Criminal Law Questions? Ask a Criminal Lawyer.
Assuming they are within the statute of limitations, they can file them any time before the first case is pled or goes to trial.
What is the charge?
Ive got to find out from a friend it is her step son. Ill get back with U 2mrw. Thank you
OK. I look forward to hearing from you.
He was charged with Meth Precursor under 15 mg. She said another person bought to much cold medicine and that person said he gave some of them to her son to make meth with. A arrest warrant for him was then issued and he is being charged because of what was said. You would think her son would of had to of bought to much medicine or at least got caught with some or in the act of the crime at least
I've handled several "cold pill" cases. Basically, a person does not have to get caught with the cold pills. In most states, a person must sign to get psudephedrine (cold pills). The police can then go back and review the logs of cold pill purchases and determine who made frequent purchases and who they were with at the time (assuming the other person bought pills, too). That alone may be enough to get an indicment.
Also, it is possible that other people who have been charged have given statements against him. There is no requirement, however, that he actually be caught with anything illegal.
In fact, often times, a person is charged with conspiracy and has never actually possesed anything illegal. Conspiracy makes the agreement to do something illegal a crime, whether or not anything illegal ever actually happened. In short, there are several ways for him to be charged with a crime without ever being "caught" with anything illegal in his possession.
thats exactly what took place. The kid who got charged made a statement against him and he was arrested on the same charge as that kid. My friend is worried now they are going to add more charges steming from that charge. This happened over a year ago and she was hoping it was to late for more charges to be filed.
I'm sorry to say, but it's not too late.
My friend said she read something about Rules of Evidence at the end of the Statute and thought it meant he had to have the actual pills on him. When I read it tho it just looked like IF he did they could be submitted in court. Which one of us is correct?
You are correct. A conspiracy doesn't require the DA to present the actual drugs. They only need to prove there was an agreement to violate the law.
He wasnt charged with conspiracy tho. His charge was precursor.
Even still, they only need to prove that a conspiracy existed. It's called the law of parties. Basically, if two or more people agree to do something illegal, they are all responsible for the actions of the others
For example, if two people agree to rob a bank, one goes inside and the other drives the get away car, both are responsible for the bank robbery, even though one never actually entered the bank.
ok i understand. Just seems like if you didnt like someone and were charged with a crime you could name the person and they would be charged too. Terrible thought I know.!! Thank you for the help.
Sometimes that does happen. In my experience, people generally don't get convicted based on the word of one person, who happens to be a criminal themselves.
The prosecutor would need to corroborate the person pointing the finger to have a good case.
Can I help you with anything else?
No. Appreciate your help