Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 07/04/2005 1:46:17 AM PDT by freepatriot32
ADRIAN - An ex-wife's claim of using marijuana for medical purposes freed an Adrian man from a felony possession charge and resulted in her arrest after a trial Thursday in Lenawee County Circuit Court.
Juan Mauricio Solis, 32, faced a possible prison term if convicted of possessing the small amount of marijuana Adrian police reported finding in his SUV because he is on parole for a marijuana trafficking conviction four years ago.
The prosecution ran into trouble during the non-jury trial Thursday when defense attorney Anna Marie Anzalone called Solis' former wife as a witness.
Linda Solis testified that she lost the small baggie of marijuana that turned up in Juan Solis' Ford Explorer on March 23. She told the court she has been using marijuana to relieve pain she suffers from thyroid tumors because doctors do not want to prescribe addictive drugs.
As she began saying the marijuana was hers, Judge Timothy P. Pickard warned Linda Solis that her testimony could be used to prosecute her and that she could face up to one year in jail if convicted of first-offense marijuana possession.
"I want to get this over with and admit to my guilt," Linda Solis responded.
She said she discovered her marijuana was missing from her purse after she went for a ride in the Explorer that her ex-husband brought over to show her and their children the day he purchased the vehicle in March.
She said she realized where she lost the marijuana when she later learned Juan Solis was arrested for marijuana that Adrian police found in his vehicle on March 23.
Police reported finding a baggie with marijuana stuffed between the seats of the vehicle after a traffic stop. They searched the vehicle because it was being towed for not being insured.
Linda Solis said her purse had tipped over on the back seat floor and she was in a hurry when she picked up the contents. After her ex-husband was arrested, Linda Solis said she approached his attorney, Anzalone, to explain the marijuana. She was advised to contact Adrian police.
"I was scared. I'm not going to lie. I'm scared right now," Linda Solis testified when asked why she waited weeks before going to the police.
When she did contact police, she said, she had difficulty getting them to take a statement. One officer told her it did not matter who owned the marijuana if it was in Juan Solis' possession, she said.
Another officer asked, "How do we know you're not doing this to help him?" she said.
Under questioning by assistant Lenawee County prosecutor Gregory Grover, she agreed she was aware Juan Solis was in much more trouble than she would be for possessing marijuana because he is on parole.
She insisted she was not trying to help him by falsely taking the blame for the marijuana.
Pickard ruled from the bench that he was convinced that Linda Solis was telling the truth.
Adrian police arrested Linda Solis immediately after the trial. She was released on bond and was to be arraigned today.
Anzalone said her client has been in jail since his arrest in March and should now be released from a parole violation holder. Anzalone said she believed from the beginning of the case that Juan Solis was innocent. He has been steadily employed and passed routine drug tests since he was paroled three years ago from prison, she noted.
ping
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
We've come a long way, baby, if this is what passes for judicial compassion.
It often occurs that honorable people who get caught up in the law enforcement system get much worse deals than dishonorable types.
She's got to keep those alimony checks coming in.
He had possession of an unapproved plant AND was driving an SUV? Good thing the ex came forward or he'd've gotten the needle.
Michigan self-governance BTTT.
Can't be. Nobody goes to jail for marijuana possession.
Technically it could, and practically it could if she opts to put on a full court press for her defense rather than to plead out, so His Honor was legally obligated to warn her about it.
|
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Monday, July 04, 2005
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
 The Mises Institute monthly, free with membership Sort archived Free Market articles by: Title | Author | Article Date | Subject September 1999
Paul Armentano America's "War on Drugs" has become primarily a war on marijuana smokers. Federal data released this year reveals almost half of all drug arrests are for marijuana, and that approximately one in seven drug prisoners is now behind bars for marijuana offenses. Research reported by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) in June found that 59,300 Americans are sitting behind bars on marijuana charges. This conclusion soundly contradicts allegations by drug war hawks that few, if any, marijuana consumers serve hard time for marijuana-related offenses. In truth, the data show that law enforcement routinely target, arrest, and incarcerate marijuana consumers in alarming numbers. The FAS report, compiled from newly released FBI and Department of Justice data, determined that 42,500 state and federal inmates are imprisoned on marijuana charges, and another 16,800 remain in local jails. In all, marijuana prisoners now compose approximately 14 percent of all state and federal drug inmates at a $1.2 billion annual cost to taxpayers. The alarming percentage of marijuana inmates is less surprising when one examines recent trends in law enforcement. According to the FBI's latest Uniform Crime Report, state and local police arrested approximately 700,000 Americans on marijuana charges in 1997. This figure is almost double the number of arrests recorded in 1993, the year President Bill Clinton took office, and pushes the total number of marijuana arrests under his administration to 2.8 million. The 1997 marijuana arrest total is the highest ever, shattering the previous record of 642,000 arrests set in 1996. The new FBI statistics indicate that a marijuana smoker is arrested every 45 seconds in America. The FBI and DOJ data illustrate a disturbing shift in law enforcement priorities. As the drug-war Leviathan exponentially grows, so does its appetite for otherwise law abiding citizens who smoke marijuana. Nearly half of drug arrests made are for violating marijuana laws, up from 30 percent in 1990, the FBI reported. Of these marijuana arrests, 87 percent are for simple possession only. The remaining 13 percent are for "sale/manufacture," a category that includes all cultivation offenses, even those where defendants grew marijuana solely for personal or medical use. While marijuana arrests were 30 percent of all drug arrests in 1990, they constituted 44 percent in 1997 (the last year we have statistical data). Arrests for marijuana trafficking actually went down during this period, but marijuana possession arrests soared from 24 percent to more than 38 percent. While marijuana arrests are soaring to record heights, the percentage of arrests for the sale and manufacture of cocaine and heroin is down more than 50 percent. Cocaine and heroin possession arrests have also dipped dramatically since 1990, falling from one-third percent of all drug arrests to just over one-quarter, while marijuana trafficking arrests have also slipped marginally. Clearly, law enforcement is focusing away from hard drug trafficking enforcement, which often presents inflated safety risks to police. They are trying to justify their snowballing budgets and increased manpower by targeting recreational marijuana users, who seldom offer violent resistance. (The federal anti-drug budget went from $1.5 billion in 1980 to 17 billion in fiscal year 1999.) Despite politicians' and law enforcement's fixation on penalizing marijuana smokers, there remains no evidence that criminal penalties effectively deter marijuana use. Presently, ten states treat simple marijuana possession as a noncriminal offense, substituting a small fine in lieu of jail. The only U.S. federal study ever to compare marijuana use patterns among these decriminalized states and those that retain criminal penalties found that "decriminalization has had virtually no effect on either marijuana use or on related attitudes about marijuana use among young people." Most recently, the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine reaffirmed in March that, "There is little evidence that decriminalization of marijuana use necessarily leads to a substantial increase in marijuana use." This February ushered the release of the government's most expensive anti-drug offensive in history. Of the $18 billion appropriated for anti-drug expenditures in 1999, several billion will go directly toward arresting and jailing marijuana users. However, polls show that a growing number of Americans support non-criminal approaches to addressing the marijuana issue. For example, voters in Oregon voted 2-to-1 last year to reject a newly-passed state law reinstating criminal penalties for the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana. In addition, voters in five states--Alaska, California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington-- soundly approved ballot initiatives exempting medical marijuana users from state criminal penalties. Arizona voters extended these protections to all minor drug offenders. Clearly, Americans reject the notion that our drug policy options remain limited to maintaining the status quo. As with most issues, they advocate another option: one the anti-drug warriors fight. People may not yet be willing to undertake a market approach to marijuana, but no longer will they accept the human casualties and financial burdens inherent in maintaining criminal marijuana prohibition. -------------------------------- Paul Armentano is publications director for the NORML Foundation, a Washington, D.C., based research and legal foundation that examines marijuana policies. Further Reading: C. Thomas, "Marijuana Arrests and Incarceration in the United States," Federation of American Scientists' Drug Policy Analysis Bulletin 7 (1999): 5-7. |
|
| Print Friendly Page |
^ Top of Page | |||
| SEND TO: FROM: |
(Enter the email address) (Enter your email address) |
 AOL-IM:  |
Mises.org Menu | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home About FAQ Email Lists Blog Periodicals Coming Events Articles |
Study Guide Working Papers Mises Rothbard Catalog Shopping Basket Donate Audio |
|||
She won't. Everybody knows that, including her ex (probably his idea).
No, it's not at all clear.
What is clear is that cocaine consumption dropped 40% from 447 MT in 1990 to 271 MT in 1999*. I would expect the percentage of arrests for the sale and manufacture to follow that trend.
*http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/consumption.htm
Well let's see. We currently have 2 million people locked up. 42,500 + 16,800 = 59,300, or about 3% are there for marijuana charges. Since 5% of the general population smokes marijuana, we're not locking up near enough users.
Reply:From your link, it seems that seizers changed little, but claimed consumption declined radically. I am highly skeptical of the government claimed statistics. Also look at the year by year estimates of meth consumption at your link, the changes are not at all credible. I do believe that the increasingly harsh penalties deterred some "casual" users, which was the great victory touted by the government, but "casual" users are by definition not problem users. We are spending billions and billions of dollars in a vicious and illegal (illegal if you care a whit about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights)campaign against harmless drug users, to catch, prosecute, and incarcerate them, and creating enormous social problems when these convicts get out and can't get decent jobs, and support their families.
h1>Cocaine Seizures vs Consumption
| Estimated Cocaine Consumption vs Federal Seizures | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumption (MT * 2204.6 = lbs) | Seizures (Kg * 2.2 = lbs) | |||
| Year | Metric Tons | Pounds | Kilograms | Pounds |
| 1988 | 660 | 1,455,036 | -- | -- |
| 1989 | 576 | 1,269,850 | 114,903 | 252,787 |
| 1990 | 447 | 985,456 | 96,085 | 211,387 |
| 1991 | 355 | 782,633 | 128,247 | 282,143 |
| 1992 | 346 | 762,792 | 120,175 | 264,385 |
| 1993 | 331 | 729,723 | 121,215 | 266,673 |
| 1994 | 323 | 712,086 | 129,378 | 284,632 |
| 1995 | 321 | 707,677 | 111,031 | 244,268 |
| 1996 | 301 | 663,585 | 128,555 | 282,821 |
| 1997 | 275 | 606,265 | 101,495 | 223,289 |
| 1998 | 267 | 588,628 | 118,436 | 260,559 |
| 1999 | 271 | 597,447 | 132,063 | 290,539 |
| 2000 | 259 | 570,991 | 106,619 | 234,562 |
| 2001 | -- | -- | 105,885 | 232,947 |
You should be posting at UN-FreeRepublic.com
Yep. But what do seizures have to do with use and why are you even bringing it up?
Consumption is directly related to use. Consumption is down -- ergo, use is down. If use is down, I would expect arrests to be down.
How can the author conclude that, since arrests are down, "Clearly, law enforcement is focusing away from hard drug trafficking enforcement"?
How can he? Easy. He works for NORML.
--http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs07/794/cocaine.htm
How do you know consumption is down? Because a government agency said so? And how do they know? Consumption is by definition the drugs they didn't find. Have you ever worked for a government agency, or worked closely with one? Don't you know that it is a very common practice to simply make up statistics to support some politically expediency? Does it make sense to you that there would be such a dramatic decline in consumption, yet the seizures remained roughly constant? Or that the government's own statistics on cocaine usage as a percent of the population has had only a small decline since 1990, (and note that population has been increasing).
I suggest to you that like virtually everything else in the government's War On Drugs, these statistics are fraudulent.
Well, without any documentation, cites, or references to support your contention, your "suggestion" will be given the weight it deserves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
