columbine and signage doesn't deter criminal behavior. /rant.
Reading your link: "Finally, zero tolerance policies can be difficult to enforce. Many students who are expelled under a "zero tolerance policy" do not realize that they are bringing a weapon to school, or may do so for innocent reasons. For example, students sometimes bring small knives to school for a variety of reasons without realizing that knives are also weapons banned under Title IV of No Child Left Behind. These students' expulsions can then be challenged, and may be reversed upon review"
This is why it's highly unlikely. It is a reasonable argument to make that OP caries a pocket knife with him routinely, EXCEPT when in school, and on this particular day, forgot he had the knife with him. This is why "zero tolerance" is such a load of crap. Zero tolerance suggests that the details don't matter and that one size fits all. As we all truly know, one size does not fit all.
I don't think he forgot he had the knife on him......
Unless he forgot the boxcutter, the pot, the scale, the other drug parapernelia too......
I agree he didn't forget. But a reasonable argument could still be made that a male who carries a pocket knife regularly "forgot" on that specific day. And because that is a reasonable argument, zero tolerance policies are ineffective. Was simply referring to the question about the charges being trumped up to federal. OP needs a lawyer plain and simple. These are serious charges.