Caught with 2C-I, then got coke charges from it

morninggloryseed said:
It would have to be a federal prosecution to get you under tha analogue law, but there are weird local laws they can charge you with. They can say it was fake MDMA if they want to, and charge you for trying to sell that. That doesn't mean they will win, but if they do bring up charges it's going to cost you a bit of money for a lawyer.

Basically it will all come down to your prior record, your attitude and demeanor in court, and how good of a lawyer you have. The federal government is not going to get involved over one capsule but if they do bring charges, it's going to be a headache in the least. But I doubt you are going to go to jail over one capsule of 2C-I. Probation at the most. Unless you have a terrible prior record.
Click to expand...

SD- I agree with morninggloryseed's post in its entirety. The Analogue Act is a federal law and it is overwhelmingly doubtful that they'd even attempt to extend it to one capsule of 2C-I.

Charges against individuals in possession of research chemicals are somewhat uncharted territory under the law.

I'm not a chemist- perhaps someone who has more knowledge about testing of RCs can provide some enlightenment of how easy or difficult it is to discern 2C-I (which is not federally scheduled as yet) from other RCs in the 2-C family.

The underage drinking charge was a citation. You weren't driving, so this is not a matter for which you could be charged with a DUI. If I am incorrect in my assumption, please provide clarification- but you can't get a DUI unless you were operating a vehicle.

A plea of not guilty seems to be the appropriate course of action to take here. If you hire an attorney, the attorney can always attack the method by which the 2C-I was tested if the test results come up such that the substance was illegal.
 
If there has ever been a good test case for the Feds to try an Analog Act prosecution on, it would be 2C-I as an analog of 2C-B. The only difference is a substitution on an Iodine atom for a Bromine atom in the 4-position of the ring. I and Br are in the same column on the periodic table and are chemically very similar.

Heck, even in effect I am told the two are "substantially similar" :)

Wiill the Feds get hot'n'bothered about one capsule? Extremely doubtful. But keep in mind some states have Analog Acts as well.

If they try to ID the mystery compound with GC/MS, they should be able to differentiate 2C-I and 2C-B or 2C-T-7 with relative ease. It might not be so easy for them to figure out what it is without a little detective work, but it's easy to tell what it isn't. 2C-I will have a different mass, and probably a different retention time in the column when compared to analytical standards for known illegal drugs. The peaks should look different.
 
I got the charges in the mail today. I am fucking sick that they charged me with "possesion of controlled or mimic controlled substance". I have a hearing in a month. I don't think theres a way i can get out of this since it was a capsule.

Should I get an attourney? What would be the advantage?

I know since i told the cop it was valium this limits my options. What if I said differently?

EDIT: HOLY FUCK I JUST READ THE CHARGE. I AM BEING CHARGED WITH POSSESION OF .1 GRAMS OF COCAINE. THOSE FUCKING PIGS! I AM 100% SURE IT WAS ~15MG OF 2C-I
 
Last edited:
Symmetrical Daze said:
I got the charges in the mail today. I am fucking sick that they charged me with "possesion of controlled or mimic controlled substance". I have a hearing in a month. I don't think theres a way i can get out of this since it was a capsule.

Should I get an attourney? What would be the advantage?

I know since i told the cop it was valium this limits my options. What if I said differently?

EDIT: HOLY FUCK I JUST READ THE CHARGE. I AM BEING CHARGED WITH POSSESION OF .1 GRAMS OF COCAINE. THOSE FUCKING PIGS! I AM 100% SURE IT WAS ~15MG OF 2C-I
Click to expand...


1) YES you should get an attorney, no doubt about it.
2) Can you tell me the exact name/number of the law you are charged under?
3) Is this a felony or misdemeanor?
 
morninggloryseed said:
It would have to be a federal prosecution to get you under tha analogue law, but there are weird local laws they can charge you with.
Click to expand...


Most states (if not all?) have state law versions of the federal Analogue Act.
 
Symmetrical Daze said:
EDIT: HOLY FUCK I JUST READ THE CHARGE. I AM BEING CHARGED WITH POSSESION OF .1 GRAMS OF COCAINE. THOSE FUCKING PIGS! I AM 100% SURE IT WAS ~15MG OF 2C-I
Click to expand...

That might work in your favor. If you can afford your own testing and expert, you could prove that it isn't cocaine.

However, given the small amount, it sounds like this is a misdemeanor charge. So it may not be worth it to you to spend a huge amount of money fighting it in this way. There may be a cheaper way.

BUT DO NOT TRY TO TELL THEM IT IS REALLY 2C-I. Get a lawyer and let them handle this.
 
analog doesnt matter now. fuck

Title 35, Chapter 6, section 780-113(a) Prohibited acts, penalties sub section (16) Possesion of controlled or conterfeit substance.

(My name) did possess 0.10 grams of cocaine, a schedule II substance.
 
If you were convicted, you would most likely not do any time in jail; you would either be fined, or sent to some kind of rehab/diversion (don't know what Pennsylvania law is on that).

However, it sounds like you could beat the charge, if you wanted to spend some effort/money on it, or if you get a good attorney appointed to you.

They most likely do not know what the substance is, or else they really think it is cocaine because whatever crappy test they used showed positive for cocaine. (I'm not a chemist, so I don't know how likely that is.)

In any case, they are charging you under the wrong provision of the law. You should be able to get the charge thrown out if they don't present proof that it is cocaine, or if they do, you can get your own chemist to prove that it isn't.

The bad news for you is that they could charge you under a different provision (35 P.S. § 780 113(a)(35) -- "Except as otherwise provided by law, no person shall knowingly distribute or sell a noncontrolled substance upon the express or implied representation that the substance is a controlled substance. ...."

Here's an excerpt from a case similar to yours, in which the charges were thrown out. Apparently the state charged the guy with possession of heroin, although what he had wasn't heroin. The state tried to argue that it was covered by the "counterfeit substance" language; the court didn't buy it:

Com. v. Umstead
Slip Copy
Pa.Com.Pl.,2001

Counts 5 and 6 allege possession of heroin on both March 28, 2002 and May 22, 2002. Clearly, there is no evidence that he possessed heroin on either day. Commonwealth argues that the applicable section prohibits "knowingly or intentionally possessing a controlled or counterfeit substance by a person not registered under this act...." 35 P.S. § 780- 113(a)(16)(emphasis provided). Thus, Commonwealth avers that possession of the "negatively" tested material on May 22, 2002, is covered by this section since it is allegedly counterfeit. As pointed out by defense counsel at the hearing, there is no evidence that the substance is counterfeit and the section under which the Commonwealth charged the defendant is incorrect.

" 'Counterfeit' means a controlled substance, other drug, device or cosmetic which, or the container or labeling of which, without authorization, bears the trademark, trade name, or other identifying mark, imprint, number, or device, or any likeness thereof, of a manufacturer, distributor, or dispenser other than the person or persons who in fact manufactured, distributed, or dispensed such substance and which thereby is falsely purported or represented to be the product of, or to have been distributed by, such other manufacturer, distributor, or dispenser." 35 P.S. § 780-102.

There is no proof what the substance purchased on May 22, 2002, was. If there were proof that it was a controlled substance or a counterfeit controlled substance, the crimes charged would be proper. If the substance were not a controlled substance, defendant was charged under the wrong section. The charges might properly have been brought under 35 P.S. § 780 113(a)(35). [FN1] Commonwealth presented no proof either way. Thus, the facts do not fit the statutory definition of the crimes charged and Counts 5 and 6 must be dismissed.

FN1. "Except as otherwise provided by law, no person shall knowingly distribute or sell a noncontrolled substance upon the express or implied representation that the substance is a controlled substance. ...." 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(ii).
Click to expand...
 
Here's the full text of the provision they COULD prosecute you under if they could figure out what you had, or if they knew it wasn't cocaine. You should hope they don't figure this out before the charges are thrown out, or they could amend the charges. (Aren't you all glad I'm not going to be a prosecutor?)

They would have to show intent to disribute as well.

So PLEASE don't tell them what the substance is, or that it isn't cocaine, because they might then amend the charges and get it right. Get a lawyer to deal with this for you.


35 P.S. § 780-113(35)

(35) (i) Except as otherwise provided by law, manufacturing, processing, packaging, distributing, possessing with intent to distribute or selling a noncontrolled substance that has a stimulant or depressant effect on humans, other than a prescription drug, which, or the label or container of which, substantially resembles a specific controlled substance. In determining whether there has been a violation of this subclause, the following factors shall be considered:

(A) Whether the noncontrolled substance in its overall finished dosage appearance is substantially similar in size, shape, color and markings or lack thereof to a specific controlled substance.

(B) Whether the noncontrolled substance in its finished dosage form is packaged in a container which, or the labeling of which, bears markings or printed material substantially similar to that accompanying or containing a specific controlled substance.

(ii) Except as otherwise provided by law, no person shall knowingly distribute or sell a noncontrolled substance upon the express or implied representation that the substance is a controlled substance. In determining whether there has been a violation of this subclause, the following factors shall be considered:

(A) Whether the noncontrolled substance in its overall finished dosage appearance is substantially similar in size, shape, color and markings or lack thereof to a specific controlled substance.

(B) Whether the noncontrolled substance in its finished dosage form is packaged in a container which, or the labeling of which, bears markings or printed material substantially similar to that accompanying or containing a specific controlled substance.

(C) Whether the noncontrolled substance is packaged in a manner ordinarily used for the illegal delivery of a controlled substance.

(D) Whether the consideration tendered in exchange for the noncontrolled substance substantially exceeds the reasonable value of the substance, considering the actual chemical composition of the substance and, where applicable, the price at which over-the-counter substances of like chemical composition sell.

(E) Whether the consideration tendered in exchange for the noncontrolled substance approximates or exceeds the price at which the substance would sell upon illegal delivery were it actually the specific controlled substance it physically resembles.

(iii) Except as otherwise provided by law, no person shall knowingly distribute or sell a noncontrolled substance upon the express representation that the recipient, in turn, will be able to distribute or sell the substance as a controlled substance.

(iv) In any criminal prosecution brought under this clause, it shall not be a defense that the defendant believed the noncontrolled substance actually to be a controlled substance.
 
Good luck, and let us know how it turns out. And hope that the prosecutor doesn't read Bluelight... Next time, post anonymously OK?
 
Symmetrical Daze said:
So can local court use this analog act or does it have to be prosecuted federally?
Click to expand...

Just FYI, no, the state prosecutors cannot charge you under the federal law. Only federal prosecutors can do that.
 
I did a brief search, and it does not appear that Pa. has a state version of the federal Analogue Act. (It is possible that I missed it, but I don't think I did.)

And the provision I quoted above (Section 35) requires intent to distribute -- Based on your description of the facts, it doesn't appear that you had any such intent, or that they have any proof of it.

So guess what -- You are actually INNOCENT of any legal violation! (Under state law anyway; but they can't charge you under federal law, and the feds are unlikely to bother with you.)

You or your attorney should now get discovery -- that means the prosecutor has to send you any evidence they have that the drug is cocaine. That is, they have to send you the results of the testing they did. Then you'll find out if they're bluffing, or mistaken. Hopefully for you they are bluffing, because if they are mistaken you will basically be in the position of having to prove them wrong, and as I pointed out, that will cost you more money for testing etc.

As far as the .1 g weight they quoted -- Either their scales don't go any lower, or they weighed the drug in the capsule. Either way it's bogus, and you should be able to call them out on it. Hell, they probably had to destroy a good chunk of the substance when they tested it...

You can beat this dude, please get a lawyer and do so!
 
Thanks a lot Mahan Atma... there is some hope. You are right they might have weighed the capsule.

I am still sick with frustration and anger but I might be able to survive till my hearing date of Feb. 17th
 
Symmetrical Daze said:
Thanks a lot Mahan Atma... there is some hope. You are right they might have weighed the capsule.

I am still sick with frustration and anger but I might be able to survive till my hearing date of Feb. 17th
Click to expand...

Again, please try to get a lawyer well before then. If you can't get one appointed it'll cost a few bucks, but if you beat the charges you won't get fined, or waste time with probation/diversion/etc. But you can probably get one appointed, without knowing more about your financial situation, I'd guess that's the case.

A good lawyer will make you feel better about it too, they may be able to tell you confidently that there's nothing to worry about.

Get discovery as soon as possible too, that will answer a lot of your questions.
 
Symmetrical Daze said:
What if they say they tested all of the substance and don't have it as evidence?
Click to expand...

That by itself could warrant a dismissal of the charges. But don't concern yourself with all the "what ifs" right now, there's too many of them. Instead, get discovery and rule out all the "what ifs".
 
BTW, if you get a decent lawyer, there's a good chance the charges could get dropped with nothing more than a phone call. You're innocent forgodsakes; believe it or not that's a rarity, and a halfway decent prosecutor will drop it as soon as they figure that out.

If you get a lawyer who has a working relationship with the prosecutor, your lawyer could call them up and say, "Look, it wasn't cocaine -- the guy really is innocent, you all are wasting your time." In a case like this, that could be enough.
 
Thanks again. I don't have much to worry about if the cops are going to do the right thing and they have the evidence. I wonder if a test that only uses color or whatever simple test they used, is admissable evidence if they used it all to test.

Is there going to be a prosecutor? Thats scary. I didn't plead not guilty. I thought just the cop shows up, or are you referring to the cop?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top