When Charged With a Crime ®

The use and abuse of fentanyl has taken the country, including Southern California, by storm over the past few years. For some, fentanyl was what they were looking for and expecting when they took the drug. For others, fentanyl may have been used or added to other drugs without the knowledge of the user. In either case, the consequences of fentanyl use and abuse have led to countless overdoses, an alarming number resulting in death.

In this video, Managing Partner David P. Shapiro explains that many courts, including those in San Diego and in the federal courts of the Southern District of California, have been viewing fentanyl cases more and more seriously over the past few years. This has led to judges and prosecutors treating possession and/or distribution/transportation of fentanyl more harshly than crimes involving other drugs. And when there is a fentanyl overdose death, you can expect an investigation as to where the person obtained the fentanyl, even though it is often obtained from friends who are simply selling to feed their own habit. This type of investigation will lead to an examination of cell phones, social media and anything else the police can get their hands on to obtain details as to the source of the drug. This could obviously lead to even more serious charges and lengthy prison sentences for those convicted. 

If you have a problem with fentanyl, whether you’ve been charged with a crime, and are looking for help, you can always contact our office by calling 619-295-3555 for an honest assessment of your options moving forward.

We often hear of a criminal prosecution in which the case is thrown out, and it is often described as being dismissed on a “technicality.” In this video, Partner Stefano Molea explains why that is a misnomer.

Stefano discusses a fairly typical dismissal, the cause being that the evidence against the accused was found to be obtained in violation of the their Fourth Amendment rights. Perhaps the police wrongfully entered and searched a home having neither a warrant nor probable cause for the search. For whatever reason, the court correctly finds that the search was illegal, making the evidence inadmissible, leaving the prosecution with no case. A dismissal is then ordered by the court, or the prosecution voluntarily dismisses its case.

Describing the reason for the dismissal as a “technicality,” Stefano points out, shows an utter lack of respect for one of the “pillars of freedom” – protection against unreasonable government interference in our lives. Far from being a technicality, the dismissal, leading to the suppression of evidence in the case, sends a message to law enforcement that it has overstepped its bounds, and thereby provides them with the impetus to improve their investigative techniques. At the same time, it protects the accused, as well as the rest of us, from the abuses that occur when government power goes unchecked.