Talking to the press

[Silverplum]

Why wouldn't an object used to smoke tobacco be returned to a person who was not charged with drug paraphernalia?

The more you write, the less of a case you seem to have.

He can always just use the phone book to figure it out. rolleyes

 

[NeilTheCop]

So if they take a shotgun from someone with 10" long barrels and the serial number ground off, but do not charge the suspect with a crime, all he has to say is "It's dove season, I want my shotgun back", would be OK to return it?
Or if you take a pound of cocaine from someone but they are never charged all they have to say is "I have a toothache". As cocaine is still a legal anesthetic in dentistry, would you give it back?

 

[quincy]

So if they take a shotgun from someone with 10" long barrels and the serial number ground off, but do not charge the suspect with a crime, all he has to say is "It's dove season, I want my shotgun back", would be OK to return it?
Or if you take a pound of cocaine from someone but they are never charged all they have to say is "I have a toothache". As cocaine is still a legal anesthetic in dentistry, would you give it back?

Facts matter in law, NeilTheCop, which is one reason we do not entertain hypotheticals on this forum.

If the item taken is legal to own, it can be returned to its legal owner. Cocaine is not legal.

You really need to speak to an attorney in your area.

 

[NeilTheCop]

New Mexico

30-31-25.1. Possession, delivery, manufacture or delivery of drug paraphernalia prohibited.

A. It is unlawful for any person to use or possess with intent to use drug paraphernalia to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

OK, so as there were the stems of 41 freshly cut marijuana plants in individual hydroponic growing pots, I'm fairly sure that this is without doubt drug paraphernalia as far as the law is concerned.

B. It is unlawful for any person to deliver, possess with intent to deliver or manufacture with the intent to deliver drug paraphernalia with knowledge, or under circumstances where one reasonably should know, that it will be used to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

Not only I, but a District Court Judge believed that if it was returned it would be used to grow marijuana again.

 

[quincy]

New Mexico

30-31-25.1. Possession, delivery, manufacture or delivery of drug paraphernalia prohibited.

A. It is unlawful for any person to use or possess with intent to use drug paraphernalia to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

OK, so as there were the stems of 41 freshly cut marijuana plants in individual hydroponic growing pots, I'm fairly sure that this is without doubt drug paraphernalia as far as the law is concerned.

B. It is unlawful for any person to deliver, possess with intent to deliver or manufacture with the intent to deliver drug paraphernalia with knowledge, or under circumstances where one reasonably should know, that it will be used to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

Not only I, but a District Court Judge believed that if it was returned it would be used to grow marijuana again.

And that is what you are basing your case on, correct?

You are justifying the destruction of confiscated property being held by the police department because you believe that, even though the property was not proven to have been used in the commission of a crime, it MIGHT be used in the commission of a crime at some time in the future?

Returning held property to its rightful owner, by the way, is not considered "delivering." It is considered returning.

Speak to an attorney in your area for advice and direction.

 

[NeilTheCop]

Thank you all. This has been fun but is now moving in a circular pattern.
I will let you all know how it turns out in the end.

 

[quincy]

Thank you all. This has been fun but is now moving in a circular pattern.
I will let you all know how it turns out in the end.

I will be interested to hear how it turns out for you, NeilTheCop.

 

[CdwJava]

A brief overview.
I was assigned to the property room. As was normal practice I researched cases where we had a lot of property associated with the case taking up room. One of the cases from 2012 involved a very large amount of hydroponic equipment that was taken during a search warrant. Case was conclude, the accused had plead and was nearing the end of his jail term. I contacted the case agent and told him I would be destroying the equipment because it was classed as drug paraphernalia and had been used to grow marijuana. Case agent told me to return all of it to the family of the accused. I said no, because that would be an illegal act. He got pissed. My immediate supervisor told me to get rid of it. Wrote a destruction order, had it checked an approved by the city attorney, got it signed by a District Court judge and had it destroyed.
The case agent made a formal complaint against me.
Had an interview with the internal affairs officer. This was very brief as the case agent making the complaint and the internal affairs officer were one in the same. They assigned a very good friend of the case agent to conduct the investigation, which was a foregone conclusion.
Demoted, 14 days without pay and put on the night shift. Then a definite effort to make my life difficult by the administration, so I quit.
Had a hearing with the Department of public safety, who are responsible for certification and LEO integrity. They exonerated me of any wrongdoing and confirmed that the case agent had given me an unlawful order.

This isn't the reason I was considering going to the press, it was about the information that was revealed at the hearing.

Actually, if the items had been seized pursuant to a search warrant, you should have waited for THE COURT to release it or order its destruction. Unless things are done differently in your state, evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant can ONLY be released by the court issuing the warrant.

So, are you or your former agency actually being sued for the value of the destroyed property?

As far as going to the press, that can be a two-edged sword. If you gab, then others may gab, and you have no idea what info may be passed on about you - true, misleading, or baldface lies, it could be damning. Before you do ANYTHING like that, consult an attorney.

 

[STEPHAN]

You have no control over the media. Be aware of the Streisand effect.