So I Just Got A Possession For Less Than An Ounce...

So I was just kickin' it in the dorms tonight...

Had a little bud in the room, but hadn't smoked or dranken.

Officers knock on the door, I open up.

They tell me it smells like weed and ask if I've been smoking or drinking, to which I say no.

So they perform two tests on me (the eye test and one where I had to tilt my head back with my eyes closed and tell them when I thought it had been 30 seconds).

They claim I failed both tests, even though I was sober.

They then ask if they can take a look inside the room, to which i deny consent. They also said if I gave them any pieces or weed I had then they would go easier on me. I said I had nothing to give them and I had no weed in the room.

They then wrote me a ticket for possession of less than an ounce.

Is that possible? Can I get convicted if all they have to go off of is an officer's word that I was stoned and a scent?

I go to University of Oregon in Eugene, Oregon by the way.

 

That doesn't sound right. They didn't even see the bud? Did I understand that right?

 

Nope.. they didn't see anything. They gave me a ticket based on scent and me "failing" the sobriety tests, even though I was stone cold sober.

Can they do that? Do I need to get my piss clean before I fight this case?

 

yeah, I'd suggest getting your piss clean. When you fight it, a drug test might aid your case. I don't think the ticket can stand up if fought. People display signs of being high when not actually high. many times when I'm not high, I look like I'm in another world my eyes are all sorts of fucked up. I don't know how they could give you a ticket for possession when there is no evidence of poss. only the supposed consumption. And I thought being high wasn't a crime if you're just sitting around as long as you no longer hhave the goods

 

It'll never stand up in court. They have to bring back some evidence in a case like this. Now say they thought you were stoned while driving and you refuse any searches or tests you could still get a driving while intoxicated. However I'm fairly sure there is no law stating that you cant be stoned in your house. There is a law that says you cant possess controled substances, but no law that you cant have them in your system unless your operating a motor vehicle.

 

In the future you should always deny a field sobriety test. Those are the ones like "say the ABCs" or "walk this yellow line" NOT brethalizer tests.
There is no penalty for refusing to consent to a field sobriety test like there is for brethalizers and blood tests. Furthermore, field sobriety tests are 100% subjective and up to the officers discretion. if you look through this forum a little bit you'll find plenty of people who have been fucked over by a field sobriety test.
However, you never explained WHO exactly busted you. if it was the local po-po then you should be fine (they have NO, i repeat NO evidence on you ((a smell is p.c., but not evidence). If it was a private security firm hired by a private school (again, this is a big issue, if it's a public school you have more rights), you could face expulsion/probation/fines.

Oh, and daedalus, there is no penalty for denying a search, it cannot be used against you in any way. the only thing you have to do is: A) provide identification, insurance, and registration, and B) submit to a brethalizer or blood test, and even that you don't REALLY have to do, only the penalties for refusing are worse than failing.

 

Get your piss clean, make sure theres no herb or paraphernalia in your room (in case they choose to actually search), and fight that shit that's messed up man

 

I don't see how there is any way this dude can get convicted. Your fine man, but I would clean up my piss if I were you, just in case. Sorry man, that sucks

 

thats complete bullshit. get your piss clean, go to court and fight their asses.

 

In Oregon it's decriminilized to a point where possession of an ounce or less is a 100 dollar ticket or less but thats if they got some weed from you so that makes no sense at all. There's no way it will stand up in court whether you're clean or not.

 

I would of started laughing when I read this if it wasn't so damn wrong. Good job on denying the search though. It's always horrible when you hear about people accepting searches, whether it be a car search or a home search. It seems many people don't realize that if a warrent isn't shown, then the cop or security person can't legally search your place even if they "smell something". And there's no way a cop can get a warrent because they smell something.

 

This kid lives in a college dorm. He signs a contract at the beginning of the year stating he understand the rules and agrees to them. Most colleges have a rule that under the scent they can search the room which is theirs and you are renting. and yes it is a legal search, but obviously in your 14 years of wisdom you knew this.

 

Hey man, no need to be so harsh about it

 

There's just always a lot of younger people coming in and thinking one rule applies for everything and all situations, when what it really is is that the law is very circumstantial. And especially when there is some sort of contract involved, like with apartments or dormitories.

It just...it gets old, man. Stick around, you'll see it eventually.

 

I agree Shaman. It happens with both young and older posters but mainly the young ones (hence my comment about his 14 years of wisdom). They've read one internet article probably without sources about the legality of searches and what not. In reality, they have no clue about how things really work. I'm not saying I have all the answers to how things happen, but enough to know that different situation have very different rules.

BTW, are you in columbia or springfield?

 

bottom line is if they want to search you, they will and then they can later fabricate probable cause (which is too open of a term)

 

And that's another reason why this place is so great. There's people all over the world, in all kinds of scenarios, and we can predict what might happen and see what does happen and learn from everybody's experience, not just our own. I've learned so much in coming here. It's grate.

And for your question, neither. I'm a little surprised, though, usually the only two places people think exist in MO are KC and STL. Originally, I'm from a place halfway between Springfield and STL. But now I'm at school, roughly an hour SE of KC. Not gonna name names, though. That's a little too risky for me.

 

StL fer sher

 

^Zappa Plays Zappa at the Pageant on Thursday. Shit's gonna be amazing.

 

I understand the not naming names. There are so many great towns in MO, how can they be limited to KC and STL. I went to SLU in the heart of STL for 2.5 years, lived across the street from the fox it was awesome. I also have pals scattered from Rolla to SMS and everywhere in between. Missiourians always intrique me, except for those from St chuck