DrugBuyers.Com: Busted for possession...please help I'm scared

I totally agree with Trampy and realize I should not have posted about ways an attorney may or may not get her sentance lessoned. Although, I am sure the attorney will let her know providing she hires one.

I drink from time to time, but I do not drive. I am not holier than though I just care about human life. I have seen so many people get themselves killed, their family killed, or a person they have never met killed.

There are to many people that believe that something like this cannot happen to them. I think the best policy is to just not drink even one drink if you do not have a non drinking person to drive you after you do. I have drank one drink that completely made me to the point where I would not have been a safe driver. You really do not know how a drink will effect you.

I don't think a person that has 1 DUI should not get some type of punishment especially having the license suspending for a time period so they can reflect. But, especially after your first DUI I do not understand letting it happen again.

To the poster Trampy I believe that told me to find a case that the appeals court had ruled that the "smelling of pot" was sufficient evidence for a warrantless search of a home. I was explaining what had happened to a person I was friends with years ago. That is what happened the guy was arrestd and after he was arrested I did not have any other information on what happened at trial. He was just arrested. I do not think that he even hired an attorney that would have fought for his rights and I am sure he did not exercise them he was young and basically he knew he was guilty. I am sure that if he would have plead not guilty and went to court and hired an attorney his rights would have been upheld. Or yes, if not in appeals court it would have been ruled that "plain smell" is not probable cause to search a home without a warrant. I was not involved with this person at all after this happened. If it was me I would have exercised my rights. I completely agree with you regarding the search of your home. As I said this is what happened regarding the police and the serch not the trial.

As to the search of your vehicle, The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the smell of marijuana alone was enough to establish probable cause for a warrantless serch. The decision estalishes a so called "plain smell" exception to the requirement of law enforcemnet to obtain a warrant before conducting a search. It was written by Justice Evelyn Lundberg Stratton.

_Smell of Marijuana_
If the smell of a contraband item is distinctive and the person who smells it is qualified to distinguish it, that smell provides probable cause. State v. Compton, 538 P. 2d 861 Washington App.

Even where the officer was wrong, but believed in good faith that he was smelling marijuana, this may yet establish Probable cause State v. Remholdt, 64 Wn. App.505 D. 2d_(1992)

But this is regarding a vehicle not a home I completely agree with you regarding a home. Privacy rights are much greater in homes than in cars as they should be.

--------------------
~~~ Karma ~~~