How a Jacksonville Drug Lawyer Fights a Paraphernalia Charge?

Jacksonville Drug Arrest

Drug Paraphernalia Charges

I discussed Jacksonville drug paraphernalia charges in yesterday’s article, “What is Drug Paraphernalia under Florida’s Drug Laws?” When you read Florida Statute 893.145, it seems as if anything can be considered drug paraphernalia in Jacksonville.  If you are charged with Jacksonville possession of drug paraphernalia, you can fight your Jacksonville drug charges.  The State Attorney must prove that you were in possession of the drug paraphernalia, just like any other Florida drug charge.  For example, if the State Attorney wants to charge you with Jacksonville possession of marijuana, he or she needs to prove that you were in actual or constructive possession of weed (marijuana).  If you were arrested for Jacksonville possession of a controlled substance or possession of cocaine, the prosecutor will need to prove that you possessed the controlled substance or cocaine.  He or she cannot just argue that you were near the drugs.

With Jacksonville drug paraphernalia cases, the State Attorney also needs to prove that the item that you are accused of possessing is actually drug paraphernalia under Florida’s drug laws.  To decide whether or not something is drug paraphernalia, use Florida Statute 893.146 (listed below).  As a Jacksonville Criminal Lawyer, I use this Florida drug law to disprove the fact that the item was drug paraphernalia.  Your Jacksonville Criminal Defense Attorney needs to point out why the item does not fall into these categories.

If you have been arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia or and other Jacksonville drug charges in Duval, Clay, Nassau, or St. Johns County, call 20 Miles Law.  Talk to a lawyer in Jacksonville about your Florida drug case.  Contact a Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyer by calling (904) 564-2525 or by email (Contact Us).

893.146 Determination of paraphernalia.—In determining whether an object is drug paraphernalia, a court or other authority or jury shall consider, in addition to all other logically relevant factors, the following:

(1) Statements by an owner or by anyone in control of the object concerning its use.

(2) The proximity of the object, in time and space, to a direct violation of this act.

(3) The proximity of the object to controlled substances.

(4) The existence of any residue of controlled substances on the object.

(5) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the intent of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, to deliver it to persons who he or she knows, or should reasonably know, intend to use the object to facilitate a violation of this act. The innocence of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as to a direct violation of this act shall not prevent a finding that the object is intended for use, or designed for use, as drug paraphernalia.

(6) Instructions, oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use.

(7) Descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its use.

(8) Any advertising concerning its use.

(9) The manner in which the object is displayed for sale.

(10) Whether the owner, or anyone in control of the object, is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the community, such as a licensed distributor of or dealer in tobacco products.

(11) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the ratio of sales of the object or objects to the total sales of the business enterprise.

(12) The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the community.

(13) Expert testimony concerning its use.

 

Comments are closed.