Caught with marijuana in Washington What happened next

Have you ever faced unexpected legal issues in Washington for something you weren’t even aware of? You’re not alone; many struggle with similar situations, unaware of the laws involved. Knowing the law is crucial to addressing these challenges effectively. This article explores how the landmark case of CITY OF KENNEWICK v. DAY provides a precedent to navigate similar legal dilemmas.

Situation

Specific Circumstances

In the state of Washington, a man named Mr. D found himself in a tricky situation with the City of Kennewick. One night, Mr. D was driving his car when he came across an accident scene with a barrier. He decided to drive around the barrier, which caught the attention of a nearby police officer. The officer suspected Mr. D might be driving under the influence, so he stopped Mr. D’s car to check things out. During this stop, the officer searched Mr. D’s vehicle and found a small amount of marijuana and a pipe used for smoking it. Mr. D was surprised and said these things weren’t his. He explained that he had just picked up his car from an auto repair shop, where it had been for several months. Despite his explanation, Mr. D was charged with having marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

Plaintiff’s Argument

The City of Kennewick, the plaintiff in this case, argued that Mr. D should be held responsible because the marijuana and pipe were in his car. They emphasized that according to the law, it didn’t matter whether or not Mr. D knew about the items; just having them in his car was enough for the charges.

Defendant’s Argument

Mr. D, on the other hand, argued that he didn’t know about the marijuana and pipe, which meant he didn’t possess them on purpose. He also mentioned that he had a reputation for staying away from drugs and alcohol, which he believed should be considered to show he didn’t intend to have these items.

Judgment Outcome

In a twist, the court agreed with Mr. D. They decided that the earlier court made a mistake by not allowing Mr. D to talk about his reputation for sobriety, which was important to proving his case of unwitting possession. The court reversed the decision and sent the case back for a new trial, giving Mr. D a chance to use his good reputation as part of his defense. (Washington No. 67994-1)

Solution

Immediate Actions

If you ever find yourself in a situation like Mr. D’s, it’s important to act quickly. First, gather any evidence that can prove you didn’t know about the illegal items. This might include receipts from a repair shop or statements from witnesses who can vouch for your character. Keeping a clear record of all interactions with law enforcement and any relevant documents is crucial.

Filing a Complaint

Next, consider filing a formal complaint or a legal motion to dispute the charges. You should reach out to a lawyer who understands cases like yours. They can help you file the necessary paperwork and ensure your defense is well-prepared. Your lawyer can also guide you on how to present evidence of your good character and reputation in court.

Negotiation and Settlement

Before your case goes to trial, your lawyer might suggest trying to negotiate a settlement or reaching an agreement with the other party. This can be a quicker way to resolve the issue without having to go through a lengthy court process. Sometimes, showing that you have a strong defense can encourage the other side to drop the charges or agree to a lesser penalty. Your lawyer will help you communicate effectively and explore all possible options for a favorable outcome.

FAQ

What is unwitting possession?

Unwitting possession is a legal defense where you claim that you didn’t know you had illegal items. It’s used to show that you didn’t intend to break the law.

How is intent shown in possession cases?

Intent is often shown through actions or evidence that suggest you knew about the items or planned to use them. This can include things you said or did that indicate awareness.

What is ER 404?

ER 404 is a rule about evidence in court. It generally stops people from using character evidence to prove someone acted a certain way, but it allows it if it’s relevant to the case, like in Mr. D’s situation.

Is character evidence admissible in court?

Yes, character evidence can be used in court if it’s relevant to the case. It can help support a defense or counter accusations, depending on the rules like ER 404.

What is KMC 9.32?

KMC 9.32 is part of the Kennewick Municipal Code about drug paraphernalia. It covers laws about possessing items used for drugs in Kennewick.

How does RCW 69.50 relate to drug possession?

RCW 69.50 is a Washington state law about illegal drugs. It outlines what’s considered illegal possession and how these cases are prosecuted.

What is strict liability in criminal law?

Strict liability means you can be charged with a crime even if you didn’t intend to do it. Just having the illegal item is enough for a conviction.

Is sobriety relevant to possession charges?

Yes, sobriety can be relevant, especially if it helps show you didn’t intend to possess drugs. It can support defenses like unwitting possession.

What is discretionary review?

Discretionary review is when a higher court can choose to look at a lower court’s decision. They do this when the case involves important or unique legal questions.

Is reputation evidence used in court?

Yes, reputation evidence can be used to show character traits like honesty or sobriety, especially when it’s relevant to the defense or case strategy.