Drug Court Failure Can Lead to More Severe Sentence

Those facing drug charges or other charges with underlying addiction issues who have no history of violent crimes can avail themselves of drug court probation in lieu of prison. Many take this option in order to avoid prison but fail to realize it means they have to actually stay clean for the entire probationary term which is typically 5 years. Because drug court is an option as long as there is no violent criminal history, those facing extended terms for second degree charges such as possession with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of a school zone or 500 feet of a public park, public housing or other public place are still eligible for drug court. What those entering drug court need to know is that failing out of the program by violating the terms of drug court probation like failure to appear, using, not maintaining employment or not participating in programs required following a drug evaluation subjects them to re-sentencing on the original charges. When considering a plea including drug court probation, it is always critical for the defendant to closely review and consider any alternate sentence which the prosecutor includes in the event the defendant is not successful in drug court. Often, taking a plea including prison rather than drug court can result in completing a shorter term in prison that that which will be faced in the event the defendant fails the drug court program. If you are facing criminal charges and think you may be eligible for drug court probation you should immediately obtain an experienced criminal defense attorney to protect your rights. For more information on protecting your rights if charged with possession of CDS, theft, burglary, assault, domestic violence or other crimes in NJ visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to replace the advice of an attorney.

Can Distance From Public Facility Be Inferred In Criminal Matter?

In drug distribution cases, penalties increase substantially if the matter takes place within 1,000 feet of a school zone or within 500 feet of a public park, public housing, museum or other public place. In the case of State v. Stevens, the NJ Supreme Court heard oral argument as to whether the jury could infer that a defendant arrested with 54 baggies of heroin on his person when arrested at Martin Luther King Drive and Stegman Street in Jersey City had been within 500 feet of a public park when the actual distance measured from the park to the location of arrest was 520 feet. Hudson County Superior Court Judge Fred Theemling, Jr. denied defendant's motion for post-conviction relief based on failure of defendant's trial counsel to determine and present evidence of the actual distance. Judge Theemling denied the motion without conducting a hearing based on his assessment that the jury could have inferred the defendant had been within 500 feet of the park prior to the sale of the controlled dangerous substance (CDS) based on other evidence offered at the trial. The NJ Appellate Division affirmed with Judges Christine Miniman and Jack Sabatino deciding proof of actual distance from the park was not required and circumstantial inferences by jurors are permitted. The day after the NJ Supreme Court heard oral argument on the case, it was dismissed as being improvidently granted. This is unlikely the last this issue will be heard by the courts. During oral argument, the notion was raised that similar hearings are being denied routinely and defendants are being deprived of their rights. State v. Lewis, 866 A.2d 643 (2005), is the precedential decision on the matter in NJ. In Lewis, the court considered whether, although the defendant accepted money within 500 feet of a park but the cocaine was in another location more than 500 feet from the park, there was possession within the park for the purpose of increasing the level of offense charged. The N.J. Appellate Division found that defendant exercised control over the drugs at all times while he was within 500 feet of the park and constructive possession within the park existed for purposes of increasing the offense charged from third degree to second degree possession with intent to distribute. It is always the prosecution's burden to prove the elements of a crime charged. If you are charged with drug distribution or possession with intent to distribute you should immediately obtain an experienced criminal defense attorney to protect your rights. For more information on protecting your rights if charged with possession of CDS, theft, burglary, assault, domestic violence or other crimes in NJ visit HeatherDarlingLawyer.com. This blog is for informational purposes only and is not intended to replace the advice of an attorney.