Why Do People Plead Guilty to Drug Crimes When They Don't Have Drugs?

neversickanymore

Moderator: DS
Staff member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
32,759
Location
babysitting the argument in my head
Why Do People Plead Guilty to Drug Crimes When They Don't Have Drugs?
By Michael Barajas Wed., Jan. 28 2015


In its annual report released this week, the National Registry of Exonerations highlights a troubling oddity of the criminal justice system that's become more visible in Harris County than perhaps anywhere else in the country: People convicted of drug crimes in cases where there's no evidence of a controlled substance.
Back in October, the Houston Press received copies of hundreds of notices the Harris County District Attorney's Office sent out to defendants who'd pleaded guilty to drug offenses, telling them that forensic lab reports ultimately showed they were "convicted in error." In some of those cases, testing showed a lesser quantity of the drug than they were convicted for (the difference between, say, class B and a class A misdemeanor possession). But in many of those cases lab reports simply showed there was no controlled substance whatsoever.

The report from the National Registry shows that in 2014, Texas recorded more exonerations than any other state because of these drug cases in Harris County. In all, Texas saw 39 exonerations last year, 29 of which were drug crime exonerations in Harris County (New York, the second on the list, saw 17 total exonerations last year). Those drug crime exonerations made 2014 a record-breaking year for the registry - it recorded 125 exonerations nationally for 2014, compared to 91 in 2013.

The Harris County DA's office says that in the past there was no central system or consistent protocol for handling such drug cases -- they'd essentially been divvied up to prosecutors who handled cases in the courts where the convictions took place, and most cases were never resolved. By the spring of 2014, however, the DA's office began to realize the full gravity of the problem, that hundreds of cases could be implicated by negative lab reports that were never sent to defendants or entered in court since prosecutors had already scored a guilty plea. The DA's post-conviction review section ultimately connected with the Harris County Public Defender's Office to "clean up the files," DA's spokesman Jeff McShan told us last year.

While high-profile DNA exonerations continue inspire gut-wrenching stories of murder defendants languishing in prison for years for crimes they didn't commit, these cases of drug convictions without drugs casts an uneasy shadow over a more routine part of the criminal justice system that touches a lot more people. Last year, the public defender's office told us they'd seen at least 350 of these cases, some of which stretch back to about 2004. Meaning that over the past decade, in just one county, hundreds of people were arrested and convicted who either had no drugs at all or were carrying such minuscule amounts that forensic lab testing couldn't even prove they had drugs.

It's unclear how some of these cases could ever be resolved and made right. Some of the no-controlled substance letters the DA's office sent out list local homeless shelters as a defendant's address. Given how old some of the convictions are, it's likely some defendants have since left the county or state.

All of this begs the question: why are people pleading guilty to drug crimes when they don't have drugs? Last year when we spoke with Nicolas Hughes, an assistant public defender who's been tasked with handling the Harris County cases, he offered up a couple of explanations. Some defendants probably thought they had drugs when they didn't. Others, even if they knew they were innocent, might have had criminal records and couldn't post the high bail, so they took a plea bargain that got them out of jail quickly, even with a drug conviction.

"A lot of the times the client is indigent, and the client's in jail, and they can't afford the bond," Hughes told us a couple of months ago. "So if you're sitting there in jail and they're making you a take-it-or-leave-it offer, some people might find that hard to turn down."

Hughes also offered this bit of insight:

Continued here http://blogs.houstonpress.com/news/..._year_because_of_harris_county_drug_cases.php
 
I got arrested for weed BC they were able to scrape a tiny bit of resin from a pipe that doesn't even work and I was charged with paraphenilia and poss of CDs to wit marijuana less than 10 grams..
Its really like 10mg....no plant material either. Plus I had one of those scales that look like a CD, thank God they didn't find that BC they prob would have tried to get me on sale. Copped a plea and it was put on the stet docket and closed so no conviction thankfully.
 
When you have insane American sentences hanging over your head, I can understand why you might plead guilty to something you aren't even guilty of.
 
In America (or Georgia anyway), they can charge you for selling fake drugs as if you were selling real ones.
 
I think they can do that everywhere in the us. I remember an episode of cops where they were pretending to be crack dealers and arresting ppl after they sold them crack which was really pieces of macadamia nuts or some shit bit one guy actually got away from them lol they were pissed too. What of that had been real crack? Anyone say entrapment? A few times they actively tried to sell it to ppl like one guy apparently asked for weed.

So o guess selling fake drugs doesn't apply to the cops haja
 
In practice, entrapment--like the 4th Amendment to the Constitution outlawing unreasonable search and seizure (or its injunction against cruel and unusual punishment--death penalty anyone?!)--has been thrown out of the U.S.'s judicial system lexicon of successful defenses.
 
Because in a police state, you're already fucked the moment the police take a second look at you. And that's the way they likes it. Because cases like these send a clear message, especially to the poor: we the police are to be feared by you. So you'd best keep your head down and act really normal when we come around (which is frequent), because if you catch our interest for any reason, you're our prey of the day.

Any dictator knows that a populace with a constant low-level fear of the regime's enforcers is a great quick and dirty way to maintain law and order, and keep dissent to a minimum.
 
Top