Drug Crimes, Substance Abuse hmmmm

[jsteebs]

Jurisdiction

Wisconsin

Hello people

Let's say u are charged with the delivery of a schedule one drug. But they don't have the substance and never got to test it before it was consumed. Can they charge u with delivery with out being able to satisfy the first element of a delivery?

 

[adjusterjack]

Let's say you stop opening other threads and keep all of your discussion to this one. Gets very annoying seeing multiple threads on the same topic so please don't add anything to the other one that you started.

Meantime, it would help to know which particular statute and sub-paragraph that you are being charged with. See:

http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/961.pdf

By the way, any question beginning with the word "can" often has to be answered yes because "can" denotes the ability to do something, not whether it's done rightly or wrongly and I'm guessing that you actually want to know if you can be convicted if charges are brought.

 

[jsteebs]

Let's say you stop opening other threads and keep all of your discussion to this one. Gets very annoying seeing multiple threads on the same topic so please don't add anything to the other one that you started.

Meantime, it would help to know which particular statute and sub-paragraph that you are being charged with. See:

http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/961.pdf

By the way, any question beginning with the word "can" often has to be answered yes because "can" denotes the ability to do something, not whether it's done rightly or wrongly and I'm guessing that you actually want to know if you can be convicted if charges are brought.

961.41(1)(d)1

He keeps trying to convince me to try for a better plea. So they just have to prove that i knew it was illegal not what the substance is

I spent a lot of time on this and the best that I can come up with is the following Wisconsin Jury Instruction:

Possess a Controlled Substance §961.41 WCJI 6030

1. You knowingly possessed something.

2. That something was an illegal drug (controlled substance).

3. You knew or believed that what you had was a substance the possession of which is prohibited by the drug laws.

I'm guessing that a similar jury instruction exists for delivery but I couldn't find it.

There's no doubt that you "can" be charged.

But I'm only guessing that the prosecutor might successfully convict based on testimony about your knowledge and belief, perhaps by witnesses or by the recipient of the drugs.

What does your criminal defense lawyer say about it?

I spent a lot of time on this and the best that I can come up with is the following Wisconsin Jury Instruction:

Possess a Controlled Substance §961.41 WCJI 6030

1. You knowingly possessed something.

2. That something was an illegal drug (controlled substance).

3. You knew or believed that what you had was a substance the possession of which is prohibited by the drug laws.

I'm guessing that a similar jury instruction exists for delivery but I couldn't find it.

There's no doubt that you "can" be charged.

But I'm only guessing that the prosecutor might successfully convict based on testimony about your knowledge and belief, perhaps by witnesses or by the recipient of the drugs.

What does your criminal defense lawyer say about it?

Yeah i see what your saying but there is no expert witness that could testify in court to clarify that the substance is heroin. Or am i just trying to get myself to believe that

 

[jsteebs]

Yeah i see what your saying but there is no expert witness that could testify in court to clarify that the substance is heroin. Or am i just trying to get myself to believe that

I think I'm going have to hire a lawyer. Right now i have a pd and he does not have my best interests.

I'm not sure what to do. Any advice, u seem to know what more then i?

 

[adjusterjack]

Yeah i see what your saying but there is no expert witness that could testify in court to clarify that the substance is heroin. Or am i just trying to get myself to believe that

That's not how I read the jury instructions. Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer but I spent my career reading and analyzing insurance policies so my reading of the simple wording of the jury instructions leads me to conclude that the prosecutor would not need an expert witness to testify that the substance was heroin he would only need to prove that you knew or believed that you were delivering an illegal substance. There could be many way of doing that.

I think I'm going have to hire a lawyer. Right now i have a pd and he does not have my best interests.

I'm not sure what to do. Any advice, u seem to know what more then i?

Public defenders are supposed to be as good as, and as conscientious as, private attorneys but the reality is that they are often overworked and underpaid, their paycheck comes from the same place as the prosecutor's paycheck (not supposed to matter) and they often have to urge clients to take a plea just to move things along.

If you feel that there is a valid technicality here that your PD isn't addressing, I think you would be wise to at least have a consultation with a private attorney to see if there is anything there.

 

[KatDini]

If you can afford a private attorney, why did you lie to the court and tell them you could not? That's the only way you would have gotten a public defender.

 

[jsteebs]

If you can afford a private attorney, why did you lie to the court and tell them you could not? That's the only way you would have gotten a public defender.

If you can afford a private attorney, why did you lie to the court and tell them you could not? That's the only way you would have gotten a public defender.

 

[jsteebs]

I can't i got people that love me, thank God. Courts around here want u to see if u qualify before they try to move the case forward.