Somebody with accurate digital scales help me out...can you show me what .2 grams of

[Dueller]

...tobacco or oregeno looks like. As you might guess I've stumbled across another marijuana case.

And I didn't say "two grams"...I said ".2 grams""

[krystar]

lemme break out my microscale..

[krystar]

it's....a pinch or so.

[Dueller]

Wow...thanks so much. THAT was quick. Can you put a coing beside it for reference?

Thanks!!!!

[stomachmonkey]

That's assuming there are no stems or seeds in the weight.

[kaisen]

...or moisture content

[red-beard]

WikiAnswers - Weight of a cigarette

with paper, no filter, is 1 gram. So, 1/5th of a cigarette.

[GWN7]

I was going to say .2g is about a large roach

[red-beard]

For reference, 1 gram of water = 1 ml (milliliter).

1 ml = 20 drops of water. So, 4 drops of water is .2 grams.

[krystar]

i already put it away heh.....a quarter on the scale comparitively. i had the oregano pretty thinly layered.

[sammyg2]

Not trying to be an opinionated A-hole, this is a real question that I am seriously asking out of curiosity without judgment. I really want to know:

I've often wondered what defense lawyers felt about defending people they figured were guilty.
How about it? I figure you have to believe what you are doing is right. Like I said, this is a real question without passing judgment. I'm trying to see if through your eyes. I won't comment or flame. I promise.

Is it a faith in the system thing where the prosecution tries to convict, you try to defend, and you figure the truth and justice will prevail?
Is it that you believe the balance is necessary to prevent the prosecution from over-punishing?

[BeyGon]

How can someone be going to trial on .2 of a gram of pot???

[red-beard]

Hardly enough to pass the time

[carambola]

dude, why didn't he eat it

[Dueller]

I know you guys tire of my war stories but here goes. 20 y.o. college junior. Working his way thru school (read "I'm doing this pro bono"). 3.8 GPA at ole miss. Wants to go to law school...applying this fall. Same small town jurisdiction. Friend of my step son. Calls me and says he's been busted for simple possession. He got off work and he and a coworker decide to ride around after work. Get in coworker's truck and ride in country.

Coming back they take interstate. Coworker reaches in console and pulls out a pipe. Fires it up. Offers my client some. He says no thanks...don't do that. Blue lights come on. Pulled over for no seat belt. Coworker hands pipe to my client and says throw it under seat. Client does.

Officer asks driver to get out of truck. Tells him he's been watching him, they're getting ready to indict him for conspiracy to sell drugs...cites specific meetings they know about. Offers him a deal to not prosecute if he cooperates and goes under cover. Guy is scared and agrees to do anything. Tells him he could cite him for DUI controlled substance but gonna let him go on that. Asks him where's pot in car. Says pipe is under passenger seat.

Cop goes to truck and asks my client to get out. Retrieves the pipe. Searches my client. Nothing. Finds two empty bags in truck console with "residue". Tells them both to get in truck. Goes to squad car....writes out a citation for possession for both of them. Goes back to truck. When gives my client citation. My client says it wasn't his pot. Driver agrees. Cop says doesn't matter...you knew about it.

Here's where it gets really bogus...mind you ALL of this is on video/audio recording. Before I even saw the video, my client told me the cop said he was going to turn of the recorder to talk to him "off the record". I ask cop and he denies.

In the video at the time he starts talking to my client, cops hand goes down to audio recorder on his belt. All audio is shut off...total silence even though you can see them talking. After about 30 seconds, cop moves his hand and MIRACULOUSLY it begins recording conversation with cop saying he;s going to follow them to exit to let my client get his car.

It was during that Watergate Tape-esque period when my client said he was explaining to cop it wasn't his pot, he didn't know about it, etc and driver confirmed. My client relayed these facts BEFORE we even knew there was a video available.

When this kid called me to represent him, I told him "Go get a drug test right now and come to me with the results and I'll decide whether I'll take your case." He did...showed negative for EVERYTHING.

Got the crime lab report. results: .2 grams marijuana.


Prosecutor offered non-adjudication: i.e., plead guilty, pay fine of $250, do 6 mos probation (you pay $45/month for this privilege) and they will expunge your record. My kid is adamant he was not guilty and will not plead guilty. Largely because he's applying to law school in the fall and it will still be showing up on his record when he applies thereby assuring he won't get accepted.

[Dueller]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

Not trying to be an opinionated A-hole, this is a real question that I am seriously asking out of curiosity without judgment. I really want to know:

I've often wondered what defense lawyers felt about defending people they figured were guilty.
How about it? I figure you have to believe what you are doing is right. Like I said, this is a real question without passing judgment. I'm trying to see if through your eyes. I won't comment or flame. I promise.

Is it a faith in the system thing where the prosecution tries to convict, you try to defend, and you figure the truth and justice will prevail?
Is it that you believe the balance is necessary to prevent the prosecution from over-punishing?

Excellent questions sammy. The basic tenet to our judicial system is every person is entitled to a fair trial and is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proving guilt is upon the state to protect us from the police power of the state being abused against our society. Sort of a checks and balances system. Often I can figure out a person is guilty of something but it may not be the crime they are charged with. It may be a much lesser offense. Often when a person comes to me I have to look at the elements of the crime they are accused of and determine if those elements exist to the letter of the law.

Sometimes I wonder about truth and justice prevailing. From both sides of the fence.

[Dueller]

Originally Posted by carambola

dude, why didn't he eat it

Kinda hard to eat a glass pipe with pot burning in the bowl

[nostatic]

How can a passenger be guilty of possession when it isn't on his person and isn't his vehicle?

[BeyGon]

Originally Posted by nostatic

How can a passenger be guilty of possession when it isn't on his person and isn't his vehicle?

I got a ticket once while riding with a guy that didn't have a license, his car. The cop gave me a ticket for allowing him to drive his car without a license. I went to court, The judge upheld it. I paid the fine.

[Dueller]

Originally Posted by nostatic

How can a passenger be guilty of possession when it isn't on his person and isn't his vehicle?

The law has developed into a defintion that possession (not just drugs but any contraband...say a machine gun) that can be either constructive or actual possession. Actual possession is pretty obvious...its in your pocket.

For someone to be in constructive possession the prosecution has to prove that a) you knew it was illegal and b) you have dominion and control of the contraband. Example: If you're riding along, the blue lights come on and the driver hands you cocaine wrap in a napkin and say throw this in the glovebox, you didn't meet the requirement that you knew it was contraband. As far as dominion and control, if you're riding in someone's car and they have a bag of pot in the locked console, and you don't know about it you have no knowlege and likely don't have domiinion and control because you don't have a key to the owners console.

Cars and homes have some fuzzy distinctions.